Analysis Of The Voting Patterns During The Englewood Board Of Education Election Held On April 16, 2002

The Ward and District are shown on the top line.
“VOTE” total citywide vote without the Absentee Ballots.
“ABS” Absentee Ballots cast citywide figures.
“GRAND TOTAL” represents the results of the entire election.

The following is the explanation for each of the notes shown in the left column:

A = Total number of votes cast for all five of the candidates that were running for the three 3-year seats.

B = Total number of votes divided by three.

C = Percentage of the total voters casting a ballot in the election that voted for Lubin for the single 1-year seat.

D = Percentage of those voters who cast a vote on their ballot either for or against the budget that voted for the budget.

E = Same as D except those that voted against the budget.

F = Total number of voters who cast a vote on their ballot either for or against the budget.

G = Percentage of the total voters casting a ballot in the election who cast a vote on their ballot either for or against the budget.

H = Total number of voters who voted in this election.

I = Maximum number of votes that could be cast for the three 3-year seats that were in this election.

J = Percentage of the maximum number of votes that were actually cast for the three 3-year seats in this election.

K = Total number of candidate-votes that were missing from the maximum possible number of candidate-votes based on the number of people voting. For example, in 1-1 there were 120 voters who came to the polls. They could have cast a total of 360 votes for all of the candidates but only cast a total of 290 votes for the five candidates. That means that the voters of 1-1 could have voted for another 70 votes. Because it is not known whether that represents 70 voters who only voted for two candidates or any other possibility such as 35 voters who only voted for one candidate, I have assumed for the purposes of this analysis that the missing votes resulted from individuals voting for two candidates. In my opinion, this seems to be the scenario with the highest probability, namely, those voting for two candidates greatly exceeds the number voting for one candidate and those voting for one candidate exceeds the number not voting for any candidate.

L = Percentage of those voters who only voted for two candidates [with the assumption as noted above].

M = Average number of candidates that were voted for by the voter [with the assumption as noted above].

O = Percentage of the total number of registered voters that cast a ballot in this election. This number does not include the absentee ballots except in the total citywide vote since the data did not break down the location of those casting an absentee ballot.

Compiled by David B. Popkin - April 18, 2002

Next | Previous | Home | Previous Newsletter