Election Day Eve

Two days after the last Northampton Mayoral election, Fred Contrada wrote this in the Republican about Higgins' opponent, Gene Tacy:


"Tacy, a late write-in candidate, rode a wave of rancor against City Hall that included dissatisfaction with the handling of the Smith College science center, the Hilton Garden Inn hotel project and the landfill expansion. People opposed to those projects have insisted that Higgins shuts the public out of the decision-making process if it doesn't suit her agenda."


Sound familiar? Over the last two years, the issues haven't really changed that much. The case could be made that the issues have finally found a leader in Michael Bardsley, who doesn't have the handicap of being a write-in candidate like Gene Tacy was in 2007. But does that mean that Higgins will finally lose? Not necessarily. Yes, last time Higgins was facing a write-in candidate, but last time she did little to no campaigning. It could be that the campaigning she's done cancels out the advantages that Bardsley has this time that Tacy didn't last time.

In the end, it will all come down to numbers, of course. Northampton has approximately 18,000 registered voters. In 2007, almost 7,000 of those cast ballots at the polls. While there has been a lot of interest in the election this year, it would be a shock if more than 50% of registered voters voted this year. That means that Bardsley and Higgins are fighting for 9,000 votes. To be on the safe side, let's say that the winner has to get to 5,000 votes. In 2007, Higgins garnered 4,3331 votes basically without breaking a sweat. I'm not saying that everyone who voted for Higgins in 2007 will automatically do so again in 2009, but I do think that a high percentage will. If we add in new voters that Higgins has attracted this time around, she's close to the goal.

Bardsley has been campaigning hard on the message that he will do a better job because he'll listen. His message is very similar to the one that Tacy used in 2007, one that convinced 2600 people to vote for someone who wasn't even on the official ballot. Bardsley has taken on the mantle of outsider and reformer and just as the issues haven't changed that much in the last two years, I don't think that the people who wanted Higgins out two years ago have really changed their minds. So Bardsley can count on at least 2600 votes.

So what it boils down to is how well each candidate will do reaching out to those who haven't voted for them or their issues before. And I think this is where each candidate has fallen short.

So much of the rhetoric of this campaign has been driven by a group of people whose passion far outweighs their numbers. Online message boards, website comments, email, and social media have been ablaze with cheap shots, outright lies, well-though-out opinions, and expressions of hurt feelings. And these issues have crept up in the various forums the candidates have held. But in rehashing these issues, both candidates have focused on the same small group of people. How many truly undecided voters have taken notice of any of this? While we like to think that we live in a politically aware city, the fact remains that local elections just don't garner as much interest as state or national elections do. In talking about the election with people, the comment I've heard most often is, "why are people mad at the mayor?" That people ask that question should give pause to anyone working on a campaign this year and serve as a stark reminder that there are a lot of people in Northampton who haven't been following the election at all. And let's face it, with so many candidates and so many signs around, they tend to blend together after a while, especially if you're not up on who's who.

So as I see it, there are four voting blocs in this election. The first bloc is the non-voting bloc; they won't go to the polls tomorrow not matter what. The second bloc is the anti-incumbent bloc, which will vote for anyone on the ballot not named Higgins. The third bloc is the pro-Higgins/anti-Bardsley Bloc, and they'll vote for the incumbent. The last bloc is made up of those registered voters who don't pay close attention to local elections. This group will control tomorrow's outcome, and I think they'll vote for Higgins for two basic reasons. First, she's the incumbent and has name recognition. Second, I think they would say that things are going pretty well in Northampton. I'm not saying they're right, I'm just saying that an anti-Higgins campaign based in part on the minutiae of City Council Executive Session Minutes takes too much brain power to understand; people like things simple. And the simplest thing to do is vote for the mayor we've already got.

On Tuesday night we'll see that the new boss is the same as the old boss.