☆ It wasn't about turnout: How Mahan won, a district by district analysis of mayoral race

Labor/left media and advocates continue to struggle to find reasons to explain Chavez' close loss to Mahan in the mayoral race. Only problem: their preferred narrative (low voter turnout in ESJ) isn't backed up by the district by district data. An Opp Now exclusive.

Here are the notable statistical takeaways from the Registrar of Voters' compilation of district by district voting in the Mayor's Race:

1.) District results mirror popular vote results: close, but with a slight Mahan edge. Out of 10 Districts, Mahan won five, Chavez won four, and there was one tie (based on percentage).

2.) Mahan performed well in Chavez-leaning districts. Even in districts that he lost to in Chavez--District 3 and 5 and 7--Mahan still scored creditably, with 42%, 43% and 43%, respectively.

3.) Chavez did not perform as well in Mahan-leaning districts. In Districts 1 and 6 , historically more conservative districts, Chavez clocked in with respectable showings of 48% and 49%. However, in District 10, Mahan's home district, Chavez was beaten decisively, 63%-37%.

4.) The popular analytical concepts of Demography as Destiny, of a clear East/West split, Renter v Owner, Less v More Affluent isn't supported by the data. The data by district suggests an election not driven by race and ethnicity, but more closely delineated along nuanced ideological lines. This is aligned with national trends which suggest that, increasingly, Latinos in particular, are no longer voting as a bloc for progressive Democrats.

5.) Turnout was not the difference maker. Labor media is trying to suggest that the slightly lower turnout in Chavez strongholds (42%, 37% and 37%, respectively in D3,5, 7) explains her 6,000-vote shortfall, and that higher turnout (as in a presidential election in 2024) would increase her chances. This is statistically unsupportable.

First off, it's impossible to extrapolate non-voter behavior from voter behavior. For all we know, conservative voters in D3, 5, 7 didn't show up at all for the mayoral election as there were no conservative candidates running, and that a higher turnout would damage Chavez' chances.

More importantly, a higher voter turnout would also increase Mahan's vote advantage in the districts that he won; the increase would not occur only in ESJ. So in all likelihood, an increased turnout would probably deliver the same tight, slight Mahan lead we saw in November.

6.) Conclusion: Mahan's narrow path to victory was based upon running a wider, more citywide campaign that generated substantial votes even in districts that leaned Chavez. Both candidates had an incumbent advantage, as Chavez' county supervisorial district overlaps with much of central and eastern SJ, where she performed best. And Mahan romped in his own D10. But--and this was key in a race decided by 6,000 votes--Mahan performed well in every district, always over 40%, producing enough to push him past the finish line in first.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity