In a city known for drama, the Los Angeles mayoral election was
no exception, as inconclusive reports have left voters with a
cliffhanger as a conclusion to weeks of campaigning.
Early ballot counts with nearly 22 percent of precincts
reporting have projected Los Angeles City Councilman Antonio
Villaraigosa in first place with almost 31 percent of the vote and
incumbent Mayor James Hahn in second with 26 percent of the
electorate.
Former Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg was in third with 21
percent.
Ballot counts were reported especially slowly throughout the
night, as fog played a major role in slowing the transfer of
ballots from polling places to the downtown election center.
As expected, no candidate will win the majority vote needed to
take the election outright, making a run-off election in May
necessary.
Los Angeles Times exit polls projected a comfortable lead for
pre-primary frontrunner Villaraigosa, with Hahn and Bob Hertzberg
neck and neck for the second and final spot in the run-off
election.
If the Times exit polls prove true, the race to the runoff could
prove to be a bitter one.
A run-off election between Hahn and Villaraigosa would be a
repeat of the 2001 mayoral election, which Hahn won after
televising an ad that placed Villaraigosa’s face side by side
with a lit crack pipe. Many suspect that bad blood remains and
Villaraigosa has publicly said that he would not stand for similar
attacks in the future.
Another potential outcome would pit Villaraigosa against former
roommate Hertzberg. Though the two politicians were once friends, a
struggle for the post of assembly speaker resulted in a public
falling-out. Residual tension between the two has caused many to
believe that a runoff between the two would be heated.
Hahn, if defeated, will be the first lame duck mayor the city
has seen in over 30 years.
Voter turnout, as expected, was light as approximately one-third
of registered Angelenos made it out to the polls.
At UCLA, poll workers at the De Neve plaza polling location
complained about low voter turnout among students.
“It’s been very disappointing,” said poll
worker and third-year history student Mariana Ortiz. “I
understand that most of the students aren’t from L.A. to
begin with, but I didn’t expect turnout to be this
low.”
Of the students who did show up at the polls, many felt
uninformed about the candidates’ platforms, instead basing
their decisions on name recognition or occupation.
“It was just the name that was familiar to me,” said
Alfonso Duenas, a second-year English student, on why he voted for
Hahn. “I didn’t know anything about the other
candidates.”
Some students blamed the poor turnout on a lack of any
significant efforts to inform the public and get the vote out.
“I’m so disappointed that some of the political
groups on campus didn’t advertise this more,” said
third-year American literature and culture student Sara Sposito.
“Nobody even knew that you were supposed to vote
today.”
Sana Rezai’s election day experience could be
characterized as a result of the election’s poor publicity.
The third-year biochemistry and psychology student walked into the
De Neve Plaza polling station knowing he wanted to cast a vote but
unsure for which election.
“I just saw the “˜vote here’ sign and I thought
it might have been for the student government elections,”
Rezai said.
Though the mayoral race has received unenthusiastic response to
date, public interest is expected to ignite now that the race has
been narrowed to the two top vote-getters, said Raphael Sonenshein,
a professor of political science at Cal State Fullerton in an
interview with The Bruin last week.
Though the candidates’ campaigns did take a turn for the
negative as the primary drew near, the race has been a relatively
clean one to date.
An increased use of personal attacks and negative ads, however,
is expected as the run-off election approaches, Sonenshein
said.
“In the run-off election, it’s me versus you and
that’s always more engaging for the voters,” Sonenshein
said.