Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Today’s quotable
Next Post: Afternoon roundup
Posted in:
* Block Club Chicago…
A new study shows far fewer Black and Latino Chicagoans voted in this year’s mayoral election compared to white voters, underlying long-running imbalances in voter access and participation in city politics, researchers said.
The report, released Wednesday by the University of Illinois Chicago Great Cities Institute, details “shocking low” voter turnout among Black and Latino Chicagoans during the April 4 runoff in which progressive Chicago teachers union organizer and now-Mayor Brandon Johnson defeated Paul Vallas, former CEO of Chicago Public Schools.
About 61.1 percent of white registered voters cast a ballot in the election, compared to 29 percent of Black voters and 20.5 percent for Latino voters, according to the report.
The citywide turnout was 38.68 percent, according to the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners.
* Some selected bullet points from the study…
• Johnson captured 88 percent support from Black Chicago voters – a far higher rate than any polls had predicted.
• Vallas won the clear support of most white voters – we estimate it at 66 percent.
• Latinos broke for Vallas citywide, giving him an estimated 54.4 percent of their votes.
• 62.3 percent of the city’s registered voters did not participate in this election at all.
• A startling gap in voter turnout continues to persist along racial and ethnic lines. We estimate that 61.1 percent of Chicago’s registered white voters cast a ballot, while only 29 percent of registered Black people and 20.5 percent of Latinos did.
• Precincts that were over 80 percent Asian-American cast more than 77.8 percent of their votes for Vallas – higher than any other racial or ethnic group.
• Precincts that were 80 percent white cast just 25.8 percent of their vote for Brandon Johnson compared to our estimation of 34 percent citywide, meaning that white voters in more residentially segregated white areas were less likely to vote for Brandon Johnson.
• Precincts that were over 80 percent Asian-American cast 77.8 percent of their votes for Vallas – higher than any other neighborhood dominated by a single racial or ethnic group. While the city’s overall Asian population is still relatively small – it was 7 percent in 2020 – it nonetheless remains Chicago’s fastest-growing group and will exercise increasing political influence in years to come.
* A deeper dive into Latino voting patterns…
This year, despite there being more than two dozen Latino elected officials in the city, many of them progressive backers of Johnson, his opponent Vallas still managed to secure a majority of the Hispanic vote, though the percentages varied sharply in different Latino neighborhoods of the city. A handful of Latino-majority wards in the South and far Southwest sides racked up far bigger margins for Vallas, while those in near Southwest and Northside favored Johnson. Take the 13th Ward in Garfield Ridge and Clearing, for example, a majority-Latino ward that is also home to many city police and firefighters. Vallas racked up 70 percent of the vote in precincts that were more than 80 percent Latino, while he did even better in the mostly white precincts of the same ward.
Johnson received a majority, on the other hand, in the older majority-Latino wards in the northwest neighborhoods of the city, areas with extensive community organizations that are generally represented by more progressive elected officials. Yet even in some of these wards, vote tallies at the precinct level reveal distinctly different patterns among white and Latino residents.
In the 26th Ward in Humboldt Park, for example (see Table 3), where Latinos make up 65 percent of the voting-age population, Johnson amassed a landslide 65.4 percent of votes, but a disproportionate segment of his margin came from white voters in the ward’s rapidly gentrified areas. The data show that ten precincts within the 26th Ward where Latinos make up 80 percent or more of the population split their vote 49.5-to-50.5 percent between Johnson and Vallas, while the only three precincts where whites make up a majority of the population – all located at the ward’s eastern end – gave Johnson 72.6 percent of their votes. […]
But even more noteworthy is how isolated the overwhelming number of Latino adults are from local politics, with a startling nine out of ten adults [including those not registered] not even voting.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 1:29 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Today’s quotable
Next Post: Afternoon roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So, from the above study (bottom of page 10)
Quite simply, the city’s minority of white residents continues to
exercise a vastly disproportionate say in the election of our local officials.
And yet, above we see that 66% of white voted for the other guy, as did 77% of Asians and 54% of hispanics.
From the 2020 Census Blacks and White are about the same percent of the population.
How did Johnson win, IF the above is true? Surely, somewhere there is a mistake.
One wonders how on
Comment by Fav Human Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 1:55 pm
Really interesting stuff. White liberals on the north side were the swing voters. I wonder if a candidate like Tom Tunney or Arne Duncan would have fared better than Vallas with them?
A vote breakdown I would like to see is homeowners vs. renters. My sense is that among White and Latino voters that is a determinant factor, with homeowners going with Vallas and renters going with Johnson.
Comment by Roman Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:00 pm
Since Tunney backed Vallas (along with all the Daleyites going back to Levar, Schulter, etc)…
Didn’t matter that Vallas had questionable “affiliations and likes” and the racial underpinnings…
===homeowners vs. renters===
Is this like a “rich/poor” thought too?
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:11 pm
===Is this like a “rich/poor” thought too? ===
You’d see Vallas signs in the front yards of multi-unit buildings and Johnson signs in unit windows. It because sort of a campaign meme.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:15 pm
i do not understand this statement and wish they would give concrete examples: underlying long-running imbalances in voter access Where was there any imbalance in voter access, especially now with early voting mail in ballots absentee ballots various voting sites ?
Comment by DuPage Saint Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:18 pm
@Roman: more than homeownership, my guess is that college education (or lack thereof) is going to be more determinative.
Comment by Benjamin Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:18 pm
>> Johnson captured 88 percent support from Black Chicago voters – a far higher rate than any polls had predicted.
Any public polls, to be sure. But the public polling on this race, appears to have been done on the relative cheap. I’m pretty sure Brandon Johnson’s internal (more expensive) polling had him doing very well with this demographic.
We had our own mini-2016/20 version of “why did the polls fail?” in this last mayoral.
Comment by ZC Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:18 pm
It’s interesting that Mayor Johnson is frequently referred to as a former ‘Chicago Teachers Union organizer..’ rather than ‘Cook County Commissioner,’ or ‘High School and middle school teacher.’ No idea why this is, but note worthy.
Comment by Ashland Adam Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:23 pm
===You’d see Vallas signs in the front yards of multi-unit buildings and Johnson signs in unit windows. It because sort of a campaign meme.===
Playing out that way, the young, renter, progressives, and the idea of a Tunney, or you look at Levar, Schulter, old guard, white “homeowner” types, that race was about the stark contrasts, where memes work due in large part neither was considered “middle-building”
Reminds me of old map drawing towards areas heavy in apartments, in a GOP/Dem percentages.
Interesting look to how the numbers vs memes did play out.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:23 pm
lakefront lakefront lakefront. and underestimating that the Black voters who would come out would largely go for Johnson. Lessons for candidates in the next cycle.
Comment by Amalia Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:28 pm
=== No idea why this is, but note worthy. ===
Because it is the most polarizing title they could have given him.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:31 pm
It looks like the Asian community in my town is making a strong statement - consistent, engaged and growing. Also, the Mexican-American and Puerto Rican communities do have some distinct differences on a lot of things, but the study/findings aren’t separated like that for this study. Interesting stuff though.
Comment by levivotedforjudy Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 2:35 pm
Interesting findings, but I believe the determinant factor in Johnson’s win was not studied: Young voters actually came out and broke for Johnson in a big way.
Comment by Chisox fan Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:03 pm
So this confirms Brandon Johnson won the white guilt olympics
Comment by Ucci Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:05 pm
Amplifying Fav Human’s question: if whites were far more likely to vote and broke decisively for Vallas, and Vallas also won Hispanics and Asians, then how did Johnson win at all? Because I think I remember that he did win.
I read their methodology and I still can’t figure that out.
Comment by Socially DIstant Watcher Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:13 pm
Ucci - Who’s typing for you since you’re apparently illiterate?
- • Vallas won the clear support of most white voters – we estimate it at 66 percent. -
Comment by Excitable Boy Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:13 pm
We’re at an interesting time in mid to far north lakefront and just west politics.
Twenty years ago voting for a gay person was considered groundbreaking and a statement.
Now it seems race is the 2020’s equivalent or perhaps race and/or being far left.
Let’s look at the five gentrified or slightly gentrified wards in question.
Ward 40 Andre Vasquez
Prior to being elected was best known as a hispanic rapper. Ward is solidly majority white. Gentrifying. Loudest socialist in this group.
Ward 46 Angela Clay. Black. Far left. Best Known as community activist with ties to Helen Shiller and an affinity for PPP loans. Ward is majority white, but has long history of battles between moderates and lefties.
https://www.uptownupdate.com/2023/04/8-simple-questions-for-angela-clay.html
Ward 47 Matt Martin
One of the whitest wards in the city. Low single digit percentage of black voters. Prior alderman was of S Asian descent. Heavily gentrified and middle to upper middle income.
Essentially a socialist who won’t refer to himself that way.
Ward 48 Leni Manaa-Hoppenworth
Asian. Lesbian. Socialist. Won in close runoff in a majority white ward
Ward 49. Maria Haddon.
Black. Lesbian. Socialist, but bit more sensible than the others. Hard working too. Ward isn’t really gentrified, but is plurality white. Slow racial change with more whites and fewer minorities over the last 20 or so years.
Might have the best chance of moving up to higher office of the group. Seems to know how to project being moderate while she’s actually a leftie.
At the moment race and being far left seems to be the thing motivating voters in these wards. Want to be seen with the cool kids.
Also I do not understand why no local news outlet has run with the Angela Clay PPP stories since March. PPP fraud stories are all over the local news last few months. The City IG is also seemingly the only local IG that hasn’t released reports on PPP fraud. It stinks.
Comment by Lakeview in the 46th Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:27 pm
== Is this like a “rich/poor” thought too? ==
Yeah, I guess that’s part of it. Comparing the 13th and 26th Wards got me thinking of the homeowner vs renter dynamic. 13 is overwhelmingly made up of single family homes while 26 has far more multi family dwellings. Obviously the white folks in 13 are much, much more conservative than the white folks in 26 and that’s what drives the ward totals, but the ownership vs. renter dynamic might explain the difference in the Latino vote. Or the Latino difference might be explained by Mexican Americans being more conservative than those of Puerto Rican descent. Just wondering.
Comment by Roman Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:33 pm
About 61.1 percent of white registered voters cast a ballot in the election, compared to 29 percent of Black voters
This turnout must surely be where the error is. If you had reversed those numbers, then it makes sense.
But, with two equal population numbers, with one turning out at double the rate of the other, I don’t see that 88% can out weigh 66%.
I can see Hispanic and Asian not making a difference due to low total Pop.
Unless we want to think Blacks are way more registered than Whites. I could see more, but not a large enough difference to explain the other numbers.
Comment by Fav Human Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:40 pm
===We estimate that 61.1 percent of Chicago’s registered white voters cast a ballot, while only 29 percent of registered Black people and 20.5 percent of Latinos did.===
For local elections especially, there is a lot of data that supports the idea that only voters who perceive they have a stake in the community will vote more often than those who do not feel like they have a stake.
I don’t know if that explains this disparity or not, but I can see why a lot of Latinos and Black voters might feel like the city doesn’t work for them so they don’t bother voting. If that’s true, that’s a big problem.
The stake in the community theory is usually used to explain why young people often skip voting. But my guess is that is also going on among communities that have been marginalized for so long. It’s a hopeless, why bother, nothing is going to change kind of apathy.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 3:51 pm
==Johnson captured 88 percent support from Black Chicago voters – a far higher rate than any polls had predicted==
Even though Foxx has maintained 90%+ support in Black wards?
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 4:20 pm
47th Ward has the right answer.
The base turnout in Chicago elections is largely driven by union membership, because municipal employees have the greatest stake in election outcomes. This distorts turnout.
In fact, there are a lot of voters in Chicago that do not vote in gubernatorial elections, and sometimes miss a presidential election, but never miss a municipal election.
Union membership is racially distorted, and that distorts turnout by race.
This also distorts polling by the way, and makes chicago races very hard to poll if you do not know what they are doing. Union members have a tendency to either refuse to participate or lie and say they are voting for the incumbent or whomever they assume will win. That’s because for years campaigns have mimicked legit pollsters for their voter ID programs.
I hope this sheds light.
Comment by Thomas Paine Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 4:25 pm
City Zen, a Republican operative told me he realized Paul Vallas was a Republican when he fell hook, line and sinker for the idea that he could win a large plurality of Black votes. /s
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 4:28 pm
Caveat: I have not read the study yet. But I want to now, because I will second the questions about the math and “how did Johnson win, with these estimates?” Especially if Asian-American voters really broke for Vallas.
It’s close, with that 88% of AA voters for Johnson. But I concur with those above, that with these overall percentages and turnout estimates, it looks to me like Vallas should have narrowly won.
Comment by ZC Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 4:39 pm
If white voters are twice as likely to vote as black voters that 44% with the 88% of black voters and roughly half of the Hispanic voters etc etc would add up to a victory for Johnson.
Comment by Mayo Sandwich Thursday, Sep 7, 23 @ 5:48 pm