Thursday, January 15, 2009
Hannan / Media / Politics A Haphazard Attempt at Nailing Down English Only Early Voting
Posted by Caleb Hannan on Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 6:34 AM
You'd be forgiven if you assumed, over the past couple days, that this blog was entirely devoted to the subject of English Only. After all, given that it's the most controversial vote in Nashville's recent history, it'd only make sense to gobble up every scrap of info available to us.
But one thing that's been neglected thus far is any actual judgment of how the chips may fall. As our own Jack Silverman pointed out today, never have so many people been so divided on how a particular issue would fare at the polls. We've heard some say the yesses have it 60-40. We've heard others, speaking with similar conviction, swear by the opposite. Even Channel 4 has gotten into the guessing game. Although we have to admit, their poll results seem dubious.
So why not stick to the facts, eh?
What does that tell us? Well, if we had to assume (and we will), the majority of early, i.e. motivated, voters, are voting against the measure. It's a theory that Councilman Mike Jameson agrees with, although he is hesitant to say it's an indicator that the amendment will be struck down.
"I'm not sure we've got enough votes to win the day," he says. "Maybe we'll get lucky and it'll snow on Thursday."
Presuming to know the outcome is a fool's errand. But one thing we do know: English Only is definitely getting out the vote.
According to Nixon, a 24-year veteran of the commission, this is by far the most "popular" special election in recent history. The stadium query of '96 had more early voters; 34,000 in all. But that turnout can partly be explained by the sheer number of voting stations available. Whereas you can only cast your early English Only vote downtown, seven different polling stations were available for the vote 12 years ago.
So yeah. High early-voter turnout. A high proportion of possibly progressive early voters. Sounds like we might have a decent idea of what might come of next week's vote. But honestly, I'm still pretty sure we're all clueless. Let's just get this thing over with.
Comments (9)
Showing 1-9 of 9
I haven't voted in the early because of where I would have to go, but I will vote for it because I feel if someone wants to live in America and have all the privileges, they need to learn the language. All our forefathers did, and they would be no different.
like
dislike
Well, Tena you should vote against it then because it will do nothing to help them learn English and will cost the city $350,000. Maybe if we invested that money into English classes that are already overburdened with people wanting to learn English, we could actually help people learn our language and not punish them before they even get the chance.
Why does Mike Jamison want it to snow on Tuesday? The vote is on Thursday. I used to be proud to be from Nashville and Tennessee but now each new "political" maneuver gets more and more embarrassing.
It's not a good sign when one side roots for snow or bad weather.
I think, given the vitriol Mayor Dean and members of the council like Ronnie Steine have spewed toward proponents--counterproductively as hell, I might add--there is a larger question. Can they effectively govern if this charter amendment passes? I'm not talking about merits of the immediate issue here but about the amount of rancor Dean and others have generated.
If this passes, and the electorate turns its hostility toward Dean, Steine, and others (due more to tone than the substance), these public officials either should resign or face a recall election.
You must be kidding. Why would they resign because they see the amendments for what they are: grandstanding, nativist ramblings. We elected them to lead and they are. No one knows what the TN house is doing, though, except creating daily sequels to a real life sitcom.
Not sure if I failed to frame it correctly or not, but Jameson was definitely speaking in jest. I'd hardly call a little joke like that rancor.
And Jackson1234, what kind of "vitriol" are you referring to coming from Dean? I'm not suggesting you're wrong, it's just that what I've heard from him has been pretty rooted in logic rather than the ad hominem territory Crafton occasionally finds himself in.
That was an exaggeration on my part insofar as Dean, Caleb. However, his surrogates certainly have spewed vitriol; I've personally heard it. I think this probably has alienated Dean from the vast majority of Metro voters, and if this charter amendment passes he probably cannot govern effectively. What Dean personally did was try to thwart a vote, which didn't help him from a PR standpoint, no matter how well-intentioned. I think if the charter amendment passes by a healthy margin, it will mark the end of Dean's effectiveness. This comes froms someone who voted for and supported Dean in both the general and run-off, mind you.
Under that scenario, I see no other option than for Dean to resign along with other prominent elected proponents because you can bet the recall petitions will begin to circulate the next day.
And to be absolutely even-handed here, Crafton also should resign or face a recall election if the charter amendment fails. Unlike Dean, he should resign for many other reasons but that is neither here nor there.
