hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Jewish (and Orthodox Jewish) votes in NYC Primaries, 1993-2009

It's always good to look back at history before a new citywide primary In New York City. For this table, we have studied the most Jewish Election Districts (with more than 60% Jewish voters) in a few Jewish neighborhood of the city. To know about the profil of the jewish community in those area, look at the 2011 UJA Geographic Profile.

As you can see, there is rarely a consensus amongst these very diverse communities in Brooklyn and the other boroughs. All these neighborhoods have voted against Thompson in 2001 and then for him in 2009. They all picked Weiner in 2005 (except Williamsburg). Liu didn't get decisive support in 2009 and de Blasio picked a few areas. All the areas voted for the City Council Speaker in 2001 but not in 2005 except Far Rockaways and Williamsburg.

It's pretty ironic because they may all vote for the Republican candidate in the General election.None of these neighborhoods have voted for the democrat candidate since 1993. Only Williamsburg had mixed feelings in 2009. 

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Vito Lopez (part 2)

Next September we will figure out if the prime voters in the 34th City Council district want to elect the candidate who has always delivered despite his disgusting behavior. According to an article in the NYT, “nearly three-quarters of scandal-tarred incumbents who decided to run again survived their primaries” and Vito Lopez could become the new Fred Richmond of North Brooklyn.

Lopez is discretely starting his campaign to fill the seat of his former chief of staff (then foe) Diana Reyna in Williamsburg-Ridgewood-Bushwick. He will eventually oppose two Latino candidates from the area Tommy Torres and Antonio Reynoso. The first one was a physical education teacher at PS157 in Clinton Hill and was active in Bill Thompson’s bid in 2009. Ironically, Torres was also involved in another political scandal in 2012. The second one is the front-runner (?). He is Reyna’s chief of staff since 2007 and has the support of key stakeholders (and former allies of Lopez) in Brooklyn: Party Boss Frank Seddio, borough presidents Marty Markowitz and Scott Stringer, Council Speaker Christine Quinn, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, and several major unions.

This election is another (and hopefully the last) battle in a political war since 2005 between two factions in North Brooklyn, and already described in a previous post: Lopez and allies, Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizens Council (RBSCC) the Dilans, Stephen Levin and the UJO-affiliated Hasidic community, against Nydia Velazquez and his local supporters, Diana Reyna, Williamsburg CBOs (Los Sures, St Nicks, etc.) and more recently new candidates like Jason Otano and the New Kings Democrats with Lincoln Restler and Esteban Duran--Reynoso is a member of the NKD--. In the 34th district, the last battle occurred in 2009 between Diana Reyna and a former employee of RSBCC (and Lopez protégé) Maritza Davila. The incumbent won by about 200 votes (see map 1).

Lopez lost most of his political supporters in New York but he can still rely on his strong local infrastructure at the RBSCC. His victory in the 2012 General election was also encouraging (we will explain why later) and he may think he can beat the other faction in an open primary this time using his name and achievements. Since 2009, two other local elections must have reinforced his confidence: his large victory against Esteban Duran in 2010 in the 53rd district leader Primary and the Dilan’s victory in the 17th State senate primary.

Now it’s up the voters. Would they vote for Reynoso to protest against Lopez’s behavior? Will they prefer to stay home? The turnout will be a key factor in this election. It will certainly be boosted by the very competitive primary for Mayor. But without a strong Latino candidate some voters may stay home.

Geography is also very important. The two factions have different voter base in the 34th district, pinpointed on Map.2. To design it, we have analyzed three elections by Election districts: the 2009 34th primary, the 2010 53rd district leader primary, the 2012 7th Congress primary. We have attributed every EDs to the candidate who got the best score (in percent) of those three elections. This is not perfect. The analysis for some EDs, with cross-hatches, is just based on the 2009 election. And all those elections were held before the harassment scandal. Finally, the voter base for Lopez is located around the projects in East Williamsburg and around the RSBCC facilities and housing in Bushwick (showed in black). He will certainly be strong in other areas of Bushwick won by Davila and even Reyna in 2009. Reynoso can use the voter base of Reyna, Velazquez and Duran in the southside, East Williamsburg and Bushwick. You compare map 1 and map 2 and you will identify the 2013 primary battle areas, especially in East Williamsburg.

Will the harassment scandal affect Lopez voter base? According to the 2012 general election, not so much. Based on our analysis of the results by EDs, about 3,000 voters (9%) cast a ballot for president and voted for Senator Gillibrand (D, WFP, and IND) but didn’t vote for Lopez. About 2,000 didn’t vote for the 53rd Assembly election at all and the unknown Republican candidate got 1,000 votes that Romney didn’t get. What is interesting is where it happened (map. 3, 4, 5). The vote against Lopez didn’t really affect his voter base. Actually, in some EDs in the project in East Williamsburg and in Bushwick, you find many voters who picked Lopez but not Gillibrand or who voted for Romney but not for Gardia (whether they didn’t vote for State Assembly or voted for Lopez). Even if this election was held before the release of the New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics ‘s report, it’s pretty scary. Lopez may even get away with it in an election cycle where two other sexual predators, Spitzer and Weiner, run for office in New York City.

Based on this analysis, we did 9 different election projections. We used thee different turnout by EDs based on the mayor primary in 2001, 2005 and 2009 (see map 6). For 2009, we used directly the turnout in the 34th City Council; many voters picked Reyna or Davila but didn’t vote for the mayoral primary because there wasn’t any serious Latino candidate (in comparison with Ferrer in 2001 and 2005). Then we impact the vote against Lopez in the 53rd district in 2012. Without it, Lopez wins with a low turnout. But all other projections give a victory to Reynoso (for more details about the methodology and results, please contact us).

Now they are many uncertainties. First, Reynoso is not Diana Reyna or Nydia Velazquez. And Lopez can certainly reach more voters than Davila (who run for Lopez’s seat) in the 34th district (and out of the 53rd) in Ridgewood for example and in the two EDs with Hasidic voters in the Southside. Finally, the 1,000 votes for Gerald Esposito in 2009, mostly in the Northside, may be crucial; it was not counted in our projections. When it harmed Reyna’s campaign in 2009, it could now help to beat Lopez. The area has been changing since 2009: there are new voters and Reynoso and the NKD (Restler and Duran) have good ties in this section of Williamsburg. In the September 2012 primary, Lincoln Restler and Jason Otano did pretty well in this section of the 53rd district (see map 7, 8 ,9) against Martin Dilan and Olechowski (the president of the CB1, based in this area). That’s also where the vote against Lopez was the strongest in the general election. Otherwise, the campaign of Tommy Torres is a mystery. What (and where) is his voter base and who could he took vote from? The Cooper Houses, where he is from, have always been divided between the two factions (see maps). He has ties in the two schools where he has worked, PS157 in Clinton Hill (out of the district) and Grand Street Campus in East Williamsburg. He doesn’t have much campaign money (34,000$) and no serious endorsement.

Vito Lopez seems very weak in this election and we even wonder if he is really going to run; he acts a little bit like Ed Towns last year. But the tiger is maybe not dead. He may fight hard and win. To prevail, Reynoso will need a strong campaign and the support of his allies especially Nydia Velazquez who was really the only one to reach voters in Lopez’s stronghold (map 10). She campaigned for Otano, during her primary, but it was not enough to get a grip in the projects of East Williamsburg in the 17th state senate primary. Reynoso should also reach the 2009 Esposito voters with the help of Lincoln Restler, Esteban Duran (and Joe Lentol?).

 p.s : we haven't talked about the Otano-Davila election in the 53rd. Of course, the two elections will influence each other. If Reynoso does well in the 53rd, it will help Otano. But Otano can lose in the 53rd (Lopez's stronghold) while Reynoso win in the 34th Council district. Diana Reyna lost the 53rd in 2009 : 3051 vs 3250 (Esposito got 653).

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

2013 Mayoral Democratic Primary (part 1)

Chris Bragg wrote an interesting note about the 2013 Democratic mayoral primary. An (Crain’s) Insider reader pointed out some observations about Bill Thompson’s weaknesses in the last Quinnipiac polls.

A comparison between the December 2012 poll and the March 2005 poll seems pretty awkward, especially considering the most recent one: it was earlier, Scott Stringer was still a candidate, between 30 and 40% of the voters were undecided and, as mentioned, the dynamic was really different.

Right now, forecasting is complicated. But we think that looking back at the two last municipal election results could be helpful for candidates and observers. Three of the 2013 candidates took part in a Democratic municipal primary, 4 years ago and won: Bill Thompson for Mayor, Bill de Blasio for Public Advocate, John Liu for City Comptroller. Bill de Blasio and John Liu had a run-off. On primary day, the voters didn’t have to choose between the three candidates but at least could express preferences on the same ballot:  vote for Thompson, Mark Green and David Yassky; or Vote for Tony Avella, Bill de Blasio, John Liu, etc.

(click to enlarge)

The weak point of this analysis is the absence of Christine Quinn because she had never been a candidate for a citywide primary. That’s why we fell back on the 2005 primary. The City Council Speaker, Gifford Miller, was also a candidate against four opponents --in 2001, Peter Vallone was a candidate against four competitors--. Other issues: Thompson didn’t have strong opponents, contrary to Bill de Blasio and John Liu (with Mark Green and David Yassky); The turnout was lower for the mayor primary; There is no latino candidate; It’s hard to compare Quinn with any of the 2005 candidates.

The results : 

(click to enlarge)

Most of the EDs, only won by Thompson (49540) in 2009, voted for Weiner (47526) and Ferrer (34516) in 2005 (with a bigger turnout). The EDs, won by the three candidates, had large margin for Fernando Ferrer (34109); they are located mostly in Bronx and Brooklyn (in gray). The EDs won by Thompson and Liu (77033) voted mostly for Ferrer too. Finally, the EDs won by Thompson and de Blasio, gave a small lead to Weiner (33,268) against Ferrer (31,351).

Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (by Election Districts) give another reading of those results. First, there is a strong correlation between the three candidates in 2009, around 0,75; it’s not necessarily meaningful, as the three of them won, but still. Second, none of the 2009 candidates has a strong correlation with the winner in 2005 Fernando Ferrer: Thompson (0,52), Bill de Blasio (0,35), John Liu (0,44). However, in 2001, Thompson’s correlation with Ferrer was a little stronger, 0,66: Thompson won the City Comptroller election while Ferrer won the mayor primary (and lost the runoff against Green). Otherwise, Bill Thompson’s vote is significantly correlated with Mark Green in 2009 (0,81) and Virginia Fields in 2005 (0,71).

Looking at those figures, there is a big opportunity for a forth candidate. And Christine Quinn’s strategic focus on Latino and the Bronx makes complete sense. Expecting her to achieve it, by getting the Latino vote against Thompson, is another story…

To improve this analysis, we would need the ethnic break by EDs (before the 2013 redistricting). If a reader could provide it, I will update my post.

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Hasidic support for the 2013 Democrat Primary for Mayor

According to the New York World, The last campaign finance reports show that:

-         Council Speaker Christine Quinn has raised $6 million, with around $5 million left in her bank account. -        Public Advocate Bill de Blasio raised $3,4 million total; $2.4 million cash in hand. -        Comptroller John Liu reported $3,1 million raised in total and a bit over $2 million cash on hand. -        2009 mayoral candidate Bill Thompson has raised around $2.3 million in total and have $1.7 million cash on hand

And the last Quinnipiac poll in May identified one favorite for the democratic primary, Christine Quinn (35%) and three contenders Bill Thompson (10%) De Blasio (11%), John Liu (9%). 35% of the Democrats remained undecided.

                   REGISTERED DEMOCRATS

                     Tot    Men    Wom

Liu                   9%    10%     9%

Quinn                35     34     36

Thompson             10     11     10

de Blasio            11     13     10

SMONE ELSE(VOL)       1      1      1

WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      2      1      3

DK/NA                31     31     32

Who will get the support of the Hasidic community in Williamsburg?

In the recent past, the Hasidic community (UJO-related) in Williamsburg backed two Council Speakers, Peter F. Vallone (2001) and Gifford Miller (2005). In 2009, Christine Quinn was not a candidate and they supported City Comptroller William C. Thompson Jr.

Since the 1989 charter revision in NY, the speaker has a considerable amount of power, especially when compared to the other members. “He or she is the operational and symbolic leader of the council, and is responsible for hiring its staff and has the power to appoint the chairs and members of council committees, but these decisions are ratified by the entire council”. He or she is a key player in the municipal bureaucracy. The speaker also has a discretionary fund of several million dollars that he or she distributes to council members for chairing committees or for doing good works in their home districts [“pork or pastrami spending”].[i] The Williamsburg community that relies on these discretionary funds to finance some of his social services, through the United Jewish Organization (UJO) and other Community-based organizations, has had good relationship with the Council Speakers. It’s likely they will support Christine Quinn, the favorite candidate so far.

However, in 2009, the Hasidic community (UJO-related) supported and (modestly) financed the Brooklyn candidate William C. Thompson Jr like  Vito Lopez, their declining political ally who backed Miller in 2005 but went with Alan Hevesi in 2001. Both Lopez and the Hasidic community (UJO-related) backed Bill de Blasio for Public Advocate in 2009 against Mark Green.

The dissident faction in Williamsburg (Aaronis & related) supported the same candidate in 2009 but has backed other candidates before: Mark Green in 2001 (and 2009) and Anthony Weiner in 2005.

The campaign contributions by members in Hasidic Williamsburg (11211, 11205, 11206, and 10950 for KJ)[ii] give us more information about their support: Christine Quinn, $68,625 since the last financial report), 27 contributors; William Thompson Jr., $38,005, 181; Bill de Blasio, $28.200, 29; John Liu, $855, 5.

Until the middle of 2012, both Satmar factions didn’t want to put all one’s eggs in one basket. They gave to several candidates:

-      Abe Friedman, for the Zalis, and Jack Brach, for the Aaronis, collected money for Bill de Blasio, about 28,200$ -      A few entrepreneurs gave big donations to Christine Quinn, totalizing $46,450; Mostly Aaron’s backers towards the end of 2011 and in the beginning of 2012: Gary Schlesinger, via his wife (later refunded), members from Kiryas Joel (like Joel Landau), etc. -      William Thompson didn’t get much donation until January 2011 (6,000$), when one individual Schmiel Weiser, an entrepreneur from Williamsburg, bundled 16,000$, mostly from Aaronis but also Zalis.

However since the middle of 2012, the balance has changed :

-        Bill de Blasio got only 4 donations (8150$): 2 during the summer, and 2 in January 2013 including $4,950 from a prominent Zali.  -        Quinn got 8 more donations ($22,175), apparently from both side. -        Bill Thompson’s campaign received 15,830$, mostly bundled by Jack Brach, the controversial[iii] editor of der Blatt, in January 2013.

Quinn is still a long way ahead his opponents in Hasidic Williamsburg. But Thompson seems to be on his way up again since the end of 2012. This trend could reflect the recent momentum around Bill Thompson. It could also reflect a strategy on the Aaronis side -We wonder how the campaign staff of Thompson and de Blasio have reacted to Brach’s bundle-. If, the Zalis support Quinn, the Aaronis could prefer Thompson to De Blasio.

Let’s not forget: Money is a good indication about a potential support by the leadership of the two sides, but not necessarily about the final vote. In 2005, the Zalis officially supported Gifford Miller, who had collected a good amount of money in Hasidic Williamsburg ($51,810). But the candidate did one of the worst performances for a mayoral primary in New York since the 80’s, with only 1198 votes. The leadership needs actually a good reason to mobilize its members, whether internal (within the Satmar) or external (metzitzah b’peh, school system reform, etc.).

[i] Berg, Bruce F., New York City Politics : Governing Gotham : 2007, New Brunswick, N.J, Rutgers Univerity Press

[ii] We didn’t study Boro Park because the contributors are diluted with other congregations (Bobov,etc.)

[iii] « Green Backer pleaded to dirty-money scheme », Daily News, 09-08-2001 ; « Green endorsment angers Jewish leaders », Times Herald-News, 09-27-2001

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Levin/Restler & City Council Redistricting (update 1)

After the final meeting of the New York City Districting Commission, the revisited lines need to be approved by the City Council. The lines protect the incumbents, so it shouldn't really be a problem. In the 33rd district, the boundaries have slightly changed since the preliminary draft. A few blocks from the old 33rd district, in BoCoCa and North Park Slope, have been reintegrated. On the other side, a few blocks in the Williamsburg's Northside (East of the BQE) will finally stay in the 34th District. It doesn't change our conclusions for a possible primary between Steven Levin and Lincoln Restler : both area may favor Restler. 

On the other hand, we don't think the revisited lines will help a possible run by Vito Lopez in the 34th district, as a Post's journalist tried to pinpoint. The proposed plan is a clue of the contrary. The Broadway Triangle in South Williamsburg would stay in the 33rd District, whereas it was included in the 34th during the preliminary draft. The Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizens Council (RBSCC) co-sponsored a huge housing project with a hasidic organization (UJO) in this area, part of Lopez's 53rd Assembly District. If Lopez becomes Council-member, he will lose the Broadway Triangle. Lopez knows it; so does Christine Quinn. 

Legend : 

in red, the revisited 33rd district in yellow, the first preliminary draft in black, the old district

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Lincoln Restler Vs Stephen Levin, September 2013

One month after the election, Lincoln Restler finally lost against Chris Olechowski, the Community Board 1’s chairman, 6018 to 6037. He has decided not to challenge the results of the elections, released by the BOE a few days ago. Commentators wonder if he will challenge the local City councilman Stephen Levin, who supported Olechowski, in a primary next year. The epic fall of Levin’s main support (and mentor) Vito Lopez, after sexual harassment complaints, could be considered as a great opportunity for Restler. But it’s forgetting another reality: district and, redistricting.

In theory, redistricting reflects the demographic changes and erodes the electoral support of the incumbent, creating opportunities for challengers. In our case, gerrymandering could prompt the contrary. After the 2012 redistricting in the 50th Assembly district, we already mentioned that Restler’s victory in 2010 (against Warren Cohn) became a defeat (3434-2922). After the 2013 redistricting in the 33rd City council district, it seems even more complicated for a reformer candidate to win a primary.

Restler’s defeat in 2012

The Hasidic vote (UJO-affiliated) caused Olechowski’s victory. 90,5% of his votes were cast in the Hasidic area. This election has also shown that there is no polish vote in Greenpoint; the polish candidate did a little better than Cohn in this area in 2010. He got 280 votes in the Northside-Southside and 26 in Fort-Greene/Clinton Hill.

Restler did a terrific job, by reaching as many voters. First, in the Hasidic area, he received the strong support of a dissident faction of the Satmar (and their affiliates), close to Aaron Teitelbaum in Kiryas Joel, and got 37,6% of the vote. In the heavy Hasidic EDs (67,73, 74, 78), it’s closer to 30%, which is a little lower than Dilan Velazquez in June and closer to Squadron in 2008. And in the public housing, where Hasidic families live with other minorities, he did very well and even beat Olechowski in the Independence Towers (62). In the EDs 82 and 83, South of Flushing, which is gentrified by young Hasidic families, he got almost 50% of the ballots. Some commentators consider that this is a stronghold of the Aaronis but other minorities and hipsters, more inclined to vote for Restler, live also in this area. We’ll have to look at the voters file to have more information. Second, the reformer mobilized many voters, reaching municipal primary’s turnout, in the Southside-Northside (987, +75% since 2010) and Greenpoint (1349, +43%). If there is a hipster vote in the area, Restler got it.

How a reformer candidate can win in the 33rd district

The Hasidic vote had decided the primary (or special election) in 1991 (Ken Fisher) and 2009 (Stephen Levin) because the district vote was divided between many candidates (7 both times). However David Yassky proved in 2001 that you could win the primary without their support. His main opponent, the 50th district leader Steven Cohn, had the Hasidic backing, and a few supporters in the rest of the district (or at least he thought he did, as Gatemouth explained). The election was postponed, after 9/11, during Yom Kippour, and the turnout was very low, especially in the Hasidic area.  Finally, Cohn 2486 votes in the Hasidic area and around 2000 in the rest of the district. There were only 4 candidates, and David Yassky was able to compensate his lost in the Hasidic area in other parts of the district. Yassky, a very ambitious (and reformer?) candidate, managed to get key political club support and reach the reformer and liberal voters in Brownstone Brooklyn. He got only 950 votes in the 50th Assembly District and did very well in Brooklyn Heights-Downtown Brooklyn (3063) and BoCoCa-North Park Slope (2438). The two other candidates Ken Diamondstone and David Reiss totalized 3700 voters, mostly out of the 50th Assembly District.

Why does Lincoln seem to have an opportunity

In 2009, Stephen Levin had almost the same strategy than Cohn, but won. The turnout was bigger in the Hasidic area, because of internal rivalries, and he got 3605 votes there (if you take off Isaac Abraham's vote, he got less than Cohn). He did worst than Cohn in the rest of 50th AD, but a little better in Brownstone Brooklyn. Five other candidates divided the vote in the district, and one Hasidic candidate got the support of the Aaronis.

If Restler is a candidate next year in a two-man primary, there could be a path for victory. Contrary to 2009, he could get the support of both the Aaronis in Williamsburg and the “reformers” (that supported Jo Ann Simon and other candidates) in the rest of the district. As the September election showed, he almost neutralized Levin’s support in the 50th Assembly District even with a very strong turnout in the Hasidic area. He would have to maintain his support, and just do better than Levin in the 52nd Assembly District.

How does the 2013 redistricting help the Regulars

But the situation is actually more complicated, because the 33rd City Council District doesn’t include the whole Restler’s vote base in the 50Th. As we analysed, only 4559 (76%) of his electors in the 50th AD vote in the actual 33rd CCD, contrary to 5375 (89%) of the Olechowski’s electors.

The new 33rd district, proposed by the Districting Commission, increases these figures, to 5034 (84%) and 5771 (95%). The new district includes a few blocs south of Flushing, in the 50th AD, where the Hasidic community has expended during the 00’s, and gave up several Election Districts (EDs) in the Southside and Northside, where Levin is particularly weak. The Greenpoint area will not be affected. Finally, Restler is below in the 50th by 737 votes.

The key of this election will be the 52nd AD, which is a very different political area (and electorate). In 2009, 1414 electors voted for Levin and 6676 for the other candidates. His main challenger, Jo Anne Simon, close to Restler, received lots of support, especially in Brooklyn Heights, and North Park Slope. Technically, Restler could reach the voters of all the other candidates, who are more progressive and reform-oriented.

However the 2013 redistricting could give the election to Levin. The north of Park Slope (and parts of BoCoCa) would be removed from the proposed district; 3737 didn’t vote for Levin in this area in 2009; only 1289 of those electors will stay in the district. And in 2001, this area was the base of Yassky’s victory. In the 2013 33rd district, Yassky would have lost against Cohn (4291 to 4003) 

The Yassky’s way (enhanced by the Aaronis support) seems very difficult after this redistricting. 

Other factors

It’s too early to make a deeper analysis about this election, as Restler hasn’t declared his candidacy yet. Brooklyn and local politics will have a big play there. Levin is seriously weakened by Lopez’s scandal and fall. On the other hand, he is the incumbent. He is a hard-worker and has developed ties with other elected officials (in the city council) and his electorate in Greenpoint, where he lives, and in Brooklyn Heights.

Restler will be able to start his campaign very early and develop his power base in Greenpoint and in Brooklyn heights. Let’s not forget that he grew up in Brooklyn Heights, and that his political club, New Kings Democrats (NKD), is well connected in the whole 52nd Assembly District.

The real question remains: how will the relationship between Frank Seddio, the Executive Committee and the Reformer faction evolve. Ken Fisher and David Yassky has showed (differently) that the 33rd City Councilmember could be somewhere in the middle. Then, what will the main Hasidic faction do? We guess they will stay loyal to Levin against Restler. But, depending on the internal politics, the real question will be the turnout.

Another key factor is the number of candidates: will the reformers unify behind Restler? Will the Democrat Party encourage another candidate, whether it’s against Levin or to take from Restler’s base? Finally, which candidate will get the support of Joe Lentol, Millman and other elected officials in the area?

To be continued...

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

The next Brooklyn Democrat Party Chair

The real questions concerning the election of the chairman of the Democratic Party in Brooklyn

What is the difference between 2005 and 2012? The ethnic composition of the Executive Committee’s members, like the district they represent, is quite the same (minus gentrification): 6 Latinos (5 in 2005), 15 Blacks and 21 white (22 in 2005). It’s necessary to have a consensus to elect a new chairman.

In 2005, there were a few challengers: Jose Bova, Vito Lopez, Annette Robinson, Darryl Towns and Freddie Hamilton. According to the press, Vito Lopez was finally elected with 29 votes; Annette Robinson and Raph Perfetto got 3 votes, and there were 5 abstentions (1 vote was lost in the Park Plaza diner’s toilets?). With the following spreadsheet, you can do the math by yourself. 12 district leaders didn’t vote for Lopez (Reformers, some blacks, some leaders from South Brooklyn). But he got the Latinos leaders, the Jewish leaders (after negotiations) and the white folks related to the old Tony Genovese ‘s faction : Thomas Jefferson club, 41th Assembly District Democrats Club, Highway Club and other political clubs in North (Seneca Club) and South (Stars and Stripes Democratic Club, United Progressive Democratic Club) Brooklyn. It was revenge against the Clarence Norman’s coalition although some district leaders played on both side (Cohn, Towns, etc.).

Nowadays, even if some journalists try to bet on the next chairman (black-reformers coalition VS the Lopez machine), it seems quite early to do so. There is an election in two weeks: 2 black districts are leaving and 7 black district leaders are challenged in their district; two reformers, Jo Anne Simon, and Lincoln Restler, are challenged and the latter may fall (with Lopez); three Latinos, Martin Dilan, his wife and Maritza Davila (Lopez’s protégé) have opponents. On the other side, just a few regular white leaders are challenged (Michael Geller, Dov Hikind, Linda Minucci). 2 district leaders are thus leaving and 15 are challenged (actually 12, see updates). That’s why the black coalition, if there is one today, seems pretty weak throwing big names to the press like Hakeem Jeffries and Karim Camara who are not even district leaders --It would be technically possible though--.

Camara mentioned the second big question, the 11 members-at-large added to the Committee in 2010. It’s actually 9 since Frank Seddio and Erik Dilan became district leaders. It seems pretty unlikely that they will vote next month, but who knows? At, least, one of them could become a candidate: Steven Cohn or Joe Lentol.

A few names were also mentioned in the press: Joe Ann Simon, Annette Robinson (hoping to beat her last score…) and Frank Seddio. Seddio is well positioned to be elected by the Lopez’s coalition, with no real alternative, but seems so old-fashioned in a changing Brooklyn. Gatemouth thinks that Vito Lopez should stay in office if he is reelected against a descent candidate. In that case, i would add : Lincoln Restler should become the chairman if he beats Lopez in his own turf.

  * challenged in primary election ** not seeking for reelection *** (obviously) didn't vote in 2005

update: according to Colin, Debra Scotto and Kate Zidar dropped out. 15 district leaders are challenged. if someone know about any other candidates running unopposed, let me know.

update 2 : Janitza Luna Dilan is not looking for reelection, according to Gatemouth. 

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

The Zaloynim & Aroynim vote in Williamsburg

The vote in Hasidic Williamsburg when the Aroynim and the Zaloynim vote separately for a primary : 

and when they vote together (sometimes against other congregations, like in 1989) : 

SO : 

source : NY Board of Elections, 2001-2012, by Election Districts (Eds)

Conclusion : 

The Aroynim (and allies) deliver between between 21% and 36% of the hasidic vote, without talking about elections before 2005 or with a low turnout. The Zaloynim (and allies) deliver between 57% and 78% of the hasidic vote. 

nowadays winning the zaloynim vote in a high turnout primary election is like having the whole community support in 2001, 2 weeks after 9/11 and 2 days before Yom Kippur! With a lower turnout, like Connor/Squadron, it's even worst.

With the June 2012 turnout, their voting bloc would be unbeatable if they'd work together.

Notes

about the EDs : i used EDs 41,42,49,50. They are the most hasidic ED's in Williamsburg. Before the 2002 redistricting, EDs 41+42 is ED 44 and EDs 49+50 = ED 43. Before 1992 redistricting, ED 49+50 = ED 66 and ED 41+42 = ED 67.

about the last election : we use the unofficial final results, provided by OP. with the redistricting, the EDs have changed in the hasidic area. i've managed to fix it but there could be some change needed. 

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Velazquez-Dilan Election Results

i'm waiting to have the official results by Election Districts (Eds) to seriously comment the results and give a "moderate" opinion about the hasidic vote in Williamsburg and the two "factions". Reading the comments was fun.

Until then, I used the BOE's unofficial results (in the 50th Assembly District) provided by OrthodoxPundit to have a quick preview in the hasidic area; i add details thanks to the political science scholar that provided me information about the hasidic voters by EDs in this area in 2011, before the new registration campain in the community. the map is faulty because there are some changes with EDs in the 2012 redistricting.

Anyways the biggest surprise is the turnout. 

In the hasidic area, the turnout has doubled since 2010. It actually almost reached the turnout in the 1993 general mayoral election Giuliani-Dinkins (8339) or, more recently, the 2008 general presidential election Obama-McCain (8242). In a primary, that's a big surprise. A big part of this turnout is composed of non hasidic voters, especially Latino voters in a latino congressional district. The turnout in the projects is big (and for Velazquez). 

In two of the most hasidic EDs (41-42), where they represent more than 85% of the voters, the turnout doubled since 2010, but the increase since 2008 is lower (+30%). And in some EDs, like in Bed-stuy/Clinton Hill, where the turnout has raised drastically, it's hard to know if it's because of the hasidic voters as they represent less than 45% of the voters.

Concerning the two factions, my excel table speaks for itself.

I am very curious about the results in the southern EDs, south to Heyward Avenue, in the newly developed hasidic area. The turnout was gigantic, certainly due to the new registration campaign in the hasidic community; Velazquez and Dilan are almost equal in South of Flushing, where UJCARE has its office.

More generally, we excepted Dilan (and Vito Lopez) to mobilize between 9500 and 10500 voters. According to the unofficial results, he got 8,589. We were not very far. The results in the 53rd Assembly District are interesting. The turnout was low; Velazquez got apparently 2385, Dilan 1837. Based on our previous analysis, Vito Lopez and the Dilan family could have reached between 3000 and 4500 voters in this district. This is a huge defeat for Lopez (and Dilan) in this area. 

update : i forgot to mention the general turnout in the district. With about 28,500 voters, it's a low turnout. it was the same in the democrat primary for the mayoral election in 2009, but it reached 40,000 in 2005. that's why the turnout in the hasidic area seems so important.

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Nydia Velazquez VS Erik Dilan (and the Lopez's machine)

The primary for the 7th Congress District between United States Representatives Nydia Velazquez, Councilman Erik Dilan and two other candidates George Martinez and Daniel J. O’Connor will take place next Tuesday.

This is the first time real challenge for Velazquez since his election in 1992 in a district drawn specifically to maximize Hispanic voting strength[i]. The district is less Latino and was significantly modified during the 2012 redistricting. Some neighborhoods, like Northside (Williamsburg), Greenpoint and Sunnyside were removed whereas Woodhaven, South Williamsburg and parts of BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, and Carroll Gardens) were included.  The incumbent effect will not work (or less) and challengers have more opportunities in these new territories.

2002

2012

In this context, Velazquez has a strong opponent. Erik Dilan, a Latino Councilman from North Brooklyn, who has notably the support of a coalition of powerful stakeholders in the district: his father State Senator Martin Dilan, the County leader and Assemblyman Vito Lopez and the main faction of the Hasidic community in South Williamsburg. The Dilan family and Vito Lopez have been allied for years and battled Velazquez for control in Williamsburg, Bushwick and Cypress Hills. The Hasidic community in South Williamsburg was in Ed Towns’s congressional district from 1992 until the new redistricting. A faction of the community, related to a Community-Based Organization United Jewish Organization (UJO), has started a political alliance with Vito Lopez in 2005. Voting as a bloc, they will support Dilan. A rival faction of the Hasidic community will vote for Velazquez, in opposition to this other bloc.

This is a primary election. There is no big difference and real ideological debates between the two “main” candidates. They fought about Israel, Iran and concerning “a clash over the control of Hasidic summer camps in Ulster County”. Dilan criticized Velazquez for being a “Washington insider” and “funded by the banking industry, Wall Street” whereas she described him as a Vito Lopez’s Puppet.  That’s why money, ads campaign, ethnic voters and endorsements are essential. Nydia Velazquez has the support of most of the major unions and some strong backers: President Obama, Senator Chuck Schumer, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Congressman Jerry Nadler, former mayor Ed Koch. Dilan got the endorsement of many local elected officials and some building trade unions like the NYC Carpenters.

The two other candidates in this primary George Martinez, a Occupy activist and former (51th Assembly) district leader from Sunset Park, and Daniel J. O’Connor, “an economist and businessman who works at Green Energy in Manhattan”[ii], will certainly get some vote in Sunset Park and Chinatown. George Martinez participated to (at least) two primary elections in Sunset Park for the 38th City Council district in 2001 and 51st Assembly district leadership in 2002. He respectively got 1984 and 1185 votes. Daniel Connor, who apparently speaks fluent Mandarin and Cantonese, has developed ties with the Asian community in Chinatown and could reach some of the white voters in the “brownstone belt”.

Concerning the turnout, we compiled the recent election history of the election districts in the new congressional district. The turnout has reached between 30, 000 and 40,000 in 2005 and 2009.

Velazquez will certainly win. But we wonder, following our previous study, how many votes the Lopez’s coalition can really provide. Based on our recent study, we figure out the Dilan-Lopez-Hasidic alliance could deliver between 9500 and 10500, depending on the turnout and the mobilization. We compiled the EDs in the 7th Congressional district, where this alliance can mobilize voters (see map), and aggregated results from the following elections: the Lopez-Duran primary in 2010, the Levin primary in 2009, the state senate Dilan-Clinton primary in 2004, the City Council Dilan-Santiago primary in 2003, for the highest figure; the Reyna-Davila primary in 2009, Restler-Cohn in 2010, Dilan-Clinton in 2004 and Dilan-Santiago in 2003 for the other one. (For more details, please contact me).

 In the past, those EDs have represented 50% of the vote in this district.

The results will tell us if Vito Lopez is able to mobilize his “strong infrastructure” against a Latino incumbent. See you next week. 

[i] In 2000, Velazquez won the primary easily against Mildred Rosario, “an anti-abortion evangelical Christian and former Bronx schoolteacher who was fired after being charged with proselytizing her students”, 15,894 to 4,713.

[ii] Krawitz, Alan, 12-04-2012, “Meet Dan O’Connor: Unlikely challenger in redrawn 7th District searches for political accountability”, New York Press

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Vito Lopez (part 1)

How can we measure the power and influence of the Democratic Party’s chairman of a County (County leader) in New York City, like Vito Lopez in Kings County (Brooklyn)?

 To study the Assemblyman Vito Lopez’s power, I will use three scales: his own turf, North Brooklyn (this post as part 1), Brooklyn as a whole (part 2), New York City, and state-wide (part 3).  I’m considering his influence in the context of his election as county leader in 2005, since 2002 until nowadays.

Winning Primary election in his own turf (part 1)

As an elected official and power broker in North Brooklyn since the 80’s, Vito Lopez has won his own election in the 53rd Assembly District and influenced other legislative elections that include, or are included in, his district:  34th and 37th City Council, 17th State Senate, and the 12th Congress[i]. He has also influenced judicial elections in the same area. Journalists and researchers have described his local power base in relation to the Ridgewood-Bushwick Senior Citizens Council (RBSCC), a Community Based Organization very active in Bushwick and Ridgewood Queens, sometimes described as a new “political machine” (voting for funding and/or jobs) [ii].

Since the Democrat primary for the 53rd Assembly District in 1984, he was never challenged in a primary and won easily every general election. However, in 2010, he had a primary for the male district leader’s position in the same Assembly District. His opponent, Esteban Duran, is a member of the New Kings Democrats (NKD), a young political club from North Brooklyn that fights the democrat leadership in Brooklyn. This was a test for Lopez. The political boss mobilized “a very strong infrastructure” and expected “the 384 members of his Brooklyn Unidos club [related to RBSCC] to work the district and help him beat Duran by a solid margin[iii]. He finally got 72% of the 5999 ballots (4335; 1664 for Duran), and won everywhere but the Southside.

Between 2001 and 2009, there were three primaries for the 34th Council district, which includes most of the 53rd Assembly district and stretches out in the Southside and Ridgewood, Queens (since the reapportionment after the 2000 census). Diana Reyna won them all.

Before being first elected, Reyna worked for Vito Lopez. She was the legislative aide, and from 1997 to 2001, the head of personnel to Vito Lopez.  In 2001 and 2003, Lopez vigorously mobilized his local “infrastructure” for her against Juan Martinez, the director of a nonprofit organization. United States Representatives Nydia Velazquez and Edolphus Towns who battled Lopez for control in the area supported Martinez. In the 53rd, Reyna got 5250 ballots in 2001, 3682 in 2003 and 3051 in 2009. Around 2005, the relationship between Reyna and her former boss started to deteriorate (we will talk about it later in another post). In 2009 another Lopez protege Maritza Davila, a housing organizer at the RBSCC, entered the race against Diana Reyna, then supported by Nydia Velazquez[iv]. Despite the Assemblyman’s support, Davila lost against the two-term incumbents. She got 3250 votes in the 53rd AD when Lopez got 4335 votes with a lower turnout in 2010. Beside this difference (Davila was rather unknown), the correlation coefficient between their results by Elections District (EDs) is very high (0, 94) showing the Lopez/RBSCC electoral base in Bushwick and East Williamsburg and its weakness in the Southside. It was not enough to win this election.

A Civil court judicial primary that took place in North Brooklyn in 2005 in the 3rd municipal district is another benchmark. A few months before his election as county leader, Lopez backed another RBSCC former employee Richard Velasquez against a local activist from the Southside Marty Needleman. This municipal district is composed of most of the 50th (Joe Lentol) and the 53rd Assembly districts.

It was another test for Lopez’s power; Velazquez finally got 4028 votes in the 53rd, a little bit less than Lopez for the 2010 district leader election, with a high correlation between the results by EDs (0, 89). Needleman did better than Esteban Duran in the same district (2309-1664), but Velasquez won with a large margin. He also won the 50th, outside of the RSBCC’s power base, with the support of voters in Fort Greene and the Hasidic community, which started around the time a political alliance with Vito Lopez (we will also talk about it in another post).

Otherwise, in the recent past, the 17th State Senate district, which includes most of the Lopez’s Assembly district, had two democrat primaries. The actual senator Martin Dilan won against two other candidates Nellie Santiago (2002) and Ronald S. Clinton (2004). Lopez backed Dilan for both elections whereas Nydia Velazquez and Towns supported the other candidates.

 Dilan got 2705 votes in the 53rd Assembly district in 2002 and 3517 in 2004. The correlation coefficient between Lopez’s vote by EDs in 2010 and Dilan’s vote by EDs is low in 2002 (0, 60) and relatively high in 2004 (0, 80), certainly due to the local popularity of the incumbent Santiago in 2002.

Conclusion

We can conclude that Vito Lopez and the candidates he backed have always won the primaries in the 53rd Assembly district since 2001, with the exception of the 34th City Council in 2009. Depending on the turnout and the mobilization, Lopez and his political infrastructure in the neighborhood can mobilize between 3000 and 4500 voters, mostly in Bushwick and East Williamsburg. Diana Reyna’s victory in 2009 pinpoints Lopez’s weakness in the Southside.

All the previous elections have fallen within the scope of power rivalries between Vito Lopez, Nydia Velazquez (and Ed Towns who just retired) in North Brooklyn. Therefore, the next primary for the 7th Congress District, who included most of the 53rd Assembly District (except the north part of East Williamsburg), will tell us more about their influence in the area: Vito Lopez supports Erik Dilan, Martin Dilan’s son, against Velazquez. The newly recomposed (Latino) district, after the 2012 redistricting, included most of Martin Dilan’s (17th State Senate), Erik Dilan’s (37th City Council) and Lopez’s districts. 

[i] Before the 2012’s redistricting. The 53th Assembly District is now included in the 7th Congressional District and the 18th State Senate District.

[ii] Marwell, Nicole P., 2007, Bargaining for Brooklyn : community organizations in the entrepreneurial city, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, p 105-128

[iii] Errol Louis, 26-08-2010, “Will Vito Veto Brooklyn Voters”, New York Daily News

[iv] In this election, there was another candidate from Williamsburg, Community Board 1 District Manager Gerald Esposito.

[hasidicbrooklyn-blog-blog]

Lincoln Restler VS Chris Olechowski, September 2012

It’s a classical battle between Reformers and Regulars, in this case a member of the New Kings Democrats (NKD) against the Kings County Democratic Party and his chairman Vito Lopez, that happens in the 50th Assembly District, composed of part of Greenpoint, Williamsburg, Clinton Hill-Bedford-Stuyvesant and Fort Greene, for the unpaid position of State Committeeman of the 50th Assembly District.

In 2010, Lincoln Restler won against Warren Cohn. Mr Cohn is the son of Steven Cohn, a lawyer and influent power broker in the local Democratic Party, and grandson of Harold W. Cohn, an assemblyman representing Greenpoint and Williamsburg from 1959 to 1968. Born and raised in Brooklyn, Mr. Restler is the son of Peter Restler, who works in private equity and donated $11,500 to his campaign. He finally collected 60,000$ compared to the $20,000 of Warren Cohn.

According to sources in Williamsburg and political operatives, Warren Cohn didn’t even want this position. Despite the active support of his father and local elected officials (like Assemblyman Joe Lentol), he conducted a very poor campaign. On the other side, Lincoln Restler did the work; he had been active in the Obama campaign in 2008 and he shows himself everywhere he could in the area during the campaign with the help of NKD activists. Finally, Restler won with a very short margin, by 210 votes (3722-3601), against a passive candidate.

Apparently Warren Cohn didn’t want to take his revenge (yet) this year. Steve Levin, the 33rd City Councilman and former Chief Of Staff of Vito Lopez, was suppose to be his opponent but the Regulars found someone else, Chris Olechowski, the Community Board 1 (Williamsburg and Greenpoint) chairman. Could he beat this opponent to Lopez and his so-called “machine”? What is their strategy?

How did Restler win in 2010?

He got 1049 votes in Fort Greene-Clinton Hill, 1249 in the Hasidic area and the rest in the Northside and Greenpoint (1424). On the other side, Cohn got 218 in fort Greene and Clinton-Hill, 3030 in the Hasidic area and 353 in the Northside and Greenpoint. Warren Cohn got a descent score just for one reason: the Hasidic community is famous for voting as a bloc, at least before the schism in the Satmar congregation. But Restler won because he was able to get a part of the Hasidic vote and find support in the rest of the district. He would like to do the same now, but it seems more complicated.

How did the redistricting change the deal?

Because the Regulars are always very lucky with redistricting, Lincoln Restler’s victory in 2010 would become a defeat: 3344 against 2869. Instead of 1049 votes in Fort Greene and Clinton Hill, he would get 314. He lost almost 20% of his 2010 electoral base in Fort Greene (and a few other EDs in the rest of the AD).

What is the “machine” electoral base?

In the 50th Assembly District, the main (and only reliable) electoral base for Vito Lopez is the Hasidic vote, controlled indirectly by the United Jewish Organization (UJO) and his president David Niederman (non-profit cannot support a candidate). Since 2005, and after years of conflicts between Vito and the orthodox community, they have started to work together to beat opponents to Vito and one faction of the Hassidim in Williamsburg and Greenpoint: Marty Needleman in 2005, Diana Reyna and Isaac Abraham in 2009.

How Steve Levin won the 33rd City Council primary in 2009?

In 2009, 46% of the 15422 ballots for the democrat primary for the 33rd City Council were located in the “new” 50 Assembly District. Steven Levin got 3752 votes, 53%, of the vote in the 50th AD; it represents also 75% of the entire vote he got in the 33rd City council district.

3433 votes, 91% of his vote in the AD50 or 66% of his vote in the CD33, are located in the Hasidic area. In the heaviest Hasidic EDs (533-535), he got 90% of their vote because of the unofficial support of UJO. This Community-based organization created in 1966 and developed by Niederman in the 90’s represents a bunch of Hasidic congregation: Satmar, the main one in Williamsburg, Pupa, Vishnitz, Klausenberg, Munkacs, Sopron, Krasna, Sziget, Spinka et Viener.

This primary was contested with 7 candidates from different background and voting bases within the CD33. 6 of them got more than 1,000 votes: Steven Levin (5199), Jo Ann Simon (3109), Isaac Abraham (1937), Evan R Thies (1915), Kenneth Diamondstone (1324), Doug Biviano (1127). This variety of candidates finally divided the vote, and Steve Levin surpassed the second Jo Ann Simon just with the voters in the Hasidic area. Mr. Levin and Vito Lopez know it.

The Hasidic split

Steve Levin’s election was also a challenge for the Hasidic leadership. Since 1999 (and even earlier), the Satmar congregation have split in two factions, following two different sons of the Grand Rebbe Moshes Teitelbaum who finally passed away in 2006. Niederman, who is affiliated with one of the brothers Zalman, is politically allied with other Hasidic congregations (like Pupa) within UJO. In general, they agree to support the same candidate and vote as a bloc. They are part of the Lopez’s “machine” coalition in North Brooklyn, since he became chairman of the Democratic Party of Kings County in 2005.

Another faction follows the other brother Aaron who was in charge of the Satmar congregation in Kiryas Joel before the feud started. Since 2001, they have started to establish their own political agenda in Brooklyn and made themselves a name by supporting Reformers, or just opponents to the Zalis candidates. It started in 2001, when they backed Mark Green instead of Peter F. Vallone in the Democrat primary for Mayor. It was not convincing. But after the real split, when the Rebbe died in 2006, they started their own social organization UJCARE and became more active in politics.

Their first victory happened in 2008 during the democrat primary for the State Senate in the 25th district. They backed a reformer Daniel Squadron, supported by the Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Senator Schumer, against Marty Connor elected in 1978 and Minority Leader of the State Senate from 1995 to 2002. Squadron won 13,674 to 11, 298. UJO supported Connor, who got 3057 votes in the Hasidic area (69% in the heaviest Hasidic ED’s). Squadron won the rest, 1630 votes, with 30% in the heaviest Hasidic ED’s. According to Mary Connor, he lost because of this dissident vote.

Then, in 2009, for the 33rd City Council primary, it was the first time that a Hasidic Jew from Williamsburg became candidate for a local election. Isaac Abraham, a local activist with solid ties in the community, could have been a good challenger. He was friends with Niederman; former classmate of Lipa Teitelbaum, Aaron and Zalman’s brother; and knew well Moshe Friedman, Zalman’s Gabbai. UJO finally supported Levin but Isaac Abraham got 1834 votes in the Hasidic area, with 35% of the vote in the heaviest Hasidic EDs, but no vote outside of the Hasidic area.

Why the regulars think they will win

If you compare Steve Levin and Lincoln Restler’s electoral base, the Regulars should win.

Restler’s voting base fell from 3722 to 2869. Steve Levin got 3433 votes in the Hasidic area and about 319 votes in the rest of the 50AD. But Levin is not the candidate in this election. So they had to find someone that could compete with Lincoln Restler in his turf, the Northside and Greenpoint, where he got 1441 votes, half of his 2010’s base (in the new district). Lopez thinks that “The Polish community is working to elect the first Polish community leader Chris Olechowski”.

What Lincoln Restler will do

In 2010, Restler got 1114 votes in the Hasidic area, less than Squadron and Isaac Abraham. Despite of the support of Gary Schlesinger and UJCARE, he didn’t get the full support of the Aaronis. Hasidic leaders like Leib Glanz, close to Steven Cohn, supported his son, or at least not make people vote for his opponent. He should try to maximize this vote now that he is facing a candidate from the polish community with no ties to the Aaronis. He should make himself known in the community and also reach the non-Hasidic voters in the Hasidic area, especially in the housing projects: Taylor-Wythe, Johnathan Williams Plaza, Independence, Berry Projects. He was recently helping the tenants to get their gas back in the Independence Towers; it was a great idea. In 2009, there were 289 votes for neither Levin nor Abraham in the Hasidic area. This area will be the key of the election again.

Otherwise, he will try to follow the path of other Reformers that won in Williamsburg before him, especially Daniel Squadron in 2009 and David Yassky in 2001, by wining largely outside of the Hasidic area. It’s harder for Restler because their districts (25th State Senate and 33rd City Council) were bigger and their voters more reform-oriented: Fort Greene, Brooklyn Heights, Park Slope and Bococa. In 2009, 1289 persons didn’t vote for Steven Levin or Isaac Abraham in the Northside and Greenpoint: Kenneth J Baer (137), Doug Biviano (160), Ken Diamondstone (109), Jo Anne Simon (252), Evan R Thies (656). During the same election, 2187 persons voted in the Northside and Greenpoint for the Democrat primary for City Controller: Melinda Katz (401), John Liu (586), David Yassky (1038), David Weprin (162). Lincoln Restler needs to get more than 1441 of those 2187 voters: 1289 that did vote in the City Council Race for other candidates (in 2010), and the 560 persons that vote for their City Controller but not for their City Councilman (2187-1627). A part them (273 in 2010) could be reach easily, being voters of Diana Reyna living in the AD50. Lincoln Restler should of course maximize the vote of the newcomers, young professionals, artists, students, new families, against the “old party”.

Finally, he needs to mobilize more voters in the gentrifying Clinton Hill and Fort Greene, where he also has a good reputation.

Other factors and forecast

Two other essential factors remain unsure: the money raised and the final turnout. It’s quite early to talk about their finance, but Lincoln Restler should be able to collect a tidy sum. We will have more information about the turnout after another highly related primary, the Democrat Primary for 7th Congress district.

The Hasidic area in Williamsburg that was part of Ed Towns’s Congress District since 1992 was included in Nydia Velazquez’s district in the 2012 redistricting. And the Northside and Greenpoint are no longer in her district. Velazquez, like Towns, has a conflicting relationship with Vito Lopez for years. In this context, another Regular Erik Dilan (son of State Senator Martin Dilan), who is allied with Lopez, has decided to challenge her. Velazquez, Diana Reyna (former Chief of Staff of Lopez) and Lincoln Restler fight together against Vito Lopez in North Brooklyn.

It may increase the turnover in the Hasidic area. Before the redistricting, the split didn’t affect the Hasidic support for their congressman Towns who had strong ties with the leadership. In 2008, when Squadron beat Connor, Ed Towns got 4730 votes in the Hasidic area (497 for Powell), and in 2010[1], when Restler beat Cohn, he got 3400 votes (and Powell 273). In the June primary, UJO-leadership will support Dilan because of their alliance with Lopez. The Aaronis and other dissident will support Velazquez, who already works with them against the Broadway Triangle. The last saga between the Satmars about the summer camp for their kids in Upstate New York could also give a boost to the turnout. On the other hand, Glanz is temporary out of the game (because of his trial) and the Aaronis could have less impact. It’s also unlikely that Hasidic voters would really mobilize and vote for Latinos candidate because of the past tensions in Williamsburg. Fernando Ferrer got 873 votes in the 2001 Democrat primary for Mayor and 688 in 2005, mostly because of the non-Hasidic voters in South Williamsburg. The Hispanic candidate that did the best score in their area was Richard Velazquez for a judicial election in 2005 with 1624 votes. Furthermore the younger Hasidic generation tends to not always vote the way their leader ask them.

The Northside and Greenpoint are now included in Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney’s district. Consequently the turnout in this area is very uncertain for June and, then, September. The support of Diana Reyna and Nydia Velazquez may have less effect on Lincoln Restler’s campaign for September primary. The polish vote doesn’t really exist and the turnout in Greenpoint is generally low, between 1500 and 2000 voters for a primary. In 2001 Steven Cohn, another “eminently qualified candidate, who’s been in the neighborhood for many years, over 40 years” (as Steve Levin described Olechowski), got only 966 votes (600 hundred more than his son) in Greenpoint in the democrat primary for City Council. Yassky got 856, Kenneth Diamondstone 413 and David Reiss 373. Another question is Assemblyman Joe Lentol. He contributed to Lincoln Restler's campain (via Citizen for Lentol), participated to events with both candidates, and could influence the vote in Greenpoint and the Northside.  

*Anti-levin : didn’t vote for Levin in 2010 + vote for Diana Reyna in a few EDs

Conclusion

Lincoln Restler has very little room to maneuver. His base in Clinton-Hill and Fort Greene is now very small and has little potential to grow. He almost reached the maximum Anti-Levin vote in Greenpoint and the Northside in 2010, and the vote against Levin (and lopez) in the Hasidic area is very instable and will depend on the turnout. With a good war chest and a well-organized team, he could still create a surprise. 6856 Democrats voted in Greenpoint in 2010 during the General election and 1230 in Fort Greene. They have to be convinced to vote.

1 High turnout: Restler win

For example, if he got: 1441 (Northside and Greenpoint vote in 2010) + 300 (additional votes in the Northside and Greenpoint) + 1600 (Aaronis and other Hasidic dissidents) + 200 (Non-Hasidic in South Williamsburg) + 350 (in Clinton Hill and Fort Greene) = 3891.

Chris Olechowski could get: 3100 (UJO) + 130 (Clinton Hill and Fort Greene) + 600 (Northside and Greenpoint) = 3830.

Total vote: 2300 (Northside and Greenpoint), 4541 (Hasidic area), 480 (Fort Greene and Clinton Hill)

2 Low turnout: He lose

If the turnout is lower, we could imagine: 1441 (Northside and Greenpoint vote in 2010)  + 1100 (Aaronis and other Hasidic dissident) + 100 (Non-Hasidic in South Williamsburg) + 200 (in Clinton Hill and Fort Greene) = 2841.

Chris Olechowski would get: 2600 (UJO) + 70 (Clinton Hill and Fort Greene) + 300 (Northside and Greenpoint) = 2970.

Total vote : 1771 (Northside and Greenpoint),  3700 (Hasidic area), 270 (Clinton Hill and Fort Greene)

The regulars count on the Hasidic mobilization and it’s a test for Vito Lopez. The Aaronis also want to show their strength. We wonder what kind of campaign Chris Olechowski will conduct: would he focus on the Greenpoint area and keep a low-profile? So far, we anticipate a low turnout. Lincoln Restler will need money and a well-organized campaign. Good luck.

    [1] In 2010, Niederman and other Hasidic leaders close to UJO got also elected as Democratic delegate for the 50th AD with 3000 votes in the Hasidic area.