Opinion Columnists
Email
Print
The Few Rule: Big decisions were made by the 3.65% who voted in the primary
ADVERTISEMENT
Published: September 17, 2009
For those who don't know it -- and judging by the abysmal 3.65 percent turnout in Winston-Salem, that's more than a few -- primary elections were held Tuesday in municipalities across North Carolina.
In Winston-Salem, primaries were held in seven of the city's eight council wards. With the collective grinning-puppet performance of incumbent council members in the alleged "debate" over Winston-Salem's $48.7 million downtown ballpark, that presumably should have added up to increased interest and participation by the electorate.
But it was not to be. Eight -- count 'em, eight -- ballots had been cast by 1 p.m. Tuesday at the Miller Park Recreation Center polling place.
Five hours later, the story was much the same at Reynolds High School, where 27 of the 993 eligible voters bothered to cast a ballot.
"It's slow," said John Friedenberg, the chief judge in the Reynolds' precinct, in a massive understatement. "Two hours ago, if I would have put my head down, I would have nodded off."
Focus on the positives
Ordinarily, such a pathetic turnout would invite rounds of hand-wringing and navel-gazing about the level of engagement and lax participation in an alleged representative democracy.
Shame on you. Bad citizen. You can't complain if you don't vote.
Rather than singing from the same old songbook, though, let's focus on the upside.
Low turnout saves time. Asked why he was in his office instead of shaking hands at the polls, Ted Shipley (the winner of the Republican primary in the Southwest Ward) just laughed.
"I've got a lot of work to do here," he said. "I'm doing more good e-mailing and calling people."
Low turnout means fewer clueless boneheads jamming up the lines at the polls. It means fewer people choosing candidates by flipping a coin or because of a pretty color scheme on a campaign sign. Anybody who made the effort to vote in a local primary -- in theory -- probably made an effort to learn something about the candidates and the issues.
What serves us better -- a big turnout of know-nothings or an election determined by an informed smattering?
It's hard to say: Would you rather be shot or stabbed to death?
"It's still a local election," Friedenberg said. "A lot of it is still going to be knowing (the candidate), their neighbor or somebody who lives next door to somebody's cousin."
Status quo drubbed
Regardless of the turnout, Tuesday's results were interesting.
One incumbent -- Democrat Joycelyn Johnson -- went down hard in the East Ward. A second, Evelyn Terry in the Southeast, won her primary -- but just barely -- and will now face an Oct. 6 runoff against James Taylor, who had 150 votes to Terry's 160. A third candidate in that race, Jimmy Boyd, netted 136.
Looked at another way, the results in the Southeast can be read this way: Anybody Else 286, Status Quo 160.
Certainly a lot of factors came into play Tuesday. Derwin Montgomery, the winner in the East Ward, benefited from a coldly efficient organization of his fellow students at Winston-Salem State University.
Beyond that, seeing one incumbent beaten soundly and a second staggering into a runoff indicates voter unrest. Whether that has to do with backlash over incentives given to Dell Inc. or the council's spot-on imitation of toothless lemmings in the never-ending ballpark saga remains to be seen.
(In fairness, the council did set a "deadline" of Monday for loans in the deal to close. If they don't, council members could go to Plan B -- stamping their feet until the mayor hands them lollipops.)
The turnout might not be much better Nov. 3 than it was Tuesday, but the next six-plus weeks should be fun to watch, even if the winners are chosen by a relative select few.
ssexton@wsjournal.com
727-7481
Email
Print
