The final (unofficial) results are in for the preliminary election for Mayor of Newton
- Albert Cecchinelli Jr 661 (6.2%)
- Ruthanne Fuller 5926 (54.7%)
- Amy Mah Sangiolo 4247 (39.2%)
Congratulations to Ruthanne Fuller and Amy Mah Sangiolo who will run against each other in November’s final election for Newton mayor.
Here’s the vote by ward. Fuller won by a sizable margin (55% – %39%) and led in most wards of the city but there were striking differences in the vote across the city. Clearly development is a big issue and clearly different neighborhoods of the city have very different views.
Sangiolo won handily or was in a dead heat in 10 of the city’s 32 wards. Three of those wards (2-1. 3-1, 3-3) are along the Washington St corridor, one of them is by the Northland project (5-1) and one is by the Riverside project (4-2). Sangiolo also won in Nonantum (1-4) and also across her home Ward 4. The vote clearly show that the two candidates do indeed represent distinct constituencies with distinct views.
I’m reposting my comment from the prior thread…
Such a disappointment. In my view Ruthanne’s performance as Mayor hasn’t warranted this level of citywide support. She’ll take this as validation of a term that has profoundly disappointed so many. I give great credit to Amy, but the only way I see her overcoming this in the Nov election is to take off the kid gloves. There’s plenty to attack in this Mayor’s record without needing to get nasty. Thoughts?
Apparently lots of people in Newton don’t care about their school-age children.
Honestly, you can’t draw too many conclusions from a preliminary election. I realize folks will try and look for patterns, but it is a now a two person race and twice the number of people will vote in the real election. Also, I’d imagine Al’s votes are far more likely to go to Amy than Ruthanne, no?
Too soon for any predictions in the main event. Let’s see what happens in the debates. But I will say again, online banter is not votes. Just because a lot of very vocal people support Amy, doesn’t mean a lot of folks don’t silently support Ruthanne.
Pulled some numbers from the MA Office of Campaign Finance site a couple of weeks ago.
Since Oct 2020 thru late Aug, Mayor Fuller pulled down (170) $1,000 checks. From Jun 2021 (when Amy announced her candidacy) thru late Aug, Amy received only (15) $1,000, while outpacing Mayor Fuller in donations $500 or lower, 171 to 129.
This gap in funding shows in the uptick in Mayor Fuller’s social media campaign of late (especially this week) not to mention geo-targeting text and calls, not seen since the last Congressional election.
To be running against and incumbent Mayor, with strong support from her friends on the City Council, and spending from a signficantly larger warchest – for a preliminary election – there is lots to be excited about in a 39% result.
It only takes 50.01% percent to win in November, and am exited about the prospect of a new Mayor that rolls up her sleeves shows up year round, and not just before an election.
Congrats on a good showing, Amy!
Matt, your point is a good one, but I think you are spinning this in the most positive light for your candidate. Ruthanne has barely tapped her war chest. I’ve seen close to zero facebook ads, I’ve only gotten one mailing, and there have been zero television or radio spots. Last election I saw dozens of facebook ads and mailings.
I think Mayor Fuller hasn’t yet brought the weight of her political donation advantage to the election. That’s coming. Probably starting now, through the election.
I also seem to recall you stating we were in a new order when Bryan and Maddie were defeated by lessor margins.
My original point holds. This doesn’t mean much. But you should also stop spinning the results. Knock on more doors.
@fignewtonville – I agree that when it comes to preliminary elections that ‘your mileage may vary’ in the general election. That said, I think the wards that each candidate did well in this time around are indeed what the November election is all about.
They sort of define what Amy’s candidacy is about. If she can expand from there she has a shot in November. I also totally agree that nearly all of Cecchinelli’s vote will end up in Amy’s column in November.
Jerry:
In the last election with Scott Lennon running, a total of 24,910 voted. That’s a hefty increase from the 10,800 or so that voted today.
I do think that Amy’s core strength is north of the Pike except Newton Corner, and Ward 4. I was surprised she didn’t do better in Newtonville south of the Pike.
She is trying to win with the same coalition as Scott Lennon, and expand it south of the Pike. But Scott had Ward 3 and Ward 4, and got very close in Ward 2, and he was strong north of the Pike.
Doesn’t mean much either way. And of course she has a shot in November. I just think it is difficult to knock off an incumbent.
Fig,
If you’re saying that this year’s general election will have many more voters than this year’s prelim and, therefore, Amy’s got a lot of potential voters to put in her column, sorry, no. In 2017, Scott was a little less than 4% behind Ruthanne in the prelim and they had Amy’s slice of the electorate (24.5%) to divide. (There was a similar dynamic in 2009 when Setti Warren ran a few points behind Ruth Balser and then captured more of the Ken Parker slice and actually won.)
Amy was 15% behind tonight. And, Ruthanne was well over 50%.
As I argue here, Amy’s best shot was always going to be the prelim.
Amy has no shot in November. Zero.
I think some of Al’s votes will go to Amy because they don’t like Fuller, but some will go to Fuller because they enjoy her Republican history and her family’s donations, and some may simply sit out.
I think Amy’s campaign really needs to be vocal about Ruthanne’s inability to get NPS functioning in a timely fashion for 2020-2021 and the Development issue. Every citizen should know that while Ruthanne displays full day kindergarten under her watch, NPS did so much worse with her as mayor.
Turnout was so much higher (14,000+ vs 10,000+) that it’s hard to really draw conclusions about yesterday except for the thinning of the race to two candidates. As that was a foregone conclusion, and the Cecchinelli vote so low as to not be a huge factor in helping Sangiolo, it comes down not to what the votes were yesterday but to who didn’t show up that will in November. And that’s clearly going to be a much larger number and % than in 2017.
Fig,
Though I wouldn’t draw too much from 2013, it is a little instructive. I don’t recall Ted’s general election campaign as being particularly vigorous. But, it is interesting to note that, in an election that has many similarities to 2021, Setti got a virtually identical percentage of the preliminary and general election votes: 69.3% in the prelim and 69.9% in the general. I just don’t expect too much movement to Amy in this race. Certainly not 11 or 12 points.
Off-line, a friend asked me to provide some more detail on my assertion that Amy can’t win. Here’s what I shared:
Yesterday, there were about 11K votes cast for mayor. In November, based on the last three mayoral elections, there’ll be anywhere from 15K to 25K, with an outside possibility of 30K.
Yesterday, about 6K people voted for Ruthanne. Amy got about 4,250 votes.
Let’s imagine that there will be 25K votes in November. Amy would need 12,501 votes to be guaranteed the win. Assume all the preliminary voters vote in the general and both Amy and Ruthanne retain their prelim voters. Amy would need to win 8,251 of the 14K new votes (and the 661 Al Cecchinelli votes). For Amy to win, Ruthanne could win up to 12,449 votes … or no more than 6,449 new votes. Which would mean that Amy would have to win 58.9% of the new votes.
It’s just not realistic. It’s far, far, far likelier that both Ruthanne and Amy perform roughly at the same level as they did in the preliminary, with some change based on how the Cecchinelli vote split.