And who said money can't buy an election? It must have been Knox's support of ending pay to play legislation that got him here... It must have been his drafting the smoking ordinance... It must have been his record of community service... It must have been his amazing track record as deputy mayor...

nope, none of that was him. It's just about the money.

To be honest, the only person on this site who really saw this coming was Councilman Kenney, and he was "jumped" when he suggested that Knox could actually buy this election based on the "loop-hole" for multi-millionairs who self fund a campaign.

your expert commentary that is in no way, shape, or form biased towards Bob Brady or against the two candidates who threaten his campaign according inconclusive polling data is deeply appreciated.

One of the most troubling conclusions that can be drawn from this poll is that the role of television advertising in local elections is far more important than ever before.

My prediction is that, as a result of this poll, the campaigns are going to start making more oppositional commercials (and going on the air even MORE if they can afford it). Brady jumped a lot in this last poll. That's going to make Knox a bit nervous and he will start making negative ads about Brady. Brady will counteract and try to chip away from Knox's lead. This will then lead to a mass audience perception that the real race is between those two candidates. This could lead to an open door for one of the other 3 candidates, but I don't think anybody is going to win this television war without throwing some mud.

On a side note, there is one HUGE flaw in this poll - they only polled registered democrats (not likely voters). Statistically speaking, less than half of these people polled are likely to even turn out to vote on Election Day.

Tom Knox's lead is NOT outside of the margin of error, as you conclude in point #1 of your original post. As I teach my statistics students, you add and subtract the margin of error from the sample proportion to get the range of values where the true proportion of the population is likely to fall (most polls use a 95% confidence level when calculating the margin of error).

So to calculate the ranges for the candidates:

Knox: 24% +/- 5% = 19% - 29%
Fattah: 17% +/- 5% = 12% - 22%
Brady: 16% +/- 5% = 11% - 21%

Because these ranges overlap, you CANNOT conclude that in the population (all registered Democrats in Philadelphia) there is actually a difference between these three candidates.

I am new to posting to the website, and have to say that I am generally impressed with the conversation that occurs. For a long time -- too long perhaps -- serious political dialogue in Philly has been left to insiders while the rest of the populace exists in "The Matrix" of not being in on how political decisions are made. But the larger point that I want to make, which I probably take too long to do, is that those interested in the "reform" agenda, have to sell that agenda to voters. IMO, most reform candidates do not have the history, credibility or "connectiveness" to voters to beat out candidates who do not have that agenda.

This conversation often takes place in Center City/University City apartments/homes of young professionals lamenting the leadership of the City, without realizing that it is voters in rowhomes in the Northeast, Germantown and Mt. Airy, West Philly, Roxborough, South Philly, North Philly, Olney, the OakLanes, Southwest Philly that elect candidates. Those voters have a different set of concerns. Corruption is not at the top of the list. Crime always is. And that disconnect is what leaves folks surprised that Happy Fernandez could not win, Angel Ortiz lost, Donna Miller continues to represent Chestnut Hill, Rick Mariano was elected election after election, and that Michael Nutter is doing so poorly in every poll.

Philadelphia is notoriously parochial, and if you do not have the right kind of neighborhood credentials, your neighbors will not vote for you. Philly is not the kind of place that voters can be won over solely on ideals without answering the questions "Who are you, Where are you from, and Why do I care?"

That said, it is refreshing to see some folks with a reform agenda think about the inside of the Machine that runs Philly. (Think Judicial Elections. There are very few people who have any clue as to who runs or why they win. The Bar Association regularly posts lists of recommended candidates and non-recommended candidates and ward leaders in "smoke filled" rooms would routinely cut deals to help lawyers who have worked for the Party, lawyers who have volunteered for Wards, lawyers who have worked for unions, lawyers who are friends of those who control votes, win. The public thinks its a fair process. In fact, qualifications are secondary to connections.)

Front runners begin to run away with the race, b/c people don't want to waste their votes. People who are undecided in a race with a lot of attention usually do not end up voting. Mayoral race voters largely vote race and then region. Most white voters will vote for white candidates and most African American voters for African American candidates.

I am going to apply these principles, and some of my own experience to some of the major races, for the point of concluding that those who truly want reform in the City, have to convince a populace focused on other issues to get elected. And against candidates who do remind voters of someone in their community.

Those principles mean that Michael Nutter and Dwight Evans cannot win. Both lack the money, which creates the momentum to break through. Nutter can't win, b/c his base of largely highly educated white voters who live in Center City, Roxborough and Chestnut Hill (broad strokes) are not enough to win. There are simply not enough voters for him to win. Knox and Brady will win a great number of white voters not leaving enough for Nutter. Fattah, Evans, Brady and Knox will each get more black voters. (Nutter may not win the 52nd ward.)

Evans has strong support in West Oak Lane (but cannot get more black votes with Fattah and Brady). He has very little white support.

As the race goes on, financial support will wane and even voters who supported them in early polls will either not vote or support other candidates. (This is at the margins, so it will not mean that they will get no votes, but will lose the momentum you need to win.) Leaving the race b/w Brady, Knox and Fattah.

(It is too early too see if Brady's strong machine support and row-house cred in white and black communities will win, or Knox's money and message will carry the day, or if African American voters will solidify around Fattah to prevent a Knox/Brady win.)

The at-large candidates for Council have similar dynamics. Without the large scale television barrage, they will rely on name recognition and volunteers (read: Democratic Party committeemen and unions). Incumbents have name recognition (Wilson Goode is a great example. He doesn't need to raise a lot of money, will not have large scale union support and will win.) Kenney has money and union support. Blondell is a black candidate with credibility with reform voters and Center City residents. Both will win.

Ramos and Greenlee will have a great struggle. (Juan) Ramos has very strong union support, but with Ben Ramos running as well, even well intended voters could mess that one up. He does not have a strong name like Angel Ortiz and is still known primarily at the Latino candidate on council. Bill Greenlee has no name recognition at all and cannot get David Cohen's base. David Cohen had strong support in many African American neighborhoods among older voters who remember his works over many years. Few voters will know to connect the two.

That leaves 2 seats open potentially. However, very few of the "reform" candidates have any chance of winning any of those seats. They have no name recognition as a huge problem. Most first time candidates at large lose (Blondell, Wilson Goode as examples.)

But there is a larger issue that I want to highlight that is a problem that I see in commentary on this blog by some posters. Most Philadelphians live in row homes and are working class union card carrying folks. Reformers highlight issues important to them, but not as relevant to most voters. Crime, Crime, Crime is the big issue. Education, second.

As a result, most reform (at large) candidates come across as completely disconnected from most voters. There is a reason that Carol Campbell, Donna Miller and Rick Mariano are/were council people. Aside from strong support of the party, they were almost stereotypical of some of the strongest voting areas of their districts. (Carol, West Philly, Donna Miller, Germantown, and Rick Mariano, the lower Northeast.) That combined with a lot of challengers running against them meant that (for Rick and Donna and other similar candidates) they were guaranteed elections. (Similar priniciples apply at large.)

In district races, Verna will trounce Damon Roberts. While the district has a strong African American minority -- could be weak majority -- Verna is perceived as a nice lady, who has lived in South Philly forever, long roots, and has helped many individual voters. In short, people do not dislike her. Philadelphians are notoriously parochial and Damon's short roots in Philly and even shorter roots in the district will be huge hurdles. There will not be enough votes cast for Damon to show any protest vote. But its the same issue, connecting to the voters -- a very different subset than bloggers or residents.

Donna Miller will likely beat Irv (no offense to the blog) and Cindy Bass. Donna will win Germantown and North Philly and Irv Chestnut Hill and Cindy East Mount Airy. None of them will have enough votes to overcome the fact that Donna will crush in Germantown and North Philly and will still get enough votes in Mount Airy to eek out a win. That formula has worked for several elections, and underscores an important fact, that voters that support Donna Miller are generally opposed to Chestnut Hill (read: middle class or wealthy white voters) or Mount Airy (read: middle class or wealthy black voters) controlling the district.

Savage/Quinones race will probably elect Savage, b/c very few white voters will vote for Maria, and it is still a strongly lower Northeast-oriented (although splintered district). But Savage is not the greatest candidate so that's a close one.

I have given a run down on all of the races to make the larger point that is to affect/effect policy, you need to get elected. Ending pay to play and corruption are important issues, but not for most of the City living in the specter of extreme violence and crappy schools. So voters will relate to people who are at least relating to Philly in the way that they relate to Philly. Which will probably mean electing a slate of candidates who talk about those issues or share a common sensibility. Which in turn means that few reform candidates will win.

Just my thoughts, but I thought I would inject some of what I think many insiders/political professionals/community activists may have as a set of beliefs.

I should add -- not that it should matter -- that I do not work for any candidate for any office but have in the past. So these are my thoughts and not an attempt to "spin" the blog as other folks have been accused of. (No candidate would suggest anyone write anything this long.)

A couple of broad points.

1. Bill Green -- the son/grandson not Bill Greenlee -- doesn't have super name recoginition among current voters. But his candidacy is interesting to see, not b/c he will win, but as a test to see how much name recoginition by itself will get votes.

2. The Democratic Party registration is now majority African American. If you add Latinos, it's pretty clear that turnout is the same. That means that for white candidates to win they will have to get African American/Latino votes. The difficulty for most candidates is that would require getting African American voters to pick them over African American candidates. That's the tough task. Which means that even if you are carried by the Ward Leader, it will be a near impossible sell to say don't vote for Sharif Street, Derek Green, Blondell, Wilson Goode, etc., for whoever the Party caries. It puts ward leaders in the position of telling their committeepeople that they are "cutting" a candidate of color. Many committeepeople of color -- Latinos and African Americans -- are older and remember when the Party was not supportive of their candidacy. Many of the Ward Leaders and elected officials were the first African American to hold the seat -- Nutter from Land, Chaka in both seats, Dwight in his house seat. So they remember the 60s/70s (yes many are that old) when the Party openly opposed committeepeople of color. (Research Hardy Williams for more info.)

3. People are really angry about the direction of the City. But its hard to blame that on Council At Large incumbents. Still, there is a strong anti-incumbent anger that is really all across the City. Unfortunately, its not like City Government once was a well oiled machine that stopped working last year b/c of pay to play and corruption. So Philadelphians have a much higher tolerance for "broken windows".

4. If you are running for judge -- these are just my thoughts -- here's one roadmap for success. 1. Run to lose the first time to get your name out there. 2. Run to win the second.

First time candidate. I would meet your ward leader. Get his support. (It's the question everyone will ask when you try to get other ward leaders support.) You will probably find that a lot easier than you suspect, b/c most ward leaders have never had a judge elected and the other wards already know the drill. Do some volunteer work in the community. Help committeepeople w/ their constituent needs -- wills, minor criminal problems for constituents, etc. Help the party or your ward during election time. (Making sure petitions are filed correctly, i.e., circulated by a registered voter in the district, fully filled out, notarized.) You will build up that goodwill you will need to cash in on when you run.

Attend as many ward meetings as you can the year that you run. Have your ward leader introduce you to other ward leaders and committeepeople. (You can meet most everyone you need in City Hall.) Ask them for your support.

This is the tricky part. Most people do not vote for Judge. So you need to get votes where people actually vote for judge. The problem is many ward leaders and other folks collect money for ballots -- that you may or may not end up on -- fully realizing that it is very difficult to convince people to vote for judicial candidates in many areas.

That means it is important to get voters who actually vote for those candidates. So, win your neighborhood and ward. Convince your neighbors to vote for you. Then convince them to vote only for you. (That's the important part, remember its a race, you need get build up a lead somewhere.) Then focus your resources on areas that have high turnout for judicial races.

South Philly is a great example of such an area -- particularly if you have an Italian American surname. There are a host of judges on the bench from S. Philly and w/ Italian American surnames. That's an oversimplication, but it bears a lot of truth.

5. This is the part I can't understand yet. Fattah seems to have convinced a lot of African Americans that he does not connect with their issues. I hear that all the time. That doesn't make sense to me, but the polls reflect its truth. He will also need a lot more money. Election Day costs $1MM in this city. ($100-$150 per precinct, just for workers.) TV time, will run millions more.

Knox has established himself as a credible candidate. The question is can he reduce Brady's surge in numbers to hold on to his lead.

If Brady can knock Knox off his pedestal and creep into Chaka's African American support -- b/c folks will start to flee Nutter and Evans in marginal numbers, he could win.

6. It's not that it is just Center City that's pissed off -- and they are pissed off -- it's that its important to connect to people where they are at. That is what is so hard about running at large. If you live in the progressive Northwest you still have to convince folks in Rhawnhurst to vote for you. Same is true if you live in E. Mount Airy, you still have to go to 2nd and Snyder or Mayfair for votes. The folks who are best able to do that tend to be incumbents. That's why its so hard to win Citywide and why a lot of folks lose the first time, hence, my pessism.

7. If Knox wins, Democractic City Committee will officially not matter in Citywide races for Mayor. That's a huge change.

That's it.

I am Bill Green. I am running because the next four years will define the next generation in our City. The only thing that grows this City, long term, is jobs--good paying jobs with benefits. There is not a successful City in this country that does not have a growing and thriving middle class. Philadelphia loses its middle class because it fails to provide basic city services well. A City that does not educate the majority of our children, that can't keep its streets safe, that can't keep its streets clean or plowed, can not grow its middle class or attract good paying jobs with benefits. We must get back to basics and do the things we first formed governments to do--and we must do them well. People will not live in the high tax City and suffer poor services--that is why we are now the sixth largest City. I am the only person running for City Council that has risked personal resources to create jobs, that has had to put payroll on his personal credit card to make sure employees got paid on Friday. I know first hand the struggles of a new business and know how to change our City processes, system and tax structure to create jobs. I am a business lawyer working with companies looking for capital to create jobs every day. My focus will be creating jobs--not eliminating trans fats.

I do not feel entitled to the office of City Council, I feel I am among the most qualified. I have been an options and futures trader, entrepreneur and business lawyer. We need a fresh start, a new energy and a new momentum in this City. I want nothing more than to work hard and to do the right thing every day. That is why Governor Rendell endorsed one candidate for City Council out of the 40 candidates (including five incumbents) running. According to the Daily News, the Governor is endorsing only two candidates in the entire state for the May 15th primary--Darnell Jones and me. He is behind me because he believes I am among the most qualified to restore fiscal stability to this City.

How I will win:

1. I agree with Lou Agre that Greenlee is a shoe in if he can get on all of the ward ballots Lou mentioned.

2. I am the only non-incumbent that has significant labor support, The Building Trades Council (inlcuding Local 98, the Sprinkler Fitters), UFCW, Gas Workers, Teamster Locals (stay tuned for more next week). They are supporting me because they want to expand the pie and create jobs--they believe I am qualified. No other progressive candidate has union support. This is 2000 to 3000 bodies on the street on election day.

3. I will be on ward ballots.

4. I will have my own field where needed.

5. Targeted marketing via email, radio and TV. Our email database larger than others described above.

6. My family's history of inclusiveness is not forgotten and I am proud of it. My office will reflect the diversity of this City.

Sharif also has labor support. Labor does not get behind someone because their father was Mayor 25 years ago. You have to earn it.

7. Ballot position. It is a shame chance plays a role but there you have it.

Lou:

The first two races that I referred to where Chaka was elected as the first African American were his state house and senate seat. Of course, Nix was the first. Chaka's congressional seat is his third elected office. (I can't remember if he ever held a committeeperson's seat in his race to become Ward leader years ago.)

The issue that is interesting is whether in the twilight of the Democratic Machine the party can elect candidates. The party is anti status quo. Many committee people have City jobs and are paid to make sure that their sponsors or the Democratic Party generally gets elected.

As African Americans and other previously disenfranchised folks enter the Party mainstream -- a lot of that happened in the 70s/80s, not much since -- the question is in an electorate that is now majority folks of color, with a Democratic City Party with a long -- not necessarily recent -- history of not reaching out to all communities, how will the process of getting people elected change.

Wilson Goode Jr. did not need any party support to win. Carol Campbell and Steve Brookens were nominated by the party and lost badly -- at large. (This not quite comparing apples to apples obviously, but they did very poorly at large and Wilson Goode had no official party support that I can remember.)

Tom Knox's media blitz has shown that the Party is now irrelevant in electing Mayor's candidates. (Rendell may have done it in before.)

The reason why the Party's influence is an important question is b/c if there is to be change of the status quo, the Democratic Party cannot have control over elections, b/c it is committed to the status quo. However, many who seek to completely change the system and come from outside of the system, don't have the broad based constituency that legitimizes their running for office.

Short answer, in order to win office as a "reformer" (read: non-ward leaders) you are going to have to be (i) wealthy, (ii) folks of color running against the Party (read: success of Wilson Goode, Chaka Fattah, etc.) b/c they'll have the constituency, or folks that have great name recognition and connections (read, Franny Rizzo, Sharif Street, Bill Green, etc. (iii) or existing elected officials (Bob Brady).

The problem with that is that it sets the bar to high for reformers to win (i.e., Dilworth and Clark would have a hard time today.)