Saturday, April 17, 2021

 



VIEWS OF THE "VIEWS"




In political races, we are always inundated with tracking polls that follow every slight move in the candidates' relative popularity in the expectation that this will indicate which ones will win their contests. Of course, opinion polls are often unreliable, most famously in 2016 when almost all of them predicted Clinton would win.

There are no public opinion polls in the run-up to the May 1st bishop's election in the Diocese of South Carolina. However, there is a sort of poll one may track that does throw some light on the relative strength of the five nominees as we approach the election. Elsa McDowell conducted interviews with each of the five and posted them on Youtube on April 7. They run between 19 and 30 minutes each. In them, the nominees were asked the same questions in the hopes their answers would help the people of the diocese get better acquainted with the five. Three of the five had no background with the diocese. Of the two who had connections, one had lived outside of the diocese for many years and so was not well known. On each interview, the current number of "Views" is given on the Youtube page. A View is registered each time a person clicks onto the particular interview. These View numbers indicate the relative public interest in the candidates and show how this interest is changing as time goes by. This is the best metric we have to give some indication of the relative strength of the five nominees in the horse race heading toward the finish line on the First of May.

 

Numbers of "Views":

Walpole. Apr. 8-113; Apr. 12-301; Apr. 14-374; Apr. 17-413.

Woodliff-Stanley. Apr. 8-83; Apr. 12-256; Apr. 14-344; Apr. 17-378.

Lee. Apr. 8-76; Apr. 12-222; Apr. 14-303; Apr. 17-353.

Hoare. Apr. 8-61; Apr. 12-246; Apr. 14-311; Apr. 17-340.

Johnson. Apr. 8-61; Apr. 12-226; Apr. 14-276; Apr. 17-308.


The first point is that the relative positions of the five have remained nearly the same. On April 8, one day after the interviews aired, the ranking of the Views was:

1-Walpole (113)

2-Woodliff-Stanley (83)

3-Lee (76)

4-5-Hoare (61)

4-5-Johnson (61)

On the most recent check (noon Apr. 17), the ranking was:

1-Walpole (413)

2-Woodliff-Stanley (378)

3-Lee (353)

4-Hoare (340)

5-Johnson (308)

Conclusions for the numbers above:

---There has been the most interest in Walpole all along. She has remained consistently in first place in the "Views." From Apr. 8 to 17, she collected the most Views, 300.

---Woodliff-Stanley has remained in second place. From Apr. 8 to 17, W-S collected the second-most Views, 295.

---Behind the two women, there has been the most interest in Terrence Lee, an African American. He has consistently held third place, not far behind W-S. From Apr. 8 to 17, his interview had 277 views.

---Less interest has been seen in Hoare and the least in Johnson. However, Hoard saw a significant surge in interest overall. From Apr. 8 to 17, he climbed from 61 to 340 Views, but this still left him in fourth place. Johnson had the least interest, moving from 61 to 308 and leaving him in fifth place.


What effect might the Walkabouts/Conversations of April 12-14 have had on sparking interest in the various nominees?

We can trace the Views from the early morning of April 12, before the Walkabouts, to noon today, the 17th.

The biggest surge in Views from the start of the Walkabouts on the 12th to today is with Lee who went from 222 to 353, a rise of 131, or 59%. Since the 12th, there has been more interest in the interview of Lee than any other nominee. The second highest surge was with Woodliff-Stanley, who moved from 256 to 378 Views, a rise of 122, or 48%. The third was Walpole, at 112 new Views, followed by Hoare at 94 and Johnson at 82. This suggests that Terrence Lee may have been the biggest winner of the Walkabouts/Conversations marathon. At least he has won the race in the Views of McDowell's five interviews since then.


As interesting as these numbers are, we must emphasize a big word of caution here. These figures tell us only the number of people clicking on each of the interviews. All this shows indisputably is interest. This is not necessarily an indication of how the viewers will vote. What it does show is the relative interest the viewers have in the five nominees; and I think that is worthwhile to consider.


Here is my take-away from the data of the Views of the McDowell interviews first posted on Apr. 7:

---Callie Walpole is consistently the subject of most public interest. This is true even though she is by far the best-known nominee among the people of the diocese having been Archdeacon for years.

---The two women candidates, Walpole and Woodliff-Stanley, are consistently in first and second place in Views. This suggests significant public interest in electing a bishop who is a woman.

---Terrence Lee, the African American nominee among the five, has shown the biggest surge in interest since the start of the Walkabouts on the 12th. This suggests that Lee was the major beneficiary of the Walkabouts. We will have to keep track of this to see if this momentum can move him into competition with the women candidates. So far, Lee has remained consistently in third place.

---Hoare and Johnson have shown the least movement in interest since the start of the Walkabouts.


If you read my previous post, "Thoughts..." you know the recent bishop's election in Alabama had two nominees who were women, in a field of four. In that case, the First Ballot showed the two women ahead, and collectively with a majority. This showed that the will of the people was to have a bishop who was a female. With that, many voters moved from the bottom two candidates, seeing that their first choices had no real chance of winning, to the top two and most of those opted to go with the candidate leading in the votes. This gave Glenda Curry a majority victory in both Orders on the Second Ballot. It is possible the same sort of scenario could play out in South Carolina. If the two women come in first and second places on the First Ballot, but without a majority, there could very well be movement from the bottom two candidates to the top two. If the moving votes opt to go with the highest vote-getter, as they did in AL, this could mean the woman leading on the First Ballot would wind up the winner. As it looks now, no one is likely to win a majority on the First Ballot on 1 May. The question, then, will be where will the votes from the bottom candidates go?    


Make whatever you wish of these numbers. This is not a scientific study and may tell us nothing in the end; and I doubt we should make too much of the figures. On the other hand, these numbers do indicate the comparative interests of the people of the diocese of South Carolina in the nominees and may well give us a hint of how the horse race is progressing. After all, the bishop-designate will be chosen in an election. Quasi-democratic that it will be, it will still reflect the minds and hearts of the people of the Diocese of South Carolina, as it should. The Views of the five interviews may do the same.