skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

The Story Behind Nathan Fletcher’s Loss

While the vote for second place in San Diego’s special mayoral election appeared to be a tight race last night, an inewsource analysis shows former assemblyman Nathan Fletcher lost in almost every precinct.

With 581 precincts counted, Fletcher won in just 14. He even lost his own University City neighborhood precinct.

See How The 581 Precincts Voted

Photo by Joe Yerardi

A map showing San Diego Mayoral election results by precinct.

“To me that was his ideal supporter: Caucasian, Democratic household, probably north of (Interstate) 8, higher median income. People like him,” said policy analyst Vince Vasquez

While Fletcher had broad support with 24 percent of the vote, it wasn’t deep enough to win over entire neighborhoods, said Vasquez, a senior policy analyst at National University System Institute for Policy Research.

Republican city councilman Kevin Faulconer won the greatest number of precincts, 387, almost all of them north of Interstate 8. Democratic city councilman David Alvarez won 180, almost all of them south of the 8.

The interstate has long been perceived as a political and socio-economic dividing line between Republicans and Democrats, the rich and the poor.

“You see that deep geographic divide among voters. It’s something not going away. If anything its more pronounced,” Vasquez said.

That polarization posed a problem for Fletcher, a Republican, turned Independent, turned Democrat. He did not get the Democratic Party endorsement nor the San Diego and Imperial Valley Labor Council Endorsement.

Voters often take their cues from political parties and other lobby groups, Vasquez said.

Fletcher was hit by attack ads from both Republicans and Democrats throughout the campaign for switching parties and missing votes while serving in the California Assembly. Even his college transcript, which he refused to release, became a Republican talking point throughout the campaign.

Fletcher conceded the race Wednesday and threw his support behind fellow Democrat Alvarez.

“We worked tremendously hard and we came really close. And I 100 percent respect the decision voters made,” Fletcher said.

“Today I leave public life. I leave the pursuit of elected office,” he said.

Just over 200,000 San Diegans voted in Tuesday’s special election, called after former mayor Bob Filner resigned over a sexual harassment scandal. Registrar of Voters Michael Vu said the turnout was about 32 percent. Although 100 percent of the precincts have been reported, there are still about 34,500 provisional and mail ballots left to count.

An inewsource analysis also shows Fletcher’s victories in precincts were narrow compared to the other candidates. In precincts he lost, he lost by less than the other candidates.

Fletcher’s average share of the vote in precincts he lost was nearly 24 percent, compared with Faulconer about 22 percent and Alvarez 20 percent

In precincts he won, he won by a less than the other candidates did. Faulconer’s average vote share in precincts he won: 49 percent, Alvarez’ share was 48 percent and Fletcher’s average vote share in precincts he won was 40 percent.

The trend demonstrates Fletcher’s broad but shallow support, but in this election being in the middle meant losing the race.

To view PDF documents, Download Acrobat Reader.


Avatar for user 'CaliforniaDefender'

CaliforniaDefender | November 21, 2013 at 12:57 p.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

Fletcher would have easily defeated Alvarez and moved to the run-off if:

1. He turned independent BEFORE losing the Republican nomination for mayor in 2012.

2. He STAYED independent and didn't turn Democrat to get union money.

San Diegans have had enough of Democrats and Republicans who like to foment the north-south, left-right, rich-poor divide. We need an independent mayor.

Fletcher was definitely not it and I'm glad he's now gone from politics forever.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Chip'

Chip | November 25, 2013 at 10:56 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

I was very disappointed when I saw this map--it is misleading!
The election was really 2 races:
1. A Democratic runoff with votes split between 3 candidates.
2. A count of Faulconer supporters.

Your map gives the impression that Faulconer was a big winner.
If you wanted the map colors to really mean something, you should have added the votes for Alvarez, Fletcher, and Aguirre (total = 55.2%). Clearly, there would be fewer "red" areas for Faulconer (42.7%).

The runoff will probably be closer if more "Decline to State" voters turn out (they are 2nd largest group), and I suspect only a small portion of those are Fletcher voters who will switch to Faulconer.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Chip'

Chip | November 25, 2013 at 11:47 a.m. ― 3 years, 4 months ago

The "great I-8 divide" is exaggerated in this map, because of the split in Democratic votes. For a more accurate view of such a divide, if it still exists, examine this map from the 2012 Presidential election results:

It's well done--you can zoom in and see the totals, etc.

If Romney vs. Obama is a typical 2 party race, you can see a lot of blue-ish precincts north of I-8.

( | suggest removal )