For Women, A Long-Awaited Primary Day
By Kimberly Anglin

The weather may have been overcast, but on Super Tuesday New York City’s women voters didn’t seem to mind. They found their way to polling centers to cast their ballots and let their voices be heard, even if they were only able to give a quick shout.

The earliest of the day’s women voters could stop only briefly to cast their ballots before running off to their jobs. “I’m already late for work,” said one woman expertly juggling two handbags while frantically checking her watch and hurrying down the street.

Women voters seemed well aware of the historic nature of this year’s primary: for the first time, two minorities, a woman and an African-American, had an equally strong chance of becoming the Democratic presidential candidate in the November -- and possibly the country’s next president.

For this reason, some women cited to a stronger bond with the candidates than in years past. Jennifer B., 48, who declined giving her full name, said she felt a “strong connection” to Democratic primary hopeful Sen. Barack Obama.

“I just feel that if he were my president and asked me to do something, I would do it,” she said.

Other female voters latched onto Sen. Hillary Clinton, expressing the belief it was time for another kind of minority, a woman, to hold office. Jean B., a 70-year-old music executive, who declined to give her full name, voted for Clinton because she felt was Clinton was “strong enough to fight the dirty tricks that Republicans use.”

In short, the 2008 primary allowed female voters to experience a palpably strong connection to the candidates, one that has been arguably missing in years past.

Close Democratic Race Spurs Many To Vote in their First Primary
By Alexandra Beggs


Super Tuesday began early this morning in New York City as voters trickled into polling sites. Fueled with espresso, this reporter stood 100 feet away from the door of a New York University dorm polling site to capture the excitement of the voters, and to figure out if the 2008 primaries were more “super” than past ones.

Many voters certainly thought so.

Terri Dieli, 55, who has been voting in the general elections in New York for 30 years, strongly supports Clinton, but this morning was her first primary vote. Dieli said that she voted for Clinton “not just because of what’s happening with the war, but because I’ve been following her throughout her career.”

Aidan Byrne, 27, has been voting for eight years, but this was also his first primary. He chose the candidate he did because, he said, he wanted “to see a different family in the White House.”

The close race between Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama was cited as the reason many voters felt this primary was more important than in 2004 – and that many turned out.

Voters have until 9 p.m. in New York to cast their ballots, which will bring to a close what The New York Times considers “what could be the most significant night of the 2008 campaign to date.” Increased voter turnout in New York and in the 23 other participating states may change the way the public regards primary elections in the future.

Iraq War and Candidates’ Personalities Key Factors for Voters
By Jessica Kramer

Seventy five percent of those questioned at a New York City polling station named the war in Iraq as a primary concern that factored into their vote on Super Tuesday.

The same percentage of voters ranked the candidates’ personalities as equally important factors as well.

Voter Laurence O’Keefe said his concerns were three-fold: the war in Iraq, the “stretching of our military resources around the world,” and the environment. He said he believes Clinton, Obama and McCain have a “fairly equal chance of doing a good job on the economy."

Leonie Haimson said the war along with global warming were the most important national issues for her. She said she voted for her candidate because “he’s a stronger leader” than the other choices.

“It’s hard for me to separate confidence in a person’s leadership [from their] judgment,” she said.

For voter Linda Bennett the most important issues were the war in Iraq, the economy and healthcare. She believes her candidate has a “good stance” on these topics and she’s said she's done a good deal of research to support her convictions. The candidate’s personality did not factor into her voting.

Healthcare, however, was the primary concern for voter Martha Ackerman, who cast her ballot for Obama. She said she believed the candidates “have really different attitudes [on healthcare]. One really believes people can help themselves, and the other is paternalistic.” Ackerman quoted a Chinese proverb to illustrate her point: “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”

While it is uncertain whether these responses reflect the nation’s views, it appears traditional patterns of thinking about war and personality have prevailed once again in the voting booth.

Few College Students Vote Early
By Damon Beres

The voter turnout at New York University’s Hayden Hall dormitory, a polling location for Tuesday’s primary, was something of an irony. At 8:30 a.m., the small, dimly lit room was full of people eager to cast their votes. The catch? Very few, if any of them, were students.

Instead, the voters were mostly business people voting on their way to work or older residents of the neighborhood. The majority of students who passed through shuttled off to class, headphones locked on tightly, ignoring the polling station altogether.

One exception was NYU freshman Brianna Sahagian, who stood across the street, holding a large blue Obama sign and stopping pedestrians for last-minute campaigning. She had already cast her vote.

“I was here at 7 a.m. in the cold,” Sahagian said. Though she voted before class, she noted that she would have missed class if absolutely necessary.

“[Skipping] one day of class could be worth it for four to eight years [of an Obama presidency],” she said, looking around for potential Obama followers.

But Sahagian found few her age. More typical were voters like Richard Morgan, a middle-age man who cast his ballot before going to work. He said he was eager to take part in what he described as an “important process” and declared his “desire for change.”

“I won’t be sad to see Bush go,” said Morgan.

Another voter, Hope Sloane, a local resident, was also in high spirits about the election.

“There’s only one day,” Sloane said. “You have the opportunity to vote.” She also added that even if faced with a line around the block or the possibility of missing work, it would be worth it to do her duty as a registered voter.

Yet, there was no line around the block, only a cluster of voters in the dorm commons room. As time passed, there was still a noticeable lack of students. Perhaps they had voted in their home states or were unable to muster Sloane’s energy; she’d been in the neighborhood since 5:30 a.m.

Standing outside Hayden Hall, cigarette in hand, Sloane expressed her opinion. “People complain, but you have this one day to make a difference.”

But no college students were nearby to hear.

Take That, Madison Avenue
By MaryJane Weedman

Despite Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s large surge in advertising spending before today’s primaries and caucuses, many New York City voters said their decisions on Super Tuesday were unaffected by such ads.

Clinton and Obama reportedly spent a combined $19 million on advertising in the days before Feb. 5. But most New Yorkers voting at the 110 E. 14th St. polling place near Union Square said such publicity had little to no impact.

Isabel, 54, said she was “not at all” affected by candidates’ advertisements. Instead, the debates played a central role in her decision to vote for Obama.

“You’ve been voting for so many years…and you hear the same story over and over again. You look at the old school, and you go, ‘Yeah, yeah, yeah.’ And then you hear somebody like Obama, who’s so smart, and so eloquent, and so calm about his message,” said Isabel.

Jim Venturi was also unaffected by the candidates’ advertising. Instead, he said, what most influenced his choice to vote for Obama was the candidate’s “personal qualities.” Venturi said he thought Obama was more electable, more genuine and had better judgment than the other candidates.

“And probably most importantly, I like him better,” said Venturi.
For some voters, the advertising was both ineffective and overwhelming. As one Manhattan office manager said, “I think it’s been too much, too early. It might have affected some people, but not me.”

Manhattan resident Kate Taylor said she did not even see any candidates’ advertisements. Her decision, she said, was influenced by reading newspapers and speaking with friends.

Reports have indicated that Romney and McCain had a “far more restrained advertising effort” than Clinton and Obama.

If the voters in Union Square are representative of the greater population, perhaps Republican candidates Mitt Romney and John McCain were right to not spend heavily on advertisements after all.

Voters Reveal Their Reasoning
By Lisa Bonarrigo


On Tuesday, Feb. 5, polls for the 2008 presidential primary elections opened in more than 20 states across the nation. In New York City, early morning voters at the Carlyle Court polling station, inside an NYU dorm, said they felt torn between the Democratic candidates but revealed clear reasons behind their choices.

Some voted strategically, thinking ahead to November. “It was a tough decision between Hillary and Barack,” said Deevana Kumar, 33. “I think Barack has the cross-over characteristics that the Democrats need to beat the Republicans. I like Hillary, but she’s too polarizing.”

Barry Karpel, 45, had his eye on the national election, as well. “I made my decision based on who could beat the Republicans,” he said.

Others, however, chose based on the candidates’ voting records. Craig Warnky, 36, made the decision to vote in his first primary this year. He chose his candidate by reading the newspaper and researching online. His reasoning was clear. “This election is critical. It’s absolutely critical to our generation,” Warnky said.

Debbie Gilbert, 50, made her decision based on the candidates’ records but noted the historic nature of the choice: “I was excited this morning. I’ve been waiting my whole life to vote for a woman,” she said. “I’ve also been waiting my whole life to vote for an African American. So it was ironic that I had to choose between the two.”

Students Celebrate Their New-Found Right to Vote
By Jamie Letica

One of the most important and thrilling aspects of turning 18 is being allowed to vote in a national election. The young voters stumbling out of one Union Square polling station early Super Tuesday morning were clearly a dedicated and jubilant group eager to make their opinions count before class.

The 14th St. area of Union Square had two voting sites inside NYU dorms. This “definitely encourages more people to vote and get involved because it is so easy for NYU students to vote. We just have to walk downstairs,” said Jessica Ulgenalp. She left the polls this morning feeling excited, she said, but still a little nervous because today is the first time she has been eligible to vote.

“It’s really important that young people vote,” said Ulgenalp.

Julia Fishman, 19, went to the polling station early this morning before her long day of college classes. She left feeling as if she had “fulfilled her role as an American citizen.”

“College students used to be one of the largest demographics at the polls,” said Fishman. “This is not the case today even though many of the issues directly affect us. … Only those who actually showed up to vote on Election Day deserve the right to complain about the government.”

Fishman said she voted for Sen. Hillary Clinton because she believes Clinton deals with the social issues that concern her everyday life better than Sen. Barack Obama does, especially a woman’s right to choose.

Another student, Alexandra Bear, 19, said she believes it is her “civic duty to vote.” She lives in one of the NYU dorms where voting will take place all day, but elected to vote early this morning. Although she said she was “very tired,” Bear said that “when responsible parties know enough they should be voting.” She feels as if she is educated enough to vote and “had a say in today’s outcome, no matter how small it was.” Bear, unlike Ulgenalp and Fishman, has voted before - in a senatorial election in her home state of California. She believes voting in her new residence, New York City, is important because “New York is more of a swing state, and is more easily swayed than California.” Bear voted for Obama this morning because she denounces the idea of “two of the same families holding the United States presidency for 30 straight years,” which she considers an “oligarchy” or an “aristocracy.”

It is evident, even very early in the morning, how passionate many young people are about exercising the opportunity they have long awaited: voting in the presidential primaries and their first presidential election.

Seeking Change in a Transforming Neighborhood
By Cory Carroll


Avenue C in New York’s East Village has changed significantly in the past few years. On any morning one can see both prim professionals catching cabs and shopkeepers washing late-night revelers’ debris from sidewalks. On Super Tuesday, both the gentrifiers and the gentrified went to the polls to vote for even more change.

Among them was East Village resident Cecilia Traini, eager to vote for the first time in a primary. She said she chose the candidate she thought would best address both national concerns and those prevalent in her neighborhood. “Things are so screw[ed] up,” Traini said. “The issues are war, reproductive rights and housing.”

Most voters interviewed at one polling station, the Barrier Free Living Center on 270 E. Second St., voiced similar concerns. Lizzie Seeman said her priority was health care.

What is needed is a better “universal, quality healthcare program,” she said, “instead of the clinics around here.”

Others voted for candidates who reflected their interest in a subject of particular importance to the East Village: development. “Building and economic development in the Lower East Side bring more professionals, like myself, into the neighborhood,” said Meredith Genova. While she also said her concerns that the development changes, such as a spate of new luxury hotels, were threatening “working class” people, she added that “with development comes opportunity.”

Avenue C is clearly part of a neighborhood both overwhelmed with change and begging for more.

Change Appeals to the Middle-Aged and Elderly, Too
By Michael Ronan

On a dreary Tuesday morning, in the early hours of Super Tuesday, voters rushed to the polls, aiming for change. Change had been a major talking point for several candidates, including Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Both used the word to inspire a surge in youth votes.

But at East 10th St. and Broadway, in Lower Manhattan, it was clear that the middle-aged and the elderly were equally eager to effect change.

Renee Feinberg, 67, said she voted because she wanted to “to be a part of it,” referring not just to the election process, but to what she sees as an overwhelming shift of voters to the left. “The country has shifted against core conservative values.”

Middle-aged voters agreed.

“I hope [the Bush presidency] is viewed as the total disaster that it is,” said Eric Myers, a 53-year-old writer. Adam Nash, 44, said that President Bush would be remembered as “the President who alienated a country.”

While many older voters arrived early at the polls, only a lackluster number of young voters appeared, even though some polling stations were held inside NYU dorms. “We need the young person votes,” said Myers. “That’s the only way it can work.”

New York's Little-Known Voting Leave Statute
By Nicholas Luckenbaugh


It was early in the morning and the streets were still damp from the night’s rain. Even so, masses of New Yorkers could not be deterred. Some plodded to work. Some rushed to beat the line at Whole Foods. Others voted.

“I’m an early roller. I like to get my vote in early,” said one retired woman.

“I seriously hate getting up this early,” said David Thompson, 25, a sales associate in Chelsea. “I almost didn’t vote; I was so tired this morning.”

But Thompson, like many voters interviewed, didn't know he could have slept in and, instead, left work to cast his ballot.

According to the New York State Board of Elections, an employee may receive up to two paid hours during a workday to vote. Eligible employees must have less than four consecutive non-working hours between their work shifts and the opening or closing of the polls.

“I’m not sure if I would have left work or not, but it would have been good to have known,” said Kiran Dinsa, 32.

Dinsa, a receptionist, works from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m., making her eligible for voting leave.

“I think it’s an excellent law, but I’ve just never felt the need to use it personally,” said jury analyst Samantha Cochran, 22. Cochran was informed of the voting leave law by her former employer.

The voting leave statute states that New York employers must post a notice regarding voting leave eligibility at least 10 working days before every election.

“That’s definitely not posted anywhere. I’d have seen it,” said Thompson.

Susan Cho, 40, works in the Theatre District. She had seen a sign about voting leave posted in her office.

“I’ve taken advantage of [the statute] in the past, just not this year,” she said. Cho said she used her vote as an excuse, convincing herself to get up early for a brisk morning stroll despite the gloomy weather.

Although the statute existed for many years, many people are not aware of it. Some people feel that their jobs receive first priority.

“I can’t [vote]. I have to work,” said one man in a maroon hat, hurrying past the polling station.

“I wish I had known before I got up this morning,” said Thompson.

“The opportunity definitely needs to be advertised more,” said Cochran. “I think it would convince more people to get out and vote.”