There are several interesting aspects of that election which suggest that identity politics based on ideological claims and promises (race, religion, pie-in-the-sky) lost while hard-nosed political-economic realism (promise of economic development, quality of life, pro-active government) especially among the black voters.
1. Race. O'Malley, who's white, won a 53% majority in the predominantly black (about 70%) working class city, running against two black candidates (Carl Stokes and Lawrence Bell) endorsed by the local politcal machine and black churches. Stokes received endorsement of all major black churches in the city, city bureaucrats, Baltimore Sun and Afro-American (two major local newspapers), while Lawrence Bell was endorsed by the police and firefighthers unions. OTOH, O'Malley received endorsement of key black political leaders, including Kweisi Mfume.
O'Malley run the most "rainbow" campaign stressing inter-racial unity over divisiveness. Stokes voiced the same theme, but stronger appeals to the black voters to "vote alomg race lines." Bell repeatedly tried to race-bait his opponent, and mobilize his support by frequently voicing accusations of racism. Moreover, the BUILD coalition - primarily composed of black churches, flooded the city with posters "Do not waste your power, vote BUILD" which was a thinly veiled appeal to vote black, since both Bell and Stokes claimed affiliation with the coalition.
Stokes received 26% of the votes, while Bell - 17%. O'Malley victory hinged on a substantial chunk of the black voters (about 30%) "crossing the race line" and endorsing his candidacy over that of his two black opponents. For a fuller coverage of that aspect of yesterday's election see
http://www.sunspot.net/cgi-bin/editorial/story.cgi?section=cover&storyid=115 0140225047
Clearly, racial politics played by politicians and pundits were rejected by a significant part of black voters. Whites voted predominantly for O'Malley, although a sizeable white minority endorsed Stokes.
2. The most often cited by the media commentators reason behind the surprisingly strong O'Malley's victory was his strong crime prevention/quality of life message. While these are undoubtedly important concerns, especially in black neighborhoods, the fact of the matter is that all three candidates focused primarily on these issues. What distnguished O'Malley from his opponents, however, was his concrete proposals to address these issues on the governmental level. Stokes advocated a "grassroot mobilization" approach, such as involving local churches and NGOs, or getting citizens involved in policing and street cleaning operations. At one point, he offered to give out brooms to all citizens willing to clean up their neighborhoods. Bell came up with vague slogans to fight crime and cited his endorsement by the city police.
It seems that the voters prefered the pro-active government approach to city problems proposed by O'Malley to self-help grassroots tinkering hinted by Stokes or law-and-order credentials of Bell.
3. Change. O'Malley campaign prominently featured promises of sweeping changes, including firing the top city bureaucrats (the chief of police, the director of public works, and the director of public housing) implicated in numerous scandals, and charges of corruption and discrimiantion. Stokes also promised a change but was much more vague about it - he said he would ask the top bureaucrats to "reapply" for their jobs, but refusing to tell whether he would re-hire them. Bell did not have much to say on the subject except vague promises.
It seems that the voters were fed up with the indeptitude of Schmoke (the current mayor) administration promising much but delivering little, and endorsed someone who promised to take concrete and decisive steps to change the status quo .
4. Privatization. O'Malley was the only candidate who declared his opposition to the privatization of city services. Stokes hinted he would privatize some services. Moreover, O'Malley was the most anti the let's-cut-taxes-while-delivering-more-public-services attitude. Stokes with his private business background was more inclined toward it. O'Malley was also the only candidate who acknowledge the city's fiscal problems due to shrinking tax base, and promised to counteract that trend by attracting more people to the city.
While the antiprivatization aspect of the O'Malley campaign was virtually ignored by the mainstream comentators, in my opinion it was an important factor in his electoral victory.
5. Economic development - O'Malley proposed the most specific strategy to increase economic development and reduce unemployment (which is twice the national average).
6. Environment. O'Malley was the most pro-environemnt of the three candidates.
7. The socialist candidate, Bob Kaufmann, who ran a poorly visible campaign on the "traditional" leftish shibboleths of the struggle of poor people against bourgeoisie, anti-racism, and anti-big-business slogans (reading much like some of the postings to lbo-talk and pen-l) received less than 1% of the votes in this predominantly black and working class city. That epitomizes how out of sync the Left in this country is.
wojtek