2025 Result
5th / 8
1,977 votes
Non-Voters
8,933
55.7% of registered didn't vote
Gap to 3rd
-1,415
votes behind Sumner
Holmes Proved It
+1,208 votes
4th → 1st in one cycle
New Since Pres. Election
1,191
471 R, 437 U, 266 D — 78.4% voted Nov 2025
New Since City Election
125
45 R, 44 U, 35 D — median age 29
Turnout Trend
44.3%
Up from 34.2% in 2023 (+10.1 pts)
Primary Split
78% R
But 4,300+ non-primary voters turned out for city council
2025 Election Results — All 8 Candidates
| Mayoral Race |
|---|
| Candidate | Votes | % | Result |
|---|
Full 18-Precinct Heatmap
| Precinct | Slagboom % | Votes | Rank |
Gap to 3rd | Simon % | Trump % |
City Turnout | Pres Turnout | Ballot Gap |
Non-Voters | Tier |
Mobilization Gap Analysis
Ballots Cast: Presidential (2024) Minus City Council (2025)
Partisan Landscape
Established Voter File (1,829 GOP-filtered)
New Voter Universe (512)
Partisan Composition
Top Precincts for New Voters
Key Insight: 72.7% are age 17-25 (predominantly UI students). These are highly persuadable — 49.2% modeled as Swing.
The Hidden Electorate
May 2024 primary: 78% Republican ballots. But 4,300+ voters who skip primaries showed up for the Nov 2025 city election. These non-primary voters are a key swing bloc whose partisan lean is unknown. In a non-partisan race, both sides vote.
Contact Data Summary
Cell Phones (Established)
1,453
79.4% of established file
Cell Phones (New Voters)
232
45.3% of new voters
Email Contacts
82
addresses on file
Campaign Email
slagboom.for.moscow
@proton.me
primary campaign contact
Simon-Slagboom Correlation
Your top 4 precincts (M3, M2, M7, M16) are identical to Alex Simon's top 4 precincts in the mayoral race. The "change" electorate tracks perfectly. Simon got 30% citywide — your ceiling is higher in a vote-for-3 race.
Target Candidates for 2027
| Name | 2023 Votes | 2023 % | Rank | Notes |
|---|
MURA Board: Davis and Kelly both sit on the MURA board — a governance angle for campaign messaging.
Blankenship Watch: Blankenship is running for Idaho State Senate in 2026. If he wins, his council seat could be vacated mid-term, creating a potential appointment opportunity or special election dynamic.
Historical Turnout
| Election | Registered | Ballots | Turnout % |
|---|
Turnout jumped from 34.2% (2023) to 44.3% (2025) — a 10-point increase with a mayoral race on the ballot. 2027 will NOT have a mayoral race (Lewis's term runs to 2029), so turnout may be lower than 2025's 44.3%.
Vote Math
| Scenario | Turnout % | Total Voters | Votes Needed for 3rd | Label |
|---|
In a vote-for-3 race, the 3rd place finisher typically needs about 1/3 of ballots cast. At 2025-level turnout (44%), that's ~2,350 votes. Our target of 3,400 gives margin for error.
Total New Since 2024
5,974
37% of current voter file
Since Presidential (Nov 2024)
1,191
median age 30 · 30.2% student
Since City Election (Nov 2025)
125
median age 29 · 36.0% student
Post-Pres Nov 2025 Turnout
78.4%
New registrants showed up
New Registrations by Window
Since Presidential Election (1,191 voters)
Since City Election (125 voters)
Post-presidential registrants voted at 78.4% in Nov 2025. These are motivated new voters, not passive registrations. R+U outnumber D 908 to 266 (3.4:1 ratio). This is a growing conservative-leaning pool.
Post-city-election registrations are slow (125). Only 16.8% have already voted. The 2027 registration drive needs to start by summer to capture these voters early. 36% are students — target permanent residents for durable registrations.
Confirmed R
1,656
Score 70-100
Likely R
6,744
Score 40-69
R-Leaning Dropoffs
6,678
Voted 2024, skipped 2025
Excluded “Rs”
232
Registered R, FEC-confirmed D donor
Confirmation Score Distribution
Score Histogram (0–100)
Tier Breakdown
232 registered Republicans are confirmed Democratic donors. Ground truth FEC/Sunshine data reclassified 3,840 voters (23.8%) — raw party registration systematically overstates R strength. All 232 are excluded from targeting operations.
Psychographic Segments
Segment Size & Average Score
| Segment | Voters | Avg Score | Message Theme |
|---|
Channel Reach & Contact Lists
Door Knock List
3,313
Score 40+ dropoff voters
Mailer Households
4,716
Deduplicated addresses
Phone Bank
1,943
Score 30+ with phone
| Channel | Reachable | Primary (3-star) | Cost/Contact | Est. Total |
|---|
Fundraising Targets — R FEC Donors Who Never Gave Locally
243 confirmed R-aligned FEC donors have never contributed to a local Moscow campaign. Top 10 by federal giving:
These 243 donors gave $175K+ to federal R candidates. A $500 local donation from 50 of them = $25,000 — enough for 3 full mailer drops. Start with the M12 cluster (Bennett, McGuckin, Shawver, Craig).
Campaign Math — Path to 3,400 Votes
2025 Baseline
1,977
votes received
Win Target
3,400
Sumner's winning total
Gap
1,423
additional votes needed
Dropoff Pool
6,678
R-leaning dropoff voters
| Scenario | Confirmed R (502) | Likely R (3,201) | Lean R (2,975) | New Votes | Total | vs Target |
|---|
At moderate activation rates (50% T1, 30% T2, 15% T3), the campaign reaches 3,634 votes — 234 above the win threshold. The math works if the targeting system delivers. The moderate scenario requires activating 1,657 dropoff voters out of 6,678 available (24.8%).
R+U Advantage
12,058
vs 3,810 D (3.2:1 ratio)
Turnout Collapse
-40 pts
83.9% presidential → 44.0% city
R+U Dropoffs
5,349
Voted 2024, skipped 2025
Dark R Households
1,206
2,696 voters — all R/U, none voted
Party Registration Breakdown
Moscow Active Voters by Party
Registration Trend by Era
Moscow is trending Unaffiliated, not Democratic. D share of new registrations fell from 26.9% (2016-2020) to 22.7% (2024-2026). R share is stable at ~37-38%. The Unaffiliated bloc is growing (35% → 38%).
Turnout Tiers — Who Shows Up?
4-Election Turnout Rates
| Tier | Count | % | R% | U% | D% | Med. Age | Strategic Value |
|---|
Presidential Only (5,868 voters) is the #1 target universe. 36.4% of all Moscow voters showed up for the presidential and stayed home for city council. They skew young (median 36) and 41.9% Unaffiliated.
The Dropoff — 6,918 Lost Voters
R Dropoffs
2,693
38.9% of all dropoffs
U Dropoffs
2,656
38.4% of all dropoffs
R+U vs D Ratio
3.7:1
5,349 R+U vs 1,441 D
Primary Signal
82.1%
of primary-voting dropoffs pulled R ballot
Precinct 12 hemorrhaged the most voters: 705 dropoffs (76.1% rate), but R registration is 48.9%. Only 29 Slagboom votes came from M12 in 2025. This precinct alone could have changed the outcome.
Opportunity Gap — Slagboom 2025 vs Registration Reality
Precincts where R registration is strong but Slagboom underperformed represent the biggest 2027 growth opportunity.
| Precinct | R Reg% | Trump% | Slagboom% | Slagboom Votes | Nov25 Turnout | R+U Dropoffs | Opp Score | Gap Flag |
|---|
M12, M1, and M17 are the biggest gaps. M12 has 48.9% R registration and 55.2% Trump support but Slagboom got only 8.7%. M1 has 50.8% R and 60.2% Trump but only 2 Slagboom votes (9.4% turnout). These precincts have massive untapped conservative support.
Unaffiliated Decoder
Primary Signal Rate
4.9%
Only 282 of 5,793 voted in primary
Lean R (confirmed)
51
70.6% Nov 2025 turnout
Lean D (confirmed)
164
82.3% Nov 2025 turnout
True Independents
5,578
36.5% Nov 2025 turnout — black box
D-leaning Unaffiliateds vote in city elections at 82.3% vs R-leaning at 70.6%. The opposition is better at mobilizing their Unaffiliated supporters. The primary ballot shortcut does not work here — direct voter contact is the only way to decode 5,578 True Independents.
Precinct Battlemap — Opportunity Scores
R+U Dropoff Voters by Precinct (Sorted by Opportunity Score)
Target precincts (R-lean + high opportunity): M12, M3, M17, M7, M2, M5, M4
Avoid precincts (D-lean despite high score): M8 (23.3% R, 31.7% D) and M18 (25.9% R, 33.3% D). Canvassing there risks mobilizing the opposition.
Household & Canvassing Targets
Split Households
1,144
One voted, one didn't — built-in reminder
Dark R Households
1,206
All R/U, none voted — pure GOTV
Phone Banking Targets
2,269
R+U non-voters with phone on file
Canvassing Streets
193
streets with 10+ R/U non-voters
Vote Method Analysis (Nov 2025)
How Each Party Votes in City Elections
Counterintuitive: Republicans are Moscow's biggest early voters (40.6%). Democrats are more Election Day-dependent (61.2%). Push early voting — your base already does it. Skip the absentee chase (only 8.5% of all votes).
2025 Activation Signal
487 voters voted Nov 2025 but NOT Nov 2024. Of these, 405 (83.2%) registered in 2025 specifically for the city race. Party split: R 35.9%, U 43.1%, D 18.9%. This was a successful conservative-leaning mobilization — find who ran this registration drive and replicate it for 2027.
Student vs. Permanent Resident Segmentation
Voters classified by three-signal scoring: age + campus-area address + registration recency.
Almost Certain Students
565
3.5% · Median age 21
Likely Students
2,595
16.2% · Median age 22
Permanent Residents
12,822
80.2% · Median age 49
1,833 student dropoff voters — voted Nov 2024 but skipped Nov 2025. Students are canvassing wildcards: high turnover, leave town in summer, respond to different issues. M8 (88.7% student), M18 (57.7%), and M16 (52.2%) are essentially campus precincts — treat them differently in your canvassing strategy.
Permanent residents are your base. R registration is 40.0% among permanent residents vs 33-35% among students. Focus canvassing energy on permanent-resident-heavy precincts (M12, M17, M4, M9) where doors you knock stay knocked for 2027.
Cross-Reference Discoveries
New findings from merging voter file analysis with existing precinct/candidate data.
923 young Republicans (18-34) voted in 2024 but skipped 2025. Only 32.6% of young Rs voted in the city election vs 79.1% for the presidential. This is the single largest mobilization failure. These voters need targeted social media, campus outreach, and peer-to-peer contact.
Library levy voters skew D. Democrats overperformed their 23.6% registration share by 10 points in the May 2025 levy vote (33.8%). Special elections favor the opposition. A city council race must overcome this structural disadvantage.
155 voters voted in BOTH special elections but skipped city council. 80.6% Republican, mean age 66. These are engaged, loyal primary/levy voters who somehow missed the city race. Easy GOTV targets with a simple reminder.
2025 new registrants voted at 78.9%. Of those, 40.1% Republican. The conservative registration drive didn't just register people — it got them to vote. This model works and should be scaled.
Gender gap insight: Women vote at slightly higher rates (45.3% vs 42.7% for men). D women voters (1,150) far outnumber D men (652), but R is gender-balanced (1,504 F vs 1,481 M). Messaging to conservative women is already working.
The most engaged voters (4-of-4 elections) are 64.7% Republican. Only 10.8% Unaffiliated. The base is rock-solid — the problem is purely turnout breadth, not depth.
Recommended Next Steps
| # | Action | Why | Priority |
|---|
| 1 | Build a canvassing tracker tool | Track door-knock results. ID voters 1-5 scale. Mark supporters for GOTV. The CSVs from this analysis are the input. | CRITICAL |
| 2 | Student vs permanent resident segmentation | Precincts 08, 12, 18 have massive dropoffs. Are those students who left? Cross-ref with UI housing proximity. | CRITICAL |
| 3 | Purchase phone number append | 67% have no phone on file. A voter phone append doubles your phone banking universe from 2,269 to 4,500+. | HIGH |
| 4 | Map precinct boundaries | GIS overlay of precincts with canvassing routes, dark R households, and opportunity scores for visual walk lists. | HIGH |
| 5 | Identify the 2025 registration drive organizer | 405 new R+U voters registered and voted. Find the church/group that ran it. Partner for 2027 at 3x scale. | HIGH |
| 6 | Model the win number by precinct | Using battlemap + tiers, allocate the 3,400-vote target across precincts. Know exactly how many doors to knock per precinct. | MEDIUM |
| 7 | Get the 2023 voter file | Compare registration changes: who moved, who was purged, net new by party. Track the electorate shift over 4 years. | MEDIUM |
| 8 | Analyze split-ticket patterns | In vote-for-3, who voted Slagboom + which others? Reveals coalition opportunities (Taruscio, Schoolland crossover). | MEDIUM |
| 9 | Young R mobilization plan | 923 young Rs dropped off. Build a targeted outreach program: social media, campus events, young professionals network. | HIGH |
| 10 | Refresh voter file in 2027 | Request an updated file 6 months before the election. Compare to this baseline. Track new registrations and address changes. | MEDIUM |
Young Republican Mobilization Plan
1,975 Republicans under 35 — 52% dropped off after Nov 2024. This is your single biggest recoverable bloc.
Young R Dropoffs
1,028
Voted Nov 2024, skipped Nov 2025
Ghost Rs (under 35)
277
Registered, never voted
Phoneable
774
39.2% have phone on file
Decaying Lifecycle
1,025
Trending away from voting
Two distinct populations: Ages 18-25 are 90% students (1,112 voters, 657 dropoffs) — transient, high turnover. Ages 26-35 are 96% permanent residents (863 voters, 371 dropoffs) — stable, buildable relationships. Prioritize the 26-35 permanent residents. They stay in town, respond to property tax and utility cost messaging, and become lifetime voters if activated now.
Mobilization Playbook:
| Channel | Target | Action |
|---|
| Phone Banking | 774 young Rs with phones | Priority call list. Lead with property tax + utility cost messaging. Ask for yard sign. |
| Door Knocking | 863 permanent residents (26-35) | Focus on M7, M6, M2, M3. Skip M8/M18 (student precincts). These are homeowners and renters who feel the tax burden. |
| Social Media | 1,975 young Rs | Budget data visualizations, property tax comparisons. Platform: Instagram, short-form video. Signal27 content pipeline. |
| Young Professionals | 26-35 permanent residents | Coffee meetups, pub nights. Build a "young taxpayers" network. Peer-to-peer accountability for city election turnout. |
| Campus | 1,112 student Rs | College Republicans partnership. Voter registration drives Aug-Sep 2027. Dorm canvassing Oct 2027. Issue: "You pay Moscow utilities too." |
| Early Vote Push | All young Rs | Rs already early-vote at 40.6%. Push hard for early vote commitment. Lock in votes before election day chaos. |
Young R + Young U combined: 4,271 voters under 35 (R+U). 2,208 dropped off. If you recover even 40% of the permanent resident dropoffs, that's 478 votes — 14% of your 3,400 target from one demographic alone.
Win Number Model — 3,400 Vote Allocation
Target votes allocated across 18 precincts weighted by opportunity score. Higher opportunity = more votes expected from that precinct. Conversion rate = what % of available R+U voters you must win.
Citywide Target
3,400
votes to win
Total R+U Voters
—
available voter pool
Citywide Conversion
—
of R+U pool needed
Hardest Precinct
—
highest conversion rate needed
Target Votes by Precinct (Opportunity-Weighted)
| Precinct | Opp Score | Target Votes |
R+U Voters | Conversion % | Difficulty |
How to read this: Each precinct's target is proportional to its opportunity score. M12 (opp score 466.6) gets the biggest allocation because it has the most untapped R+U voters. Conversion rate tells you how hard you have to work — under 30% is comfortable, 30-50% is doable, over 50% means you need near-perfect turnout.
Top 10 Strategic Takeaways
