In the wake of Tuesday’s election some Evanston Now readers have been speculating about the significance the victory margin for Mayor Daniel Biss.

For example, Emily Neuberger asked:

“Is it really “winning big” for mayor when you get the vote of only 20% of registered voters in your town? Hardly a mandate on one’s candidacy. Maybe consider treading lightly Mr. Biss. You are not particularly well liked.”

So we decided to see how the Biss victory margin this year compared with that in Evanston mayoral elections over the past 20 years. Here’s what we found, in records from the Cook County Clerk’s office.

Election dateWinnerWinner’s voteWinner’s %Votes cast
April 1, 2025Daniel Biss10,99362.41%17,615
Feb. 23, 2021Daniel Biss7,78773.37%10,614
April 4, 2017Steve Hagerty9,00750.32%17,899
April 9, 2013Elizabeth Tisdahl5,854100%5,854
April 7, 2009Elizabeth Tisdahl6,43061.98%10,375
April 5, 2005Lorraine Morton8,60272.71%11,831

This week Biss received 62.4% of the vote in a two-way race that had the second highest voter turnout in the past 20 years.

In 2021, Biss received nearly three-quarters of the vote in a relatively low-turnout primary election against two opponents. Because he received more than half the vote in the primary, there was no contents for mayor in the general election.

In 2017, after Steve Hagerty finished first among five candidates in the primary with 44.4% of the vote, he eked out an extremely narrow victory over Mark Tendam with 50.3% of the general election vote.

In 2013, Elizabeth Tisdahl, ran unopposed for a second term and received all the votes in an extremely low turnout general election.

In 2009, Tisdahl defeated three opponents for mayor in the general election, with just under 62% of the vote.

In 2005, Lorraine Morton, seeking her fourth term in office defeated Peter Godwin, receiving 72.7% of the vote.

So, in five contested mayoral elections over the past 20 years, a 62.41% vote tally for the winner is right in the middle of the results.

We’ll leave it to our readers to decide whether they think that amounts to a mandate for — or a rebuke of — the winner’s policy positions.

Bill Smith is the editor and publisher of Evanston Now.

Join the Conversation

3 Comments

  1. Sadly Biss’ win is another indication voters want dictators with simple answers to complex problems. He and Trump, who remember won every swing state, are two sides of the same coin. Trump blames the poor and seeks to punish them, Biss blames the rich and seeks to punish them by driving tens of thousands of cars through their small residential streets to get blood money from NU and destroying single-family neighborhoods. Just as Trump had no proof tariffs would help the country, Biss has no proof his destructive measures will help, both will hurt people who were culpable enough to believe their simple solutions that created massive divisions in our society. A very sad time in American history right now.

    1. To compare Biss to Trump is absurd. “Blames the rich”? How so? How long has the NU stadium been there? Do you really think single family homes will just get torn down by the thousands? I’m sorry you’re unhappy Biss won. But the truth is that his opponent did not come out against the new stadium. Boarini only alleged that maybe a better deal could have been swung without saying how. And he did not say he opposed the zoning changes, only that they should go slower.

      1. Just to clarify, George, I did say that a better deal could have been negotiated with NU by bringing in attorneys like the ones that arranged yearly payments of over $20m from both Harvard and Yale without selling commercial rights. I also would have brought in someone who knows about Big 10 sports revenue. We hire outside counsel for slips and falls cases and HR issues. Why not for the biggest deal with NU in recent memory?

        And while I was all for slowing the Envision Evanston process (which has happened) I have also made clear that I do not favor blanket up zoning. I talked repeatedly about taking a more nuanced approach to zoning changes that allow for some types of additional housing stock while maintaining the integrity of neighborhoods.

Leave a comment
The goal of our comment policy is to make the comments section a vibrant yet civil space. Treat each other with respect — even the people you disagree with. Whenever possible, provide links to credible documentary evidence to back up your factual claims.