In three of the four towns that Durant won in both elections, his percentage of the vote remained remarkably consistent, while Alicea’s percentage dropped at the hands of Peter Boria (U-Charlton) and Bob Cirba (U-Spencer).
TOWN Nov. ’10 May ‘11 Durant -- Alicea Durant -- Alicea -- Others E. Brookfield 59.8 -- 40.2 61.8 -- 32.6 -- 5.6 Oxford 54.5 -- 45.5 54.5 -- 31.2 -- 14.3 Spencer 59.5 -- 40.5 62.0 -- 31.8 -- 6.2
In Charlton, the effect was less pronounced, however Durant still increased his margin over Alicea from +7% to +12%. In fact, Boria, a Charlton selectman, finished second ahead of the incumbent representative.
TOWN Nov. ’10 May ‘11 Durant -- Alicea Durant -- Alicea -- Others Charlton 53.7 -- 46.3 40.4 -- 28.0 -- 31.6
Only in Southbridge did the unenrolled candidates appear to take more support away from the Republican, but the effect was less pronounced than it was in the other four towns.
TOWN Nov. ’10 May ‘11 Durant -- Alicea Durant -- Alicea -- Others Southbridge 38.3 -- 61.7 30.6 -- 58.9 -- 10.5
The other indicator that the extra candidates hurt Alicea is that if the vote percentages from each town in the November election were used to predict the vote based on the May turnout, Alicea would have won by 165 votes. Here is the predicted vote using that method.
TOWN Nov ’10 Percentage May ’11 May ’11 Predicted Durant -- Alicea Turnout Durant -- Alicea Charlton 53.7 -- 46.3 2,768 1,486 -- 1,282 E. Brookfield 59.8 -- 40.2 578 346 -- 232 Oxford 54.5 -- 45.5 339 185 -- 154 Southbridge 38.3 -- 61.7 3,118 1,194 -- 1,924 Spencer 59.5 -- 40.5 1,142 679 -- 463 TOTALS 7,945 3,890 -- 4,055
It seems clear to me that for all of the discussion that the election should have been a straight runoff with no new candidates -- much of it from Republicans who claimed that one or both of the unenrolled candidates were “Trojan horses” drafted to hurt Durant -- the candidate that was hurt the most by the open field was soon-to-be former Rep. Alicea.