Gunnigle Signature Sprint is Not a Fluke

Over a period of about 21 hours, a Democratic candidate for Maricopa County Attorney, Julie Gunnigle, exceeded the 4289 (electronic) signatures that were required for her to be in the ballot in August. This was a shock to many, since the resignation of County Attorney Alister Adel had come as a surprise, and the need to collect thousands of signatures in 2 weeks was regarded as a serious obstacle.

How did the candidate get this many signatures so quickly? And what can this tell us about future campaigns?

There are two lazy answers, which nonetheless each have some merit. First, the “signatures” were done on the Secretary of State’s “Equal” site, so they can be acquired with far less muss and fuss than the in-person paper and pen kind. This undoubtedly made the rapid pace possible, but we note that the next higher number of signatures for a declared candidate was under 100.

Secondly, Ms. Gunnigle, while not being an incumbent, had run for this office in 2020, when she narrowly lost to County Attorney Adel. So, she did have name recognition that a complete newcomer would not have had, and that undoubtedly helped. But it is not clear that losing candidates normally have the ability to get this much support so quickly.

I’d like to posit a third reason for this phenomenon, which had much of the feeling of a telethon, as the signature counts were often posted throughout the day. It is likely that the continued involvement of Julie Gunnigle with the activist community since the 2020 election has kept her name in the public mind. And for activist Democrats, it was a positive association.

It is also worth pointing out that this accomplishment was achieved without raising money. There was no time to raise large sums for paid petition circulators, or for paid advertisement. Arguably, the network of supportive activists was more effective than these expensive methods might have been; at the very least, we can say that this rapid signing phenomenon was, to my knowledge, unprecedented.

Getting on the ballot is, of course, not the same as winning the election; and while it was impressive that thousands of people acted so decisively and so quickly, it doesn’t mean that the million or so voters needed to win in November will be there for the candidate. But on the other hand, thousands of active and eager supporters will be a significant asset.

Continued engagement with one’s community is a powerful approach to the political exercise. And this rapid acquisition of thousands of signatures was an impressive demonstration of that power.