Live election updates: S.F. turns out to vote (or not). Here’s what to look out for.

Way back in 1990, British comedian Alexei Sayle parodied the tedium of voting. Rather than checking the box next to a politician, voters in his sketch showed up to stick their heads “in a bucket of something nasty, please.” 

Voters in the fictional constituency were given the option of sticking their heads in one of four buckets: “creosote, sump oil, liquid manure and cold rice pudding.” 

In San Francisco there are always so many buckets. Voting can feel like work. But here’s the thing: As of Monday morning, more than 80 percent of this city’s voters hadn’t. 

Just 19 percent of registered voters had returned their ballots at the beginning of this week, according to Elections Director John Arntz. While that number will surely go up, extremely mediocre turnout is now looking like the ceiling — if not an unattainable goal. 

Simply put, this is not the Knicks-Spurs of June primaries; San Francisco voters (like California voters writ large) do not seem much enthused to vote. And that probably stems from the unappealing morass to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom atop the ticket: Municipal issues will all but certainly have a greater impact on locals’ lives, but it’s the federal and state issues that often drive people to the polls. Alas. This year, we’re not driving. We’re not even carpooling. 

There are several factors that will dictate the outcome of today’s election to keep an eye on. This is a big one.

Is anybody going to vote? 

Perhaps because of the unappealing choice of buckets atop the gubernatorial ticket — and attempts to gamify the vote in order to prevent two Republicans from advancing to the general election — Democratic voters this year are holding onto their ballots to the bitter end and struggling to pick a gubernatorial candidate. 

A late surge is hardly impossible; San Francisco turnout could double or perhaps a good bit more than that to 40 to 45 percent or more. But this will still likely be a low-turnout election (you’d have to go back to 2014 for a sub-45 percent turnout for a state primary). And low-turnout San Francisco elections tend to favor more conservative candidates and measures. 

The ballots that have already found their way to the basement of San Francisco City Hall likely skew heavily from older homeowners and/or Republicans. While Democrats could fret over the top of the ballot, there was less consternation for Republicans: They had fewer choices and Donald Trump anointed Steve Hilton. 

And older, squared-away folks — often described as the sort of people who know where the stamps are — tend to be the first to return ballots. 

So, the first drop of early ballots that will be revealed at 8:45 tonight will likely be about as conservative as San Francisco can offer. 

That’s par for the course. What may be a bit different tonight is that a large percentage will turn in their ballots at a polling place today. The typical late progressive shift is harder to foresee because so many voters, presumably across so many ideologies, will turn in their ballots late. 

And that’s if a bushel of late votes arrive. 

Who suffers from a low-turnout election? 

Backers of Prop. D, the union-backed “Overpaid CEO Tax” to ding big companies to backfill Trump cuts, were confident of a big win if turnout exceeded 50 percent (a similar measure passed 65-35 six years ago — in an election with 86 percent turnout). 

But it doesn’t look like 50 percent turnout is likely to happen. Projected turnout has continued to fall, and, among labor progressives, anxiety has continued to rise. 

Simply put, there may not be enough late voters to offset the likely conservative-leaning early voters whose ballots are already nestled in City Hall. With a low enough turnout, even Prop. A, the earthquake safety bond, is no sure thing.

A low-turnout election would also be unwelcome news for insurgent congressional candidate Saikat Chakrabarti, who would figure to do well among the city’s young, progressive — and lower-propensity — voters. 

Chakrabarti and Supervisor Connie Chan are within the margin of error in recent polling in the race to come second behind Sen. Scott Wiener and advance to November’s general election. 

But political observers also foresee issues for Chan. Right-leaning Chinese voters, who might have voted for Chan out of familiarity, could instead be peeled off by Marie Hurabiell — a Republican-turned-Democrat who has run on Republican culture war wedge issues like transgender people using restrooms.

Finally, it’s less clear how a low-turnout election will affect the supervisor special elections in District 2 and 4. But political observers felt that, in the Sunset, it could benefit Albert Chow. 

Chow has been a registered Democrat since 2005 (he was previously registered as no party preference). But he has been a neighborhood fixture as a contractor and hardware store owner for even longer and he was a major figure in the recall of Supervisor Joel Engardio and battles over the closing of the Great Highway. 

He is, for lack of a better term, the most anti-establishment candidate in the field. 

How will ranked-choice voting play out? 

Ranked-choice voting will not be a factor in District 2, where appointed incumbent Stephen Sherrill is facing Lori Brooke. But it will loom large in District 4, where appointed incumbent Alan Wong, Chow and labor-backed progressive Natalie Gee are all seen as viable candidates. 

Transfer votes from perennial candidate David Lee and hobbyist candidate Jeremy Greco will loom large. How to put this nicely? Among Sunset residents whose thought process led them to vote No. 1 for Lee and Greco, it is, shall we say, difficult to predict whom they would vote Nos. 2, 3 and so on. 

A cohesive Anyone-But-Wong ranked-choice strategy would put the incumbent in a tight spot. While Gee and Chow have a 1-2 ranked-choice arrangement they’ve urged their voters to follow, Lee isn’t playing that game. Nobody knows for sure where his secondary votes will go.

If Wong is not far ahead with a healthy plurality of the early votes, his competitors are optimistic we’ll have a new supervisor next month. 

Let’s do it again

But, here’s the thing: The winners in both District 2 and 4 are just place-holders until November’s general election. If, unexpectedly, Brooke wins or finishes a relatively healthy second, she could well face Sherrill again later this year. If she is shellacked, Sherrill may run unopposed in November. 

And the same goes for District 4: Barring an unexpected blowout, all or most of the same candidates may be back for seconds. 

Say what you will about the choice of buckets here in San Francisco — they seem to be consistent. And plentiful. 

— Joe Eskenazi