The mayor has to go negative to cut into Villaraigosa's vote, but by now his own numbers are so low he may not be believed, says a Times piece by Michael Finnegan. The salient quotes:

"He's going to have real credibility problems," said Thomas Hollihan, associate dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at USC.

•

Garry South, chief strategist for the 2002 reelection campaign of Gov. Gray Davis [and Villaraigosa supporter], said there were parallels between Hahn's predicament now and the situation faced in 2002 by Davis, whose poll ratings were dismal.

"Voters came to the conclusion that he wasn't up to the job and he wasn't doing the job," South said of Davis. "Once that feeling got ensconced in the pit of their stomach, there was no getting rid of it. They had written him out of the play. My guess is that's exactly where Jim Hahn is today."

•

"He's not a credible messenger for his own case because he's so poorly regarded by the voters," said Eric Jaye, a media strategist who advised the defunct mayoral campaign of City Councilman Bernard C. Parks.

Nonetheless, says Hahn strategist Bill Carrick: Villaraigosa has "a long and rich public record that's going to get thoroughly explored."

In his Daily News column, Rick Orlov got Miguel Contreras to explain why more union members voted for Villarigosa, even though labor bosses endorsed Hahn: "Four years ago, we endorsed Antonio Villaraigosa and spent a lot of money on his campaign. We spent a lot of money for him when he was speaker and when he ran for City Council. Maybe $2.5 million. After all those years of telling people to vote for Antonio, it's hard to tell them to vote for someone else." Orlov also chides those of us who bit on the SurveyUSA poll, which proved to be about as far off as a poll can be.