I do think that it matters where a candidate's name appears in the list of candidates on the ballot, espcially if a lot are running. I think the first spot is most fortunate, but I would think that 2nd is OK, as well. I am not sure I agree that the last spot on the list is also good.
It will be interesting to check winners in November and see where their names appeared.

Janna,

Have you read any of the research on the subject?

Brian,

This is an interesting question that I did research on myself just this afternoon. Quantitative studies have been done on national election results on whether the order of names on a long list on a ballot make any difference. Based upon the sample data conducted in Florida and Ohio, the answer is YES. First place has statistically been shown to be the best position with that candidate having between a 2% and 3% advantage; all other factors being equal. Of course, that was in a national election with two well-known candidates and many unknowns running. Last place has also been shown to statistically have an advantage rather than being in the dreaded middle of the pack. The analysis found that rushed voters preferred to pick the first name they saw. But those who took the time to read the entire list, more often chose the last name on the list since it was the one they were most likely to remember. In the Simi Valley City Council race, that means Steve Sojka who will be listed first could benefit solely by name placement. But since its a long list compared to other election years, I could benefit as well by being last on that list.

Why can't a candidate have their name legally changed to all capital letters?