The voters in Honolulu broke open several basic political questions yesterday when they apparently chose to deny Mufi Hannemann's bid for outright re-election in the primary.

The results were so painfully close to the treasured 50 percent mark. But it was hardly the clear mandate Hannemann and his supporters wanted.

Now, the odds are Hannemann will prevail in the end and will continue as Honolulu's leader, at least for the next two years. After all, he did just about as well as his two main opponents, combined.

But the election results leave open several questions which take more than a little time to resolve.

First, many in the Hannemann camp hoped this would be the first decisive step in the launch of another Hannemann campaign, either for governor or for Congress.

Second, this election, for better or worse, was a referendum on Hannemann's devoutly sought rail transit system. The rail project was seen as a major subtext of this campaign. How seriously should the public's decision to give the project another look be read as a rejection — or at least serious doubt — about the transit project?

On the political front, Hannemann has been admirably frank about his political intentions. Rather than indulging in the usual duck-and-run response that ambitious politicians use, Hannemann has made clear he reserves the right to jump to another race two years from now.

The primary results suggest Hannemann has some work ahead tending his current garden before he looks to bigger crops.

The big prize, obviously, is the governorship, which becomes available when incumbent Linda Lingle steps down in 2010. It's natural for the mayor of the state's biggest city, with four-fifths of the population, to assume the pole position in the run for governor.

(That logic didn't work for former Mayor Frank Fasi, but never mind.)

If Hannemann feels he has been of service as mayor, it's natural he would step up to the governor's race. In the Democratic primary, he would likely face either or both of state Senate President Colleen Hanabusa and U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, who are among the many looking at the race.

But don't assume that the governorship is Hannemann's only option. He has long wanted to serve in Congress, and should that option become available, he would jump at the chance.

Remember, too, that Hannemann can run for Congress without giving up his city position. But if he runs for governor, he must obey the state resign-to-run law.

The second big question is whether this settles, in any way, the issue of rail transit. Officially, no, since a rail transit question will be on the November general election ballot. But this was a referendum on transit, in very personal terms.

Candidate Panos Prevedouros made his opposition to Hannemann's transit program the long and short of his campaign. If opposition to the project motivates you, you voted for Prevedouros. Now, it is likely that there are some anti-transit folks out there who went for Hannemann anyway, for other reasons, but by and large every vote for Panos was an anti-transit vote.

In the case of Council member Ann Kobayashi, the case was a bit more muddled. Kobayashi is opposed to the project Hannemann wants, but she says she is generically in favor of some kind of transit system – just not his.

Kobayashi focused on Hannemann's personal and political style.

She also represented a faction that is uncomfortable with Hannemann and his political ambitions.

Obviously, these messages had some resonance with the voters. There's no question the incumbent is popular with the voters. But there is less than a complete sale here. On the one hand, apparently, they want more information and answers about this $6 billion rail transit project.

On the other, they want to know more about the man who will likely represent them in Honolulu for the next two years but clearly might be moving on after that.

Voters like a little excitement, apparently.