It is currently Sat Feb 22, 2025 4:15 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
About that Virginia Democrat that won by one vote .... yeah, no, it's a tie .... not sure if there's a shootout or if they go 4-on-4 first.

Anyway, picture of said ballot provided below. It seems like it's one of those calls that could go either way, though if this were a sports replay, the call wouldn't be overturned as I see no definitive evidence to the contrary of how it was originally called.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/court-tosses-out-one-vote-victory-in-recount-that-had-briefly-ended-a-republican-majority-in-virginia/2017/12/20/ed979a70-e5b9-11e7-a65d-1ac0fd7f097e_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_varecount-255pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.9181c25d2c14

Virginia court tosses one-vote victory that briefly ended GOP majority in House

NEWPORT NEWS, VA. — Control of Virginia’s legislature hung in limbo Wednesday after a three-judge panel declined to certify the recount of a key House race, saying that a questionable ballot should be counted in favor of the Republican and tying a race that Democrats thought they had won by a single vote.

“The court declares there is no winner in this election,” Newport News Circuit Court Judge Bryant L. Sugg said after the panel deliberated for more than two hours.

He said that the ballot in question contained a mark for Democrat Shelly Simonds as well as a mark for Republican Del. David Yancey but that the voter had made another mark to strike out Sim­onds’s name.

Officials presiding over the five-hour recount on Tuesday had discarded that ballot en route to a historic reversal of the original election outcome. Yancey had emerged from Election Day with a 10-vote lead in the 94th District, but the recount uncovered enough additional ballots for Simonds to give her a one-vote victory.

That seemed to set up the House for a rare 50-50 split between Republicans and Democrats, ending 17 years of GOP dominance and making headlines nationwide.

But Republicans challenged that decision in court Wednesday, saying the voter had selected every other Republican on the ballot and intended to vote for Yancey.

The judges — all of whom were elected by a Republican-
controlled legislature — agreed, leaving the race tied at 11,608 votes each for Yancey and Simonds. The balance of power in the House stands at 50-49 in favor of Republicans until the Newport News race can be resolved.

State law says the winner of a tied House race will be determined by lot — leaving the fate of the chamber to what is essentially a coin toss.

James Alcorn, chairman of the State Board of Elections, said the winner will probably be chosen by placing names on slips of paper into two film canisters and then drawing the canisters from a glass bowl (or his bowler hat). He said he is conferring with staff to figure out the date and method.

Complicating the tiebreaking vote is the need to ensure that both a Democratic and Republican representative of the three-member elections board will be available during the holidays.

“We were not planning to get together in the next week,” said Alcorn, a Democrat appointed by outgoing Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D).

But it doesn’t end there. If the loser of the coin toss is unhappy with that result, he or she can seek a second recount.

News of the court decision pulsed through political circles that, just a day before, had been roiled by the notion that Simonds had taken the seat from Yancey by a single vote in the recount.

As he was leaving the courthouse Wednesday, Yancey said “the ruling today makes certain every vote in this historic election was counted.”

The turnaround shocked Democrats, who on social media were still celebrating their unlikely rise to power in the House of Delegates. Before the Nov. 7 elections, Republicans outnumbered Democrats in that chamber by 66 to 34. The GOP has a smaller, 21-to-19 edge in the state Senate, where ties votes can be broken by a Democratic lieutenant governor. With Democrat Ralph Northam set to take over as governor on Jan. 13, the party is primed to flex its newfound muscle.

But the Newport News outcome now leaves things unclear. The House Democratic Caucus vowed to fight the judges’ decision, calling it “erroneous,” though some legal experts expressed skepticism that the party has avenues for a challenge.

“We are currently assessing all legal options before us as we fight for a just result,” said Marc Elias, the lawyer for the Democrats. “The Republicans themselves had affirmed that this result was accurate yesterday before changing their minds today.

“After conceding this seat and their majority, they are now desperately trying to claw both back ‘like a snarling dog that won’t let go of a bone,’ ” he said, quoting a recent editorial by the RichmondTimes-Dispatch.

But according to lawyers for Yancey, the questions about the recount’s lone disputed ballot were a late-breaking surprise to them, as well.

Kenneth Mallory, a paid election official chosen by the Yancey team, had spotted the ballot about halfway through the Tuesday recount. He said he thought the ballot clearly looked like a vote for Yancey, but the other official he was working with — selected by Democrats — disagreed.

“I felt hurried to move on and proceed. I was new to this process, and I was caught up by his argument,” Mallory wrote in a letter to the judges outlining his concerns.

The ballot was tossed aside as invalid, the precinct was wrapped up and the recount moved on. At the end of the day, Republican and Democratic officials alike stated that they were satisfied with the process and outcome.

But a volunteer observer working for Yancey — John Alvarado, who also happened to be Yancey’s campaign manager — had seen Mallory’s discomfort during the recount. State law limits the ability of observers to communicate with election officials during the recount, but afterward, Alvarado sounded the alarm with Yancey’s legal team, according to Republican lawyer Trevor Stanley.

Stanley reached out to Mallory Tuesday evening, but Mallory declined to talk until he got assurances from the city’s Electoral Board that he was allowed to do so, the lawyer said.

Mallory, meanwhile, said he had been agonizing about his failure to act during the recount. A middle school civics teacher, Mallory, 33, said in an interview that he had wanted to take part in the recount so he could talk about it with his students.

He wrote in his letter that he “lamented” his failure to act on the questionable ballot, and that he shared his misgivings with his wife and parents.Finally, about 10 p.m. Tuesday, Yancey’s team talked with Mallory and heard his concerns. They urged him to write out his thoughts and sign them so they could take them to court in the morning, when the judges would convene to certify the results.

Once the judges read the letter and heard arguments from the lawyers, they spent two hours studying the ballot in question before ruling.

GOP leaders in the House of Delegates, who on Tuesday had conceded the recount and pledged to share power with Democrats in what they believed would be a chamber split 50 to 50, issued a new statement after Wednesday’s turn of events.

“While it appeared yesterday that Shelly Simonds was elected, it’s obvious now that the result will remain unclear for a while longer,” said a statement from House GOP leaders Kirk Cox, Tim Hugo and Nick Rush.

Simonds, who appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Wednesday morning as the surprise victor of a tense recount that reset state politics, could not be reached for comment.

It is not clear whether a final decision in the Simonds-Yancey matchup will settle control of the House of Delegates.

Even as the court was considering whether to certify Tuesday’s recount in the 94th House District, two other recounts are taking place this week — at least one of which may further reshuffle politics in Richmond.

Election officials on Wednesday evening were finishing a recount in the 68th House District in Richmond, where Republican Del. G. Manoli Loupassi trailed Democratic challenger Dawn Adams by 336 votes, but the outcome appeared unlikely to change.

And a recount is set for Thursday in Fredericksburg’s District 28, where the Republican leads by 82 votes. Democrats have also challenged that race in federal court, where they are seeking a new election because more than 100 voters were mistakenly given ballots for the wrong legislative district.

House Democrats were meeting in Richmond on Wednesday night to elect their own leadership for the coming General Assembly session, which starts Jan. 10. They were set to vote on their designee for speaker but held off in light of the uncertainty in the Simonds-Yancey race and in District 28. Otherwise they reelected their current caucus leadership.

House Minority Leader David J. Toscano (Charlottesville) is vying with his party’s longest-serving member, Del. Kenneth R. Plum (Fairfax), for the speaker position.

After the court’s ruling threw the balance of power back toward Republicans, Plum said he thinks Democrats need to be realistic about what’s ahead.

“Irrespective of these last-minute backs and forths, it’s clear that the people are divided in their choice,” he said. “And I think what’s incumbent upon us is that we do a power-sharing arrangement [with Republicans] where we can get some work done.



Image

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
If one is wondering about the standards involved with hand-counting ballots ....

https://www.elections.virginia.gov/Files/ElectionAdministration/ElectionLaw/ExamplesforHandcounting.pdf

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43865
I'm not really sure how they can accept that ballot. Clearly it should be invalid. You can't guess what the voters intent was, and voting for two candidates is not allowed.

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:12 pm
Posts: 2865
pizza_Place: maciano's
When I read the story I was expecting it to be democratic complaining and a clear cross out. I don’t see how you can count that. I would sooner disallow the vote for the governor as its clearerly an X through the dot.

If they didn’t dq that governor vote they are completely full of shit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 23548
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Wasn't this the plot of a Kevin Costner movie?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:57 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
]

IF that ballot hasn't been altered I would side with the republicans. Looks like a mistake that the voter attempted to cross out.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:19 am
Posts: 23915
pizza_Place: Jimmy's Place
you ever heard of an executive summary?

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43865
Nas wrote:
IF that ballot hasn't been altered I would side with the republicans. Looks like a mistake that the voter attempted to cross out.

I know you have been an election judge in the past, so you might understand the process better than anyone. Can a voter request a new ballot if they claim they made a mistake? I would assume the "mistake" ballot would then be shredded.

Guessing who a person voted for is something the court should not get involved in. It was ridiculous with the 2000 Florida recount where people were examining ballots with a magnifying glass. Hand recounts should follow the 3-second rule. If you look at a ballot and can't determine who the person voted for in 3 seconds, that ballot should be tossed.

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:12 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Douchebag wrote:
Nas wrote:
IF that ballot hasn't been altered I would side with the republicans. Looks like a mistake that the voter attempted to cross out.

I know you have been an election judge in the past, so you might understand the process better than anyone. Can a voter request a new ballot if they claim they made a mistake? I would assume the "mistake" ballot would then be shredded.

Guessing who a person voted for is something the court should not get involved in. It was ridiculous with the 2000 Florida recount where people were examining ballots with a magnifying glass. Hand recounts should follow the 3-second rule. If you look at a ballot and can't determine who the person voted for in 3 seconds, that ballot should be tossed.


No doubt the can request a new ballot. In this instance the vote probably wasn't counted until the recount. The voter should have done a better job crossing out the first vote or requesting a new ballot.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:52 pm
Posts: 12570
Location: Ex-Naperville, Ex-Homewood, Now Tinley Park
pizza_Place: Oh I'm sorry but, there's no one on the line
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Wasn't this the plot of a Kevin Costner movie?

Yep... this was when he was on Brandmeier's show and said it had a chance to be one of those classic American movies. And then he gave Johnny credit for hammering the "No Bessie, you don't" clip from Wyatt Earp.

_________________
"All crowds boycotting football games shouldn't care who sings or takes a knee because they aren't watching." - Nas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 38609
Location: "Across 110th Street"
TurdFerguson wrote:
When I read the story I was expecting it to be democratic complaining and a clear cross out. I don’t see how you can count that. I would sooner disallow the vote for the governor as its clearerly an X through the dot.

If they didn’t dq that governor vote they are completely full of shit.


^^^ This.

The voter has a peculiar thing for scratching marks on his/her ballot. Scratching through the gov. circle seems to imply some form of similar emphasis and could be argued as evidence of intent.

But with this level of scrutiny and the money involved, I'd sooner bet on yet another, more partisan recount that no one wins.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
Regular Reader wrote:
TurdFerguson wrote:
When I read the story I was expecting it to be democratic complaining and a clear cross out. I don’t see how you can count that. I would sooner disallow the vote for the governor as its clearerly an X through the dot.

If they didn’t dq that governor vote they are completely full of shit.


^^^ This.

The voter has a peculiar thing for scratching marks on his/her ballot. Scratching through the gov. circle seems to imply some form of similar emphasis and could be argued as evidence of intent.

But with this level of scrutiny and the money involved, I'd sooner bet on yet another, more partisan recount that no one wins.

FWIW the panel of three judges were (are?) Republican appointees .... but I don't know that I'm ready to make that a direct point of contention.

Ultimately, I would say that not only is the ballot spoiled, but it's also 100% on the voter to not have had the wherewithal to at least inquire with an election official/judge/whatever about the possibility of receiving another ballot in trade for the ambiguous one.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group