quote:Originally posted by Morbo: Where are your numbers from Lyrhawn?
Both the Washington Post and CNN are reporting new numbers for VA, so it looks like they're opening up the counting there again. Absentee ballots, or those Fairfax County votes, maybe?
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's 4 counties yet to be fully counted in VA.
2 are pretty much split 50/50 1 is breaking hard for Webb 1 is breaking hard for Allen
I think the numbers we have now will pretty much bear out a 6000 to 10000 vote lead for Webb going into tomorrow.
If he has anything above a 5,000 vote lead, I think a recount can't take him down. I'd venture to say even a 1,000 vote lead would secure that, maybe less.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Red State Blue State is dying. There's a map up on CNN that shows a much healthier mix of red and blue imo. dunno if it'll still be there in a few hours but here goes:
I can live with Arnold so long as he's playing bipartisan governer and not republican arnold. angelides should have never won the primary, Westly could probably have made it a five point race, rather than the embarassing landslide support Arnold got...
But 87 is failing and most of the bond measures are passing. unsurprising that 83 passed, but it just creeps me out to tag anyone for life, not a precedent I want to start. 90 looks like it will pass as well. Posts: 128 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
One county in Virginia screwed up its counting and had to fix it.
And CNN's numbers are really AP's numbers, but they show up on the CNN site. AP is the only outfit in the country that counts all the votes, and the networks pay us big bucks for the right to use them.
Also, if you saw votes drop off in Montana it's because Yellowstone miscounted, zeroed them out and is now recounting. Expect a call on Montana in 2.5-3 hours.
Edited for spelling. Sheesh, caffeine makes your fingers schizophrenic (for example, I almost spelled 'fingers' as 'phingers'...)
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Morning after, it's quite clear that the Dems have the House, and it's possible (perhaps even probable) that they could get the Senate pending two recounts.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd say a recount in both states is NOT guranteed. Montana state law says the loser has to of lost by less than 1/2 a percent. Now I know that only 90% of the polls are in for Montana, which puts it at:
Tester (D) 173,259 Burns (R) 171,207 Jones (L) 9,061
Tester has a 2,000 vote lead. When you add up all the votes cast there, and whittle it down to a half percent, it's 1,767. If Tester remains above a half percent margin of victory, I don't think Burns can legally get a recount, unless he can prove election fraud anyway.
But Montana election law confuses me:
quote:13-16-201. Conditions under which recount to be conducted. (1) A recount must be conducted if: (b) a candidate for a congressional office, a state or district office voted on in more than one county, the legislature, or judge of the district court is defeated by a margin not exceeding 1/4 of 1% of the total votes cast for all candidates for the same position, and the defeated candidate, within 5 days after the official canvass, files a petition with the secretary of state as set forth in subsection (1)(a). The secretary of state shall immediately notify by certified mail each election administrator whose county includes any precincts that voted for the office, and a recount must be conducted in those precincts.
But this says:
quote: 13-16-211. Recounts allowed if bond posted to cover all costs. (1) If a candidate for a public office is defeated by a margin exceeding 1/4 of 1% but not exceeding 1/2 of 1% of the total votes cast for all candidates for the same position, he may, within 5 days after the official canvass, file with the officer with whom his declaration or petition for nomination was filed a petition stating that he believes a recount will change the result of the election. (2) The unsuccessful candidate shall post a bond with the clerk and recorder of the county in which he resides. The bond must be in an amount set by the clerk and recorder sufficient to cover all costs of the recount incurred by each county in which a recount is sought, including loss of time of regular employees caused by absence from their regular duties. (3) Upon the filing of a petition and posting of a bond under this section, the board of county canvassers in each county affected shall meet and recount the ballots specified in the petition.
The first one suggests you have to have a margin of less than a QUARTER of a percent, whereas the second one implies it is a half percent. I don't know which is which, but even with a half percent, Tester could still come out on top.
B. When there is between any candidate apparently nominated or elected and any candidate apparently defeated a difference of not more than one percent of the total vote cast for the two such candidates as determined by the State Board or the electoral board, the defeated candidate may appeal from the determination of the State Board or the electoral board for a recount of the vote as set forth in this article. In an election of electors for the President and Vice President of the United States, the presidential candidate shall represent the vice-presidential candidate and slate of electors and be the party to the recount for purposes of this article.
That seems to suggest that the 26,000 votes for the Independent in the race don't matter, as the percentage is defined as that between the winner and the challenger, not ALL votes cast. That's important, as it lowers the total number Webb needs to rule out a challenge from Allen.
Webb (D) 1,170,564 Allen (R) 1,162,717 Parker (I) 26,046
Parker doesn't matter, but when you crunch the numbers as they stand, Webb would need 23,332 votes to rule out a recount. He doesn't have them, and he likely isn't going to get them. But Allen has to wonder if it is worth the political hassle to recount the entire state to try and make up an almost eight THOUSAND vote deficit. Barring electronic error, which there has been no report of, that would be unprecedented on a monumental scale. I think Allen will heavily consider NOT asking for a recount, even if they end up losing Montana, simply because of the negative press, and the fact that it's probably hopeless, unless his margin of loss is dramatically reduced by the time every vote is counted.
And just for the heck of it:
House: Dems 233 +31 GOP 202 -30 -CNN/Lyrhawn
CT-02 (97%)(GOP Incumbent) Courtney (D) 117,434 Simmons (R) 117,211
Now THAT is a tight race. As is the NC-08 where incumbent Hayes won by 468 votes out of 120,000 cast.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well...we're still waiting to see who won VA...and a good number of us are cursing the marriage amendment that was passed. Anyone want to take bets on how long it exists?
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Five of the six states that had marriage amendments passed them.
It's an interesting situation that even though VA passed its marriage amendment, we'll probably elect a Democrat for senator. (Of course, it's not like Webb's a flaming liberal-- he's going to be the most Republican Democrat on the floor, by some accounts)
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I agree with the sentiment that has been expressed in this thread and that Scott just brushed on that it looks like some decent politicians may have been lost not because of their positions on the issues, but because they quite simply belonged to the wrong party. Sad.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Five of the six states that had marriage amendments passed them.
It's an interesting situation that even though VA passed its marriage amendment, we'll probably elect a Democrat for senator. (Of course, it's not like Webb's a flaming liberal-- he's going to be the most Republican Democrat on the floor, by some accounts)
Yeah, him or Casey. The moderates are the real winners in this election- not only has the far right been soundly kicked in the behind, but most of the Dem pickups have gone to conservative Democrats like Webb and Casey, who I can guarantee will be making their voice heard. Not great news for a solid lefty like myself, but hey, I'm all in favor of compromise in government.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hopefully this election will convince Republicans that they can't just cater to their base and expect to win elections.
More importantly, I hope it will convince Republicans that they should go back to being a reasonable party, built on solid values and fiscal responsibility. They have let their leaders transform them into a party that supports massive deficits, preemptive invasions, torture, civil rights incursions, religious fundamentalism - and into a party that thinks the ends of getting reelected justifies any means, including hiding things from the people they represent. They need to stop being the stereotype that Stephen Colbert personifies.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: (Of course, it's not like Webb's a flaming liberal-- he's going to be the most Republican Democrat on the floor, by some accounts)
Personally, I like having conservative democrats and liberal Republicans in Washington. If we flip-flopped the entire country, electing democrats in all the red states and republicans in all the blue states, we'd have the most moderate Congress ever.
As an aside, Lieberman's victory shows just how terrible the primary system is. I wonder what would happen if the primaries were open for everyone, not just voters registered with that party. I'd like to think we'd start seeing more moderate, compromise-minded candidates.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
what's interesting is that a socially conservative issue (marraige amendments) was passing in so many states at the same time that a fiscally liberal issue (raise min. wage) was passing in many states. I hope thats a trend.
Posts: 128 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is raising the minimum wage considered fiscally liberal? Hrm. I guess I'm going to have to start calling myself fiscally moderate instead of fiscally conservative. I don't care for the socially conservative trend much, myself, but it looks like that's the way things are swinging everywhere.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I can live with Arnold so long as he's playing bipartisan governer and not republican arnold.
I'm happy for you.
quote: angelides should have never won the primary, Westly could probably have made it a five point race, rather than the embarassing landslide support Arnold got...
Westly? Ew! I have really liked Angelides from the beginning. I just wish more Californians had agreed with me.
quote:But 87 is failing and most of the bond measures are passing.
87 is going down in flames, and it looks like 1A-1E all passed.
quote: unsurprising that 83 passed, but it just creeps me out to tag anyone for life, not a precedent I want to start.
Agreed. I'm not too happy about the predicted real estate consequences either.
quote:90 looks like it will pass as well.
Nope. Which makes me happy.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:what's interesting is that a socially conservative issue (marraige amendments) was passing in so many states at the same time that a fiscally liberal issue (raise min. wage) was passing in many states. I hope thats a trend.
I hope that's not a trend. I would much, much, much prefer fiscal conservatives and social liberals Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:what's interesting is that a socially conservative issue (marraige amendments) was passing in so many states at the same time that a fiscally liberal issue (raise min. wage) was passing in many states. I hope thats a trend.
quote:Originally posted by pH: Everyone can breathe just fine in the restaurants now. Eliminating smoking everywhere is stupid.
-pH
Actually, there have been plenty of times I've had to leave a restaurant because of someone smoking irritating my asthma. And I was sitting in the non-smoking section.
Nobody forced you to enter a restaurant that allowed smoking. You have now forced the proprietor of every restaurant in the state to bow to your demands.
Whatever happened to property rights?
I am not allowed to walk down the street? Smoking hurts EVERYONE, especially those exposed to it secondhand. I'd really rather not die a slow death by cancer just because I excercised my right to walk down the street.
Posts: 1591 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wait a second, Tinros. I absolutely support laws that ban smoking in indoor places open to the public (such as restaurants). But are you suggesting banning smoking outdoors? Because I would not support that -- despite the problems it sometimes causes me.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Isn't that a bit dramatic? Has anyone really died a slow death by cancer because they walked down the street past someone who was smoking? Or even 100 someones? Conceivably, you are walking by them, not standing there inhaling all of the smoke. And conceivably you can walk away.
Posts: 2880 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I'm glad the Dems took the House, I don't think I want them to take the Senate for the exact same reasons that I didn't like the Reps having both. A balance of power is good. Too much power and you don't have to be accountable to the half of the country that disagrees with you.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:After months of aggressive campaigning and with nearly 99 percent of ballots counted, politicians were the big winners in Tuesday's midterm election, taking all 435 seats in the House of Representatives, retaining a majority with 100 out of 100 seats in the Senate, and pushing political candidates to victory in each of the 36 gubernatorial races up for grabs.
quote:"Over the years, I grew disappointed with the job the politicians were doing, yet I kept on voting for them out of loyalty," Bunter said. "This time around, I swore I'd go with someone else, but frankly, looking at the ballot, I didn't see any other choice."
posted
I'm pleased that in a conservative state like AZ, The anti-gay marriage amendment failed.
And that's about all I have to be pleased about.
I'm not heartbroken the dems took the house, though. After years of gay bashing by republicans I'm sufficently pissed off at them to experience shadenfruede at their expense.
However, with all the authoritarianism that passed... that seems to pass every election... I've definately got that "There's no where left to run" feeling.
posted
He never said "mission accomplished," of course. He did give a speech on an aircraft carrier, on which the soldiers had the audacity to put up that banner and suggest they'd accomplished a mission. The speech said "Our mission continues" and "We have difficult work to do in Iraq." Full transcript is here: http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript/
It would be nice if we could have discussions without the same falsehoods being stated as fact again and again.
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's not forget second-secondhand smoke, which is the invisible toxins you breathe in if you're in a room with some who smokes, but isn't smoking at the moment. (Connie Willis, Bellwether.) It's why we can never tolerate smoking, even in private places, outside, with nobody else around. Think of the children! Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You jest, but I actually find being in a small room (or a car) with a heavy smoker physically distressing. And it's not breath. Heavy smokers ooze smoke/nicotine/something from their very pores.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Will B: He never said "mission accomplished," of course. He did give a speech on an aircraft carrier, on which the soldiers had the audacity to put up that banner and suggest they'd accomplished a mission. The speech said "Our mission continues" and "We have difficult work to do in Iraq." Full transcript is here: http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript/
It would be nice if we could have discussions without the same falsehoods being stated as fact again and again.
A banner that the White house had made. I think he has to own that one.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
The thing is, the banner stated the truth. The mission was accomplished. There were at the time, are now, and always will be more missions to accomplish.
There's lots of things to criticize Bush for. "Mission Accomplished" four years later isn't one of them. It wasn't even worthy of criticism then.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn, apparently in MT and VA the vote margins determine if the state will pay for recounts, if a recount in requested by the putative loser. But the trailing candidate can still pay for a recount, if the vote is within certain ranges.
quote:MT---- If the margin is within 0.25% — Tester's current lead is higher than this, at 0.43% — the losing candidate can request a state-paid recount. If the gap is above 0.25% and less than 0.50%, as with Burns's current gap, the Burns campaign could post a bond to pay the full cost of a recount, which would be refunded if they won and forfeited if they lost.
According to the Washington Post , the recount law in Virginia is similar, but the threshholds are different — a state-paid recount is provided for a margin of less than 0.5%, while a candidate can post a bond and request a recount if the margin is less than 1%.
quote:However, with all the authoritarianism that passed... that seems to pass every election... I've definately got that "There's no where left to run" feeling.
Cheers. I definately have that too. Only... huh, I see the dems as being far less authoritarian than the republicans. So I'm extremely happy about this election, cause I'm hoping the dems will turn things around a little.
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Yes, he has to own the banner.
The thing is, the banner stated the truth. The mission was accomplished. There were at the time, are now, and always will be more missions to accomplish.
There's lots of things to criticize Bush for. "Mission Accomplished" four years later isn't one of them. It wasn't even worthy of criticism then.
I don't disagree with you, though I think the celebratory nature of the event was misleading. I do object to "he never said that".
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: You jest, but I actually find being in a small room (or a car) with a heavy smoker physically distressing. And it's not breath. Heavy smokers ooze smoke/nicotine/something from their very pores.
Simply being in the car with my uncle on a trip to Gettysburg gave me an asthma attack. So I understand your perspective.
Posts: 752 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK. I knew "Mission Accomplished" was a cheap shot. Sorry.
Still the main point, that the President sold the Republican Victory of last night with the same energy and enthusiasm he has sold the American Victory in Iraq for the past 4 year.
I am waiting to see how he spins the Democratic wins the way he spun his narrow victory in 2000, and his victory in 2004 as great "referendums for the overwhelming popularity of Conservative America"
I can hear it now. "Last night American's did not storm upon the White House, drag us out by our heels, and lynch us from a tree. That clearly proves that the majority of Americans firmly wish us to continue, not-stay the course--but keep doing exactly what we have been doing. If you don't lynch, your approval's a synch."
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am waiting to see how he spins the Democratic wins the way he spun his narrow victory in 2000, and his victory in 2004 as great "referendums for the overwhelming popularity of Conservative America"
I can hear it now. "Last night American's did not storm upon the White House, drag us out by our heels, and lynch us from a tree. That clearly proves that the majority of Americans firmly wish us to continue, not-stay the course--but keep doing exactly what we have been doing. If you don't lynch, your approval's a synch."
It will not be as bad as your spin is on what you think he will say
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
It depends on what the referent of "that" is. If the referent is the phrase "Mission Accomplished," then yes, it's dishonest to say he never said that.
When the referent of "that" is what it has come to mean by many people who harp over and over and over again about the use of the phrase - that is, that Bush somehow said we were done in Iraq - then people need to object, loudly and strenuously.
quote:I can hear it now. "Last night American's did not storm upon the White House, drag us out by our heels, and lynch us from a tree. That clearly proves that the majority of Americans firmly wish us to continue, not-stay the course--but keep doing exactly what we have been doing. If you don't lynch, your approval's a synch."
You seem to find enough that he actually says to be offended without taking anticipatory offense to something he hasn't said yet.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know if this has been commented on, but Maryland uses computers now. I don't know if they are Diebold or not, but it did not seem to help the Republicans here.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My comment was in response to Will, who, I believe was correcting what he considered falsehoods with falsehoods of his own. One being that the "soldiers" were entirely responsible for the sign.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
CNN has called Montana for Tester, the Democratic candidate. If they're right, that just leaves Virginia.
Posts: 2149 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
