Althouse: "Republican wins contested Virginia race after name drawn from bowl."

January 4, 2018

"Republican wins contested Virginia race after name drawn from bowl."

Ooh.

49 comments:

tim in vermont said...: Meanwhile, Hillary just rolls her eyes and mutters “amateurs.”; 1/4/18, 10:39 AM
Humperdink said...: How in the world did the Russians hack a fish bowl? We shall find out. The WaPoo and NYT will all over this.; 1/4/18, 10:40 AM
Michael K said...: Anybody seen Inga ? Is she OK ?; 1/4/18, 10:42 AM
Big Mike said...: Despite being a Republican living in Virginia, I still think they should have run a special election to break the tie and not resorted to drawing slips of paper.; 1/4/18, 10:42 AM
Carter Wood said...: Virginia election law calls for a random selection to resolve ties, so any alternative -- a special election -- would require the Legislature to change the law.

Given the vast number of elective positions in the United States, these sorts of ties are not unusual. From North Carolina, 2017, COLORED PENS, COIN TOSSES USED TO SETTLE NORTH CAROLINA TIED ELECTION:

A study conducted by Democracy North Carolina of the November 2015 elections identified 69 cities where the mayor or a town council member won election by five or fewer votes. In 31 cities, elections were determined by one vote. Coin tosses broke ties for town council rates in Sparta, West Jefferson, Clarkton and Godwin, while the winner's name was drawn from a box in Dover.

The candidates who tied in Garland put colored pens in box, and the elections board chair picked the winner — in this case, the purple pen.

That's legal in North Carolina. State law says when a vote ends in a tie, county election boards "shall determine the winner by lot."; 1/4/18, 10:51 AM
rehajm said...: Momentum has shifted! #GOPWaveElection2018; 1/4/18, 10:53 AM
MaxedOutMama said...: That somehow does not seem the right way to handle it.; 1/4/18, 10:54 AM
Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...: The People have spoken!; 1/4/18, 10:57 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: Carter Wood said...

Given the vast number of elective positions in the United States, these sorts of ties are not unusual.

True, but it is unusual that the breaking of the tie decides control of a state legislature.; 1/4/18, 11:00 AM
Hagar said...: Why not? A tie vote indicates an even split in the electorate so that the election itself gave a happenstance result, i.e., someone had a flat tire and did not make it to the polls or someone not intending to vote met a friend and went with him to vote, etc., etc.; 1/4/18, 11:01 AM
tcrosse said...: I remember some deadlocked Democratic caucuses being settled by a toss of the coin. That the vast majority of these came up for Hillary suggests they used the special Clinton Quarter, with two faces.; 1/4/18, 11:04 AM
robother said...: So much for the Blue Wave. "May the odds always be in your favor."; 1/4/18, 11:09 AM
Rick said...: The article is a terrible summary of events. Why was the contest "ruled a tie"?

The next day, the three-judge recount court decided that a ballot declared ineligible during the recount should be tallied for Yancey, tying the race at 11,608 votes apiece. The voter, whose identity is unknown, filled in bubbles on the paper ballot for Simonds and Yancey but also made a slanted mark across the Simonds bubble. That voter voted Republican in every other office, but also made slash marks across a filled-in bubble for Republican Ed Gillespie in the gubernatorial race.

The court ruled the extra mark was an effort to strike out the vote for Simonds. Republicans agreed. But Democrats, contending the voter’s intent was unclear, said the ballot should have been thrown out.

So to sum up Democrats violated their oft promoted standard that all votes should be counted trying to win the election through disenfranchising someone.

Shocking.; 1/4/18, 11:17 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: Nope, still not tired.; 1/4/18, 11:21 AM
D.D. Driver said...: "Despite being a Republican living in Virginia, I still think they should have run a special election to break the tie and not resorted to drawing slips of paper."

How about a dance-off or a half court shooting contest? Something skills based rather than just random. Flip cup?; 1/4/18, 11:21 AM
The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...: Democrats weren't able to fix the outcome of drawing names from a bowl? Wow, they really are demoralized.; 1/4/18, 11:28 AM
Original Mike said...: "The court ruled the extra mark was an effort to strike out the vote for Simonds...."

I hate the courts guessing what a voter intended. If it's not clear, the ballot should be thrown out.; 1/4/18, 11:32 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Uh... that's... well.

It had to happen one way.; 1/4/18, 11:34 AM
Drago said...: Humperdink: "How in the world did the Russians hack a fish bowl? We shall find out. The WaPoo and NYT will all over this"

God help us if there happened to be a white truck parked in front of the polling location...; 1/4/18, 11:42 AM
Birkel said...: The rules were ex ante fair.
The rules were followed.; 1/4/18, 11:43 AM
Matt Sablan said...: I don't like us saying that the last ballot was the deciding one.

Why not let us look at all of the ballots? Were any iffy/fishy ones allowed/disallowed before the final one?; 1/4/18, 11:43 AM
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...: That's a bit surprising for Virginia. I have seen cards cut to break a tied election in Arizona as specified in the town charter.

But you expect that sort of thing in Arizona.; 1/4/18, 11:49 AM
Rob said...: Count every bowl!; 1/4/18, 11:50 AM
n.n said...: Democrats violated their oft promoted standard that all votes should be counted

Obama/Clinton/DNC/Press Water Closet was about Democrats using government resources to spy on Republicans, deny the vote, and collude with foreign assets in a cover-up. Heads, Democrats win. Tails, !Democrats lose.; 1/4/18, 11:54 AM
exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...: I would have had them settle it with a duel at 20 paces.; 1/4/18, 11:59 AM
Francisco D said...: Had the Democrat won the tie breaker, Inga would be citing that as evidence for the upcoming tsunami in 2018.; 1/4/18, 12:01 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: Landslide! Wave election! Or something like that........; 1/4/18, 12:02 PM
stever said...: In anticipation of a future for the United States of fully Democrat majorities via the California/DACA model, the old adage - if its close they can't cheat - there is still horrible results to endure.; 1/4/18, 12:05 PM
FullMoon said...: The Lonesome Day of Unknown Inga

Bury the rag deep in your face
For now's the time for your tears; 1/4/18, 12:27 PM
RMc said...: That bowl was racist.; 1/4/18, 12:30 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: Lawsuit under the Voting Rights Act! The Bowl must be pre-cleared by the DOJ.; 1/4/18, 12:34 PM
Humperdink said...: This is hilarious: "This is a sad conclusion for me," she (Democratic Shelley Simonds) said.

However, she did not rule out asking for a recount, saying that her options were still on the table. "

A recount? A RECOUNT?? From a fishbowl? (Just kidding, I know she means the original vote tally.)

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/politics/Random-Drawing-Determines-Virginia-Race-468005673.html; 1/4/18, 12:47 PM
Etienne said...: I think this is a new concept for the future!

Each person wanting to hold federal office will deposit 16 Million (+/- cost of living increases) into the state treasury, and they will get a ball with a number on it.

Then the balls will be put in a wire cage on election day, the cage spun a minimum of 10 times, and a ball removed.

Whoever has that number is elected. He/she can accept, or the ball is set aside, and the cage spun again the minimum times.

Anyone not accepting the election, can not have their deposit back.

After the election, the legislature will determine how the deposits will be spent.; 1/4/18, 1:10 PM
Humperdink said...: Recently unemployed Sen. Alfrankin (name tribute to AllenS) was last seen headed to Virginia to assist in any recount effort, should it materialize.

Speaking of materializing, prior to Alfranken's departure, his staff was spotted loading his automobile with what appeared to be VA absentee ballots.; 1/4/18, 1:16 PM
richlb said...: Remember, your vote counts, Millennials.; 1/4/18, 1:16 PM
Jersey Fled said...: Seems like the Democrats miscalculated the number of ballots they had to find in somebody's trunk on this one.; 1/4/18, 1:35 PM
gadfly said...: 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' name.

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 Republican appointed judges 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.

Mind-reading is not a well developed skill, so it seems that the politicians far overstepped their bounds. Since the ballot was badly marked, the voter could have requested a new ballot but did not, so both the Yancey mark and the Simonds mark have to be disallowed.

Simonds is the winner.; 1/4/18, 1:54 PM
Francisco D said...: "Simonds is the winner."

Now that you have determined the winner Gadfly, how do you intend to seat her?

If the parties were reversed who would your winner be?; 1/4/18, 2:11 PM
Fabi said...: Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy!; 1/4/18, 2:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Original Mike said...
"The court ruled the extra mark was an effort to strike out the vote for Simonds...."

I hate the courts guessing what a voter intended. If it's not clear, the ballot should be thrown out.

gadfly said...
Mind-reading is not a well developed skill, so it seems that the politicians far overstepped their bounds. Since the ballot was badly marked, the voter could have requested a new ballot but did not, so both the Yancey mark and the Simonds mark have to be disallowed.

I think we should have a simple rule: If you're too stupid to read the directions and mark your ballot correctly enough that the machine reads it, you're too stupid to be voting, and your vote doesn't count.

But

I remember "hanging chads". I remember "every vote must count." Rules go both ways. So if the Democrats lose 1,000 elections that they should have won, because of that BS, then Justice is done.

Yancey wins, the Republicans keep control of the VA House, they get to assign the Speaker, Committee Chairs, etc. Even if courts give it to Simonds later, once the organization vote goes in on the 10th, it's locked for the next two years.

I'm LMAO; 1/4/18, 4:03 PM
n.n said...: Russia! Russia! Russia!

It was former agents of the Soviet Union who failed to transition, in collusion with the Obama/Clinton/DNC/foreign assets axis to deny the vote, abort democracy under a veil of privacy, then project fast and furious in a cover-up.; 1/4/18, 4:08 PM
Yancey Ward said...: The problem is likely that this wasn't the only ballot that got included in the count that was unclear, nor was it the only ballot that got excluded at some point. On technical grounds, I would have tossed the ballot myself if I were judging the intent of the voter. However, like I wrote, I can just be 100% certain that the standards used on this one ballot were not followed on all 23,000 votes. A court tossing this result based on this ballot will then have to examine every ballot- again, which will then lead to another round of challenges.; 1/4/18, 4:32 PM
Richard said...: Ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Awwww ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!; 1/4/18, 4:39 PM
Humperdink said...: gadfly said: "Simonds is the winner."

Dewey defeats Truman!!!; 1/4/18, 5:15 PM
Daniel Jackson said...: So, for all our modernity, we have returned to a time when the fate of hundreds of thousands and empires are controlled by the roll of dice: PURIM and the MAHABHARATA.

How pathetic; 1/4/18, 5:58 PM
Drago said...: Poor Man's LLR Chuck: "Since the ballot was badly marked, the voter could have requested a new ballot but did not, so both the Yancey mark and the Simonds mark have to be disallowed.

Simonds is the winner."

LOL; 1/4/18, 6:57 PM
Drago said...: Jersey Fled: "Seems like the Democrats miscalculated the number of ballots they had to find in somebody's trunk on this one"

Gadfly, the Poor Man's LLR Chuck, will forever be haunted by the lost opportunity....; 1/4/18, 6:58 PM
CWJ said...: Kharma for the what was it seven die rolls that came up in Hillary's favor during the Iowa caucuses.; 1/4/18, 10:01 PM
Gospace said...: There was well more than one ballot where voter intent was was divined. The one ballot being discussed is simply the last and therefore deciding one. If others had been divined differently, the election would have been decided by a few votes in either direction.

Democrats failed in their usual ballot stuffing here They almost pulled it off since, as usual, the Republican led the initial vote tally. Democrats always pick up votes in recounts from previously uncounted ballots- in Democrat precincts.; 1/5/18, 1:25 PM