I wouldn't count on Wake County school board member Kevin Hill being able to avoid a runoff.
New figures today from the Wake County Board of Elections show there are 50 provisional ballots and 48 late-arriving absentee ballots still outstanding in the District 3 race. Hill would have to win all 98 ballots and receive some mail-in ballots from military voters by Friday to have a majority to avoid a runoff against Heather Losurdo.
Also today, school board candidate Jennifer Mansfield said she hasn't decided yet whether she'll endorse Losurdo in the runoff. No word yet from Eric Squires.
CORRECTION/CLARIFICATION
Revised wording to show that there are 50 provisional votes and that he'd need additonal batlots from military voters.
Comments
Curiosity
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 17:53 — Dove314Just out of curiosity, I went back to see more about how the Tedesco - Truitt election process was handled and comments posted from that period in 2009. Had forgotten how she was in a situation very similar to that of Losourdo. Costs for that run off were estimated at around $30,000 if I read the posts correctly even with her withdrawal. In an interesting flip-flop, found this quote from Woodstock:
Wed, 10/07/2009 - 15:45 — woodstock
Predictable. She'll force more time, effort, and money to be spent...for an outcome that is also predictable. Tedesco is going to win in the November run-off and silence Truitt once and or all.
In: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/truitt-requests-runoff-election
Nice try, but he situations
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 18:22 — woodstockNice try, but he situations were not similar at all. Truit had less than half the votes that Tedesco had in the initial election (Tedesco only needed 43 votes to win outright over multiple opponents). Truitt forced the run-off, then actually dropped out of the run-off -- then got back in -- and Tedesco won with well over 70% of the vote.
Don't you love the truth? I do.
(FYI It is kinda creepy having folks like you research my every word)
Just because you say it's not the same
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 19:30 — gregishereIt is the same regardless of your denial abilities, though those are some impressive denial skills.
I suppose I should have
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 19:48 — woodstockI suppose I should have qualified my comments and clarified that I was presenting the information to rational people. You caught the fact that Truitt has less than 1/2 the votes that Tedesco had, right?
http://www.newsobserver.com/2009/10/19/148357/truitt-bows-out-of-wake-school.html
Nice Try
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 20:20 — chaboardBut votes don't come in percentages they come in discrete quantities of 1. Truitt needed to turn around a deficit of 1687 votes while Losurdo needs to turn around a deficit of 1598 votes. If one was a waste of time & money, so is the other. At least to rational people.
It is all about ratio.
Thu, 10/13/2011 - 07:52 — woodstockIt is all about ratio.
NO
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 23:57 — jeffrey1You continually want to look at vote counts. That is not mathematically correct. You make a plea for rational people. You do realize that the root of the word rational is ratio, which is mathematics for percentage, right?
By your logic, the recount in the 2000 presidential elections was unnecessary because Gore was behind by about 2000 votes, more than both Truitt and Losurdo.
I know you are a political strategist, but you really should leave the math up to... well... mathematicians.
I believe Chaboard IS a
Thu, 10/13/2011 - 06:45 — virginiadareI believe Chaboard IS a mathematician, or rather a computer scientist with a background in math, and not a political strategist. Based on your responses to his election numbers and analysis yesterday, it appears you are confusing him with Perry Woods, who goes by Whaler Cane on this blog.
Whoops you're right. But I
Thu, 10/13/2011 - 06:59 — jeffrey1Whoops you're right. But I have advanced degrees in computer science and professionally tutor high school and college students in all areas of math, so my message remains accurate.
[Deleted]
Thu, 10/13/2011 - 07:43 — chaboard[deleted]
100k is a lot of money locally
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 17:38 — Jackson_TybeeIt is, for example, two teacher's salaries for the year. If the absentee ballots bring Hill even closer, I seriously think Losurdo needs to consider conceding. It would probably help her reputation for the future a lot more than going through with the run-off. She could make a big deal out of not wanting to cost taxpayers so much money, especially in these tough times, and she and the GOP would come off smelling like roses (instead of a skunk?).
So, is your plan to just
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 18:26 — woodstockSo, is your plan to just keep repeating yourself? We get it, you do not want to carry out the democratic process.
So...
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:57 — Bob_SconceIf the situation were reversed, is there any doubt that Kevin Hill would also demand a run-off? Good grief -- can you imagine the outcry from the democrats if he declined to do so?
No word yet from Mansfield?
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:51 — woodstockNo word yet from Mansfield? Hmm, the WSCA crowd still can't decide if they want to see things through.
There was a successful process and a partnership that worked in 2009, I don't see why that was abandoned. After last night I would think everyone would be asking that question.
Successful partnership and teamwork?
Fri, 10/14/2011 - 00:24 — SDR256Successful partnership and teamwork, REALLY? Really woodie? Don't see why that was abandoned? Well, well, well. Add that up to the long list of shortsighteness by highly politically focused leaders who just wanted power and would do what they could to dissemble any upstart citizens who had the gall to think they had any voice. Add in the spiteful spew from right wing 'examples' such as yourself. Look in the mirror for a shadow of the answer. Burned bridges stupidly wasted, duncecap.
I think it's fascinating how fascinated you are with us.
By the way, I had a friend call me on Tuesday morning. She was from my neighborhood, had been very active in various groups and then wsca. She said it took her awhile to realize she wasn't in a district where she could 'vote for Ron.' She said she'd always been asked before to volunteer but she has 4 kids and didn't realize till it was too late. She said "I would have been out at the polls for Ron. That's one thing WSCA did was bring even non-voting district voters who cared about the issues out across the county."
Keung....Can You Ask BOE
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:20 — chaboardhow many polling places that would otherwise be closed would have to open just for the runoff? Or what the estimated total cost of a runoff would be to the taxpayers?
I just got back the
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 22:11 — KeungHui (author)I just got back the estimate. Check back on the blog in the morning for the answer.
I asked earlier today but
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:30 — KeungHui (author)I asked earlier today but haven't gotten the numbers yet. None of the 21 precincts would normally be open Nov. 8.
Estimated Cost Is
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:28 — JanisTango100K. This is democracy. I personally didn't like the money spent to do the recount in Florida years ago (much more than 100K), but I understood why it had occur!
Holding A Runoff Is Optional
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:36 — chaboardShe has the absiolute right to request - even demand - it.....but if she does she will be spending taxpayer money on a very personal quixotic quest just because she can. And we have the right to point out what that says about her judgement and what her vanity will coist the taxpayers.
And equating the costs associated with *counting* votes in a razor tight general election to determine who actually won the darn thing with the costs of holding a second, essentially vanity, election in a race where one candidate won a resounding landslide plurality and was a mere 47 votes away from an outright majority is, well........silly.
We Can Agree to Disagree....
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:43 — JanisTangoI believe she owes it to all the people that invested their time into her campaign. I know it's optional, but I don't know anyone that would turn down the opportunity for a second vote.
It is not really what I'd
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 18:31 — woodstockIt is not really what I'd call "optional." It is really of matter of asking if she will concede before the elective process is completed. I think we know the answer to that.
Think it's silly all you
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 16:39 — woodstockThink it's silly all you want. It is going to happen.
Oh I Never Doubted That For A Second
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 19:36 — chaboardShe's a Republican.....wasting public money for personal benefit is in her DNA.
yeah, yeah, whatev... there
Wed, 10/12/2011 - 20:00 — woodstockyeah, yeah, whatev... there is going to be a run-off.