• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Judges count contested ballot for Republican. Virginia race now a tie.

E

emperus

Diamond Member
I for one think this is utter bullshit. Here is a diagram of the ballot. The actual ballot couldn't be photographed.

DRgyK0oW0AIsWca.jpg:large
 
emperus said:
How did the judges even decide what the intention of that voter was?
Click to expand...

My guess is that they tossed it out entirely, right? If the D was up 1, then tossing out that single ballot, if counted for D before, would bring it to a tie.

By the way, is this the certification for yesterday's recount? I'm not sure what is going on in this thread, lol.
 
zinfamous said:
My guess is that they tossed it out entirely, right? If the D was up 1, then tossing out that single ballot, if counted for D before, would bring it to a tie.
Click to expand...

From what I read, it's an additional GOP vote. This is BS! The rules from what I'm seeing say it needs to be thrown out.
 
emperus said:
I for one think this is utter bullshit. Here is a diagram of the ballot. The actual ballot couldn't be photographed.

DRgyK0oW0AIsWca.jpg:large
Click to expand...
Why couldn't they photograph the original. It shouldn't contain the voters name.

I smell a rat. BTW - I wonder if someone has the time to reverse this photo and read what's on the other side. Maybe a clue to a fix.
 
Soooooo....they drew lines through the R candidate for governor and that's the one they wanted but the line drawn through the candidate for VA Congress is not the one they wanted? The damn three judges need to be thrown off the bench for such a ruling.
 
HomerJS said:
Why couldn't they photograph the original. It shouldn't contain the voters name.

I smell a rat. BTW - I wonder if someone has the time to reverse this photo and read what's on the other side. Maybe a clue to a fix.
Click to expand...
I tried. I think it is the reporter's notes on a different meeting.
 
Clearly states "Vote for only one". That's not open to interpretation......Again, throw the judges off the bench for this.
5a3ad167a0f63.image.jpg
 
^ In my state, that would have been a spoiled ballot and the vote for House tossed out. If we go down the "voter intent" path that was taken in Bush/Gore, I would give that one to Yancey if I had to interpret the voter as having a preference. Give the choice to toss the ballot, I would have tossed it.

Edit: Thinking about it some more, I would have tossed it, period. The line on Simonds, at first blush, appears to be a strike but then looking at the mark for Gillespie, it could be argued that the voter initially used lines to mark the ballot and so voter intent is not adequately discernible to assign a choice.
 
Last edited:
This is how Democrats lose. Every Democrat should be talking about this as a case of a rigged election. I haven't even heard it on the news yet.
 
Should have been tossed or you call the voter and ask them. It's possible the line was to mark the one they wanted to keep. The person did vote almost republican straight ticket so probably he wanted the R but it's not clear. The right thing to do is to toss it or call the person and ask.
 
I could almost count that as a Republican vote except for the way the governor vote was indicated. That could either indicate the person was marking for candidates with X's first, or that they didn't want to vote for the Republican governor.
Sunburn74 said:
The person did vote almost republican straight ticket so probably he wanted the R but it's not clear.
Click to expand...
That's probably what swayed the judge.
 
Shouldn't they then go down all the Democrat spoled ballots and "correct" them based on how they voted for other candidates?
 
If the ballot was counted as no vote for Gillespie then it would be reasonable to count it as no vote for Symonds & a vote for Yancey. If Gillespie is given the vote then the portion for Symonds/ Yancey is clearly spoiled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top