Not that I condone such things, of course:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/05/poli...rcade-flipped-off-local-office-win/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/05/poli...rcade-flipped-off-local-office-win/index.html
<snip>
Beshear = 709,846
Bevin = 704,760
John Hicks = 28,422
Total = 1,443,048
Difference = 5086
Percentage = 0.35%
US Election:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-States-Presidential-Election-Results-1788863
Clinton = 65,844,610
Trump = 62,979,636
Total = 128,824,246
Difference = 2,864,974
Percentage = 2.22%
So, Clinton loses presidential bid by nearly 3 million votes (granted we used the electoral college there, but that's another battle to fight) and the push then was to recount in several states because of a percentage difference of 2.22%. Are we really going to cry foul when Bevin wants a recount when the difference is 0.35%? Hell, if the numbers were switched, I'd ask for a recount if I was Beshear. If Bevin wants to fight to retain the seat, I'd say let him. The numbers aren't going to change that much and the Repubs end up looking even worse for it after all is said and done, which helps Dems in the long run. (Assuming of course the decision doesn't move to the state legislature...) Just my 2¢
Interesting aside...
I also just hafta say that in looking at that map and how red it is versus where the blue vote is: not sure I'd wanna be blue in that state! Of course there are also theories as to media bias and why the colors are drawn the way they are (Red for Republicans and Blue for Democrats) for psychological effect too, but that's also another story. Repubs claim it's psychological warfare, but the media says it's just an alliterative decision (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-republicans-were-blue-and-democrats-were-red-104176297/).
Not that I condone such things, of course:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/05/poli...rcade-flipped-off-local-office-win/index.html
So, Clinton loses presidential bid by nearly 3 million votes (granted we used the electoral college there, but that's another battle to fight) and the push then was to recount in several states because of a percentage difference of 2.22%. Are we really going to cry foul when Bevin wants a recount when the difference is 0.35%? Hell, if the numbers were switched, I'd ask for a recount if I was Beshear. If Bevin wants to fight to retain the seat, I'd say let him. The numbers aren't going to change that much and the Repubs end up looking even worse for it after all is said and done, which helps Dems in the long run. (Assuming of course the decision doesn't move to the state legislature...) Just my 2¢
There's more specifics about this recanvass on the link.What is a recanvass?
A recanvass is essentially a review of the vote totals in each county. County clerks will review the absentee votes and check the printouts to make sure the numbers were correct when they were transmitted to the State Board of Elections.
State law allows for recanvassing only if a county clerk or a county board of elections notices a discrepancy or if a candidate makes a written request to the secretary of state.
If that allows the GOP governor to make any claim he can get away with and have a GOP legislature overturn the election results, Kentucky needs to change its laws.Another step that a candidate could take is a formal election contest with the state legislature, which must be filed within 30 days of the last action by the state board of elections. The state board is scheduled to certify the results of the race for governor on Nov. 25.
Under this contest, the candidate challenging the results must specify the grounds for the action, such as a violation of campaign finance rules or specific problems when it comes to how ballots were cast.
Such an election contest is covered under Section 90 of the state constitution, which addresses a "contest of election for Governor or Lieutenant Governor."
Section 90 states: "Contested elections for Governor and Lieutenant Governor shall be determined by both Houses of the General Assembly, according to such regulations as may be established by law."
I'm a bit vague on this, because the intervening three years have been packed with shenanigans and I can't keep up, but weren't the recounts requested by Jill Stein and others, not the Democratic Party? Clinton conceded on the night.
+ the difference of 2.2% was in Clinton's favour.
+ the margins in the disputed state were all less than 1%
The electorate has a sound grasp of the principal of the guy who comes in first.
Well, IMHO I think there may be those who refuse to see, but that doesn't mean they don't get it.I...am not sure I agree with this.
talktidy said:The electorate has a sound grasp of the principal of the guy who comes in first.
Also, ahem: principle.I...am not sure I agree with this.
Oh, bollocks. Yep.Also, ahem: principle.
(I shall now go back to marking exams and weeping in despair.)
GOP state Rep. Jason Nemes agreed the recanvass is appropriate but said an election contest isn’t appropriate without proof of enough fraud to reverse the outcome.
“You have to show, in order to overturn an election, that you have the goods,” he said Thursday on WHAS-AM. “And it doesn’t look like we have them.”
“If the Republicans in the (state) General Assembly tried to undo an election, that’s kind of what we’ve been criticizing the Democrats in Washington of trying to do with this baseless impeachment inquiry,” Comer said.