Hughes beats Stacey
We've got some new ballot count numbers in the Metro president race, and it appears that Tom Hughes has widened his lead over Bob Stacey to the point at which Hughes can be declared the winner.
Here's our math. Hughes is up by 1,065 votes at this point. As best we can tell, Clackamas and Washington Counties are almost done counting; Multnomah has about 5,000 ballots left to count. Stacey will pick up votes in Multnomah County, but not enough to overcome a margin of 1,065. Hughes wins by about 750 votes, and it's on to the recount.
| Posted at 5:06 PM | Permalink |
|
Comments (9)
Wait! I found another box of ballots in Multco!
Posted by Allan L. | November 8, 2010 5:54 PM
It ain't over until Queen Christine sings.
Posted by Max | November 8, 2010 6:21 PM
1000 friends with 1000 extra ballots to the rescue?
Posted by Ben | November 8, 2010 8:08 PM
How come Hughes' MultCo ballots didn't make it to Dudley's bonfire?
Posted by Garage Wine | November 8, 2010 8:12 PM
Just think, Stacey has the oportunity to concede, but will cost us how much for a recount?
Posted by teresa | November 9, 2010 10:00 AM
Teresa:
A recount is automatic if the difference is less than 2/10's of 1 percent. The losing candidate cannot stop the recount.
I'm hoping Hughes wins by at least 850 votes. That will stop the automatic recount, and force Stacey to pay for one if he wants it.
Posted by Columbia County Kid | November 9, 2010 10:47 AM
I'm hoping Hughes wins by at least 850 votes.
I believe it's 0.2% of votes cast for the two candidates, which should come in under 400,000. Which means that even an 800-vote difference would preclude an automatic recount.
As I've posted before, however, Stacey has a bottomless pit of money at his disposal and can easily afford to pay for a recount if he wants us to sit through one.
Posted by Jack Bog | November 9, 2010 10:57 AM
I understand about the 2/10ths rule. Over 2/10ths and Stacey will pony up money for the recount. Under 2/10ths and "we the people" pony up the money. My question truly is how much will be spent for a recount?
Posted by teresa | November 9, 2010 11:13 AM
Teresa -- It's a legitimate academic question to ask how much it costs, but I'm not sure it matters. The statute has a .2% cut-off for a reason -- presumably because that is the margin of error in our ballot-counting systems, and with a margin smaller than that there is a realistic chance that a recount may change the results. If that's the case, it's in the public's best interest to fund a recount, becuase it's important for the candidate who received the most votes to win. Right? You wouldn't want Hughes to be Metro president if he didn't actually win the election, would you?
As an aside, the whole issue of election "concessions" always makes me laugh. The media treat it as though the race is therefore over. Of course, just because you condede prematurely does not mean that you wouldn't win if, in fact, you got more votes.
Posted by Miles | November 9, 2010 2:54 PM