Virginia House of Delegates' Seat

First of all, the ballot that they determined was a vote for the Republican...ABSURD.  

In any case, we now have a tie.  In any sport, there are tie breakers and tie breakers of tie breakers.  Best record in the conference, best head-to-head record, yada, yada, yada....and these morons don't have some kind of tie breaker rule that makes more sense than tossing a coin or drawing a name out of a hat?

sharpy wrote:Did they decide regarding another recount?  Thought that was still on the table?

Going from last I heard, which was a few days ago...Democrat was challenging that last ballot that the 3-judge panel decided was a valid ballot with a clear designation in the election, so that the eenie, meenie, miney moe game is on hold for now.

Apparently they're drawing names tomorrow morning.  Anyone think that this will be on the up and up?

blondy28 wrote:Apparently they're drawing names tomorrow morning.  Anyone think that this will be on the up and up?

Drawing names?  You mean they're going to pick the winner out of a hat?  I thought the Dem candidate was challenging the ruling on the final ballot.  Did that challenge get denied?

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

blondy28 wrote:Apparently they're drawing names tomorrow morning.  Anyone think that this will be on the up and up?

Drawing names?  You mean they're going to pick the winner out of a hat?  I thought the Dem candidate was challenging the ruling on the final ballot.  Did that challenge get denied?

Yes.  Another three-judge panel denied request to invalidate that ballot.

Well....it pretty much ended the way you thought it would, Pam.  They picked the Repub's name out of a hat and he wins the race.  The Dem candidate ought to take the path that Repubs do with stuff like this.  Challenge it, challenge it, sue, challenge it, and then sue again.  She ought to look for a disallowed ballot that seems like it could have been a Dem vote and then sue.  Or keep fighting to have the last Repub vote overruled as not a vote.  The GOP playbook is that you keep on challenging and fighting until you win in the courts.  Either bring a gun to a gunfight, or get out of the fight altogether.

sharpy wrote:What a completely asinine way to decide an important vote. For crissake, they weren’t deciding on white vs chocolate milk for morning snack. And yes, if the dem was picked, I’d feel the same way, just be happier about the result.  

Exactly my thoughts.  I wondered if it would have made sense to open the polls for another day and say that anyone that didn't vote on voting day, but is registered, could come and still vote.  Then you count those votes and determine the winner.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:Well....it pretty much ended the way you thought it would, Pam.  They picked the Repub's name out of a hat and he wins the race.  The Dem candidate ought to take the path that Repubs do with stuff like this.  Challenge it, challenge it, sue, challenge it, and then sue again.  She ought to look for a disallowed ballot that seems like it could have been a Dem vote and then sue.  Or keep fighting to have the last Repub vote overruled as not a vote.  The GOP playbook is that you keep on challenging and fighting until you win in the courts.  Either bring a gun to a gunfight, or get out of the fight altogether.

Does anyone doubt that there was some kind of notch in the cylinder or some other way that they cheated?  Yes, challenge, challenge, and challenge again.  Of course, while it's in the courts, the Republicans hold a one-seat edge, so they will proceed with their agenda.

sharpy wrote:Does anyone doubt that there was some kind of notch in the cylinder or some other way that they cheated?  Yes, challenge, challenge, and challenge again.  Of course, while it's in the courts, the Republicans hold a one-seat edge, so they will proceed with their agenda.

Yes, they should challenge and the Dems should be crying "rigged" from every street corner. But they won't b/c they are "nice guys" - who in the proverbial words of Durocher, will finish last. In the big picture, this might be advantageous. If the Virginia state legislature goes the way of Kansas, and the Virginians suffer as the Kansasans are, then maybe in the national elections they will go blue ...we'll see

Haven't the Virginians already gone blue in the nat'l elections?

sharpy wrote:Haven't the Virginians already gone blue in the nat'l elections?

The last couple, yes, but historically it has always been a toss up state - frequently with GoP governors. Still a southern state and those are never in the bag ...if there is a 2020 election, they will be needed 

Honestly, in spite of Hillary winning the state in 2016, she didn't get 50% of the vote.  If not for Kaine being on the ballot...and Trump for that matter...it probably would have been a pretty close call.  Yeah...I wouldn't put them firmly in the "blue" category by any stretch.

blondy28 wrote:

sharpy wrote:Haven't the Virginians already gone blue in the nat'l elections?

The last couple, yes, but historically it has always been a toss up state - frequently with GoP governors. Still a southern state and those are never in the bag ...if there is a 2020 election, they will be needed 

Honestly, in spite of Hillary winning the state in 2016, she didn't get 50% of the vote.  If not for Kaine being on the ballot...and Trump for that matter...it probably would have been a pretty close call.  Yeah...I wouldn't put them firmly in the "blue" category by any stretch.

Ok, I get that, but I think it's a hell of a lot more in the blue category than Kansas, which Tim was discussing in comparison.  Lately, I think of it more as a blue state, but you're both right.  Let's just say that if Virginia goes red in an upcoming presidential election, the president will be a Repub.  I'm pretty much counting on it being a blue state if the Dem has a chance.