November 17, 2009

Counting Every Ballot

Justin Katz

The one straw at which Democrats and progressives could grasp after the election was the 23rd Congressional district in New York. And grasp it, they did. "Tea Party Over?" asked a Village Voice blogger. Matt Jerzyk declared it a "HUGE" victory for the Democrats that third-party, last-minute candidate Doug Hoffman had only come within a few percentage points of winning. Even in our own comment section, Rhody called the loss a "slap" against the tea party movement corresponding to one against the president.

Which all makes this development rather interesting:

Conservative Doug Hoffman conceded the race in the 23rd Congressional District last week after receiving two pieces of grim news for his campaign: He was down 5,335 votes with 93 percent of the vote counted on election night, and he had barely won his stronghold in Oswego County.

As it turns out, neither was true. ...

Now a recanvassing in the 11-county district shows that Owens' lead has narrowed to 3,026 votes over Hoffman, 66,698 to 63,672, according to the latest unofficial results from the state Board of Elections.

In Oswego County, where Hoffman was reported to lead by only 500 votes with 93 percent of the vote counted election night, inspectors found Hoffman actually won by 1,748 votes — 12,748 to 11,000.

Sure Owens was quickly sworn in and helped to move the healthcare atrocity through the House, but if he turns out to have lost, he'll be removed. At any rate, even if Hoffman doesn't receive the two-thirds of the remaining votes that he'll need to actually win the race, it's ludicrous to describe his near victory as a rebuke to his supporters.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

Sounds to me like these people are not only nervous about 2010, but possibly 2012 too. Can you imagine if their world-saver, their "A New Hope" were to be a one-term president?

I've said before, you never want to be the man after the man. The one who comes in immediately after a mess usually gets blamed for the mess worsening, even if you had nothing to do with the worsening. However, if you make the mess worse yourself, it's not a pretty scene.

Three more years should be plenty of time for Obama to turn the economy around and get the country moving again. If not, he'll be easy pickin's for a Huckabee or Romney or whoever else wants to step up. (Sorry Sarah, I think you've become too much TMZ to have any chance)

Posted by: Patrick at November 17, 2009 10:03 AM

Doug Hoffman was a virtual unknown and a 3rd party candidate who was polling in the single digits a month or two before that election. His near victory, even before this new count, was a stunning victory for the grassroots movement. The pro-union RINO was exposed and forced out of the race by the grassroots and the guy declared the winner has already broken 4 major campaign promises and is DOA come the next election. Matilda needs to stay with her new gig, selling email lists for profit (a very capitalist endeavor by the way) and leave the political commentary to those who actually know what they're talking about.

Posted by: Tim at November 17, 2009 6:48 PM

Where were all the calls to "count every vote" from conservatives in 2000? I only bring it up to prove that, when it comes to the advancement of of an ideological agenda or candidate, you all either come down with historical amnesia or take the obligatory high ground assumed by a party both out of touch and out of power.

Posted by: Another_Fenian at November 17, 2009 11:59 PM

Let's do the recount, then. I'm not calling for a Brooks Brothers riot against one.

Posted by: rhody at November 18, 2009 9:38 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Important note: The text "http:" cannot appear anywhere in your comment.