U.S. Senate Elections Thread (and House too, if you want)

[RTFirefly]

@Squink

Stevens’ lead now under 1,000 as Alaska begins ballot tally

Woohoo!

And it looks like that’s after counting only ~32,000 of the ballots that were outstanding as of this morning.

Sarah Palin’s chances of running in a special election may be going down the proverbial tubes.

[amarinth]

@Captain_Carrot

How the hell is it taking them this long to count the votes?! It’s been a week, and they’ve barely done anything! I’d think that they’d be done in Alaska, at least, seeing as how they have so many fewer ballots to look at.

It looks like Alaska’s absentees merely need to be postmarked by election day and don’t need to arrive until Friday.

While they could be farther along, they can’t possibly be finished yet and it doesn’t seem entirely unreasonable to wait until Friday before starting.

[Captain_Carrot]

As of 8:12 Eastern Time, Begich up by 3. Given that these districts weren’t even supposed to lean towards him, I think Stevens is in some serious trouble.

[RTFirefly]

Oh, my! Begich is now **three **votes ahead, 125,019-125,016, after ~47,000 ballots counted!

[Squink]

Now it’s an 814 vote lead:

Begich 132196
Stevens 131382

http://www.elect.alaska.net/data/results.htm

[RTFirefly]

Wow.

[Marley23]

Looks like there are still about 63,000 ballots left up there, but Nate Silver keeps saying they’re from Begich-leaning areas and that this shift makes him a big favorite. That would give the Democrats 58 seats, with the Minnesota recount looming and Georgia preparing for a runoff.

[RTFirefly]

They’ve counted over 58,000 ballots since yesterday (when I refreshed the page here at work, the count in the Presidential race went from 224,xxx to 282,996) so there’s probably in the neighborhood of 32,000 ballots still to be counted, most of which would be the questioned ballots.

I’m glad to see the turnout numbers starting to look like they’ll end up in the same ballpark as 2004. Guess I can stop worrying about that!

Like Minnesota, Alaska has a law providing for an automatic recount if the margin of victory is <0.5%. If the total vote comes in at 320,000, the margin would have to be under 1600 to trigger the recount. Begich might well win by more than that.

I’ve got no idea whether a candidate can pay for a recount if the margin’s over 0.5%. Presumably Sen. Tubes’ backers would spring for that if he loses by a couple thousand, if it’s an option.

[RTFirefly]

Meanwhile, the Star-Tribune’s saying the Minnesota recount could take until December 5. And after that, they’d rule, one by one, on any challenged ballots.

Sounds like the Georgia Senate race may be settled before Minnesota!

[RTFirefly]

What’s happening in the Anchorage Daily News? I’ll tell you what’s happening in the Anchorage Daily News:

The Daily News analysis shows that 59 percent of the absentee ballots to be counted came from election districts that voted for Begich on Election Day, and just over half of the questioned ballots came from Begich districts.

Large numbers of ballots remain to be counted from Begich majority districts including Sitka, the university district of Fairbanks, rural Southeast Alaska and Cordova. The state also has many votes left to count from Stevens strongholds like North Pole, Sterling/Nikiski, and Palmer. There are not as many of them, but an overwhelming Stevens showing in those areas could make a big difference.

Today the state expects to count all absentee and questioned ballots left from the Matanuska-Susitna Borough and northern and western Alaska. Elections officials will also count most, if not all, Fairbanks ballots today. Tuesday is the ballot count for Anchorage and Southeast, where the majority of outstanding votes lie.

Stevens is strong in Mat-Su (which includes Wasilla, fwiw), Begich is strong in northern and western Alaska, and Begich has an edge so far in Fairbanks, but is hardly dominant there. AFAICT, that nets out to whoever has the better numbers today really is the one that’s doing better today.

Looking ahead to Tuesday’s count, Begich and Stevens each have strongholds in the Anchorage area (Begich on the north side, Stevens on the south), and southeast Alaska is Begich territory, except for Ketchikan. Useful PDF map here, with last week’s vote counts.

PDF table showing vote totals by district, broken down into last week’s count and Wednesday’s count, and color-coded red and blue according to who’s ahead in each district.

[Tom_Scud]

So as far as I can tell, Alaska is not yet in a recount - it’s just counting all the absentee, contested, etc. ballots, right? According to this page:

http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title15/Chapter20/Section430.htm

Stevens can basically request a recount for any reason he wants to the “director” (whoever that is, presumably the Alaska elections commissioner or something like that) once all the ballots have been counted. Frankly, if the total is still within a thousand or two, I think it would make sense to go ahead and do a full recount.

However, there doesn’t appear to be an automatic recount provision in the Alaska election statutes:

http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title15/Chapter20.htm

Anyone with more experience looking at documents like that feel like going through and explaining what happens next?

[RTFirefly]

Try this one:

AS 15.20.450. Requirement of Deposit.

The application must include a deposit in cash, by certified check, or by bond with a surety approved by the director. The amount of the deposit is $300 for each precinct, $750 for each house district, and $10,000 for the entire state. If the recount includes an office for which candidates received a tie vote, or the difference between the number of votes cast was 20 or less or was less than .5 percent of the total number of votes cast for the two candidates for the contested office, or a question or proposition for which there was a tie vote on the issue, or the difference between the number of votes cast in favor of or opposed to the issue was 20 or less or was less than.5 percent of the total votes cast in favor of or opposed to the issue, the application need not include a deposit, and the state shall bear the cost of the recount. If, on the recount, a candidate other than the candidate who received the original election certificate is declared elected, or if the vote on recount is determined to be four percent or more in excess of the vote reported by the state review for the candidate applying for the recount or in favor of or opposed to the question or proposition as stated in the application, the entire deposit shall be refunded. If the entire deposit is not refunded, the director shall refund any money remaining after the cost of the recount has been paid from the deposit.

IANAL, but here’s how I read this: the state picks up the recount tab upfront if the margin of victory in the initial vote (which, as you’ve gathered, Tom, is where we are right now) is less than 0.5%.

If it’s bigger than 0.5%, then a recount would cost the losing candidate $10,000 (cheap - bet Stevens is good for that). But he’d get his money back if the recount changed the outcome.

So we should expect a recount, once the initial tally is finalized.

[Tom_Scud]

@RTFirefly

Try this one:
IANAL, but here’s how I read this: the state picks up the recount tab upfront if the margin of victory in the initial vote (which, as you’ve gathered, Tom, is where we are right now) is less than 0.5%.

If it’s bigger than 0.5%, then a recount would cost the losing candidate $10,000 (cheap - bet Stevens is good for that). But he’d get his money back if the recount changed the outcome.

So we should expect a recount, once the initial tally is finalized.

So the magic number for a cost-free recount is somewhere in the neighborhood of a 1600-1700 vote margin (based on a total of 320,000-340,000 total votes)

[zut]

Apparently there’s no automatic recount. However:

A defeated candidate or 10 qualified voters who believe there has been a mistake made by an election official or by the counting board in counting the votes in an election, may file an application within five days after the completion of the state review to the director for a recount of the votes from any particular precinct or any house district and for any particular office, proposition, or question.

And:

The application must include a deposit in cash, by certified check, or by bond with a surety approved by the director. The amount of the deposit is $300 for each precinct, $750 for each house district, and $10,000 for the entire state. If the recount includes an office for which candidates received a tie vote, or the difference between the number of votes cast was 20 or less or was less than .5 percent of the total number of votes cast for the two candidates for the contested office, […] the application need not include a deposit, and the state shall bear the cost of the recount.

So there’s no reason for a candidate not to contest the election and ask for a recount if the difference is below 0.5%.

[RTFirefly]

@zut

Apparently there’s no automatic recount. However:

And:
So there’s no reason for a candidate not to contest the election and ask for a recount if the difference is below 0.5%.

And given what a pittance $10,000 is, compared to the cost of a Senate campaign, there’s precious little reason for the losing candidate not to ask for a recount if the margin is above 0.5%.

So I expect we’ll see a recount, no matter what the complete initial tally turns out to be.

[Captain_Lance_Murdoch]

@RTFirefly

Meanwhile, the Star-Tribune’s saying the Minnesota recount could take until December 5. And after that, they’d rule, one by one, on any challenged ballots.

Sounds like the Georgia Senate race may be settled before Minnesota!

But, when the recount is over there will be court challenges. No question about it.

[RTFirefly]

@Captain_Lance_Murdoch

But, when the recount is over there will be court challenges. No question about it.

But…but Norm Coleman said that if he were the one trailing, he’d drop out!

You can’t possibly think he’d tell us a fib, do you?

[Tom_Scud]

@RTFirefly

And given what a pittance $10,000 is, compared to the cost of a Senate campaign, there’s precious little reason for the losing candidate not to ask for a recount if the margin is above 0.5%.

So I expect we’ll see a recount, no matter what the complete initial tally turns out to be.

Of course, in Stevens’ case, it’s a little bit different.

Dropping $10,000 on a 1-in-whatever chance to go to the Senate: definitely worth it.

Dropping $10,000 on a 1-in-whatever chance to go to the Senate only to immediately be kicked out on your ass so that someone else can take your seat: hmm…

Though the Alaska Republicans would almost certainly front him the money.

[Bearflag70]

Tom McClintock (R) has a razor thin lead over Charlie Brown (D) in California’s CD4, which is normally solid GOP territory. Still counting. CD4 is an open seat and was held by Doolittle who stepped down after the Abramoff flap.

Brown, McClintock Race To Close To Call

GO CHARLIE BROWN!

[Squink]

@Tom_Scud

Dropping $10,000 on a 1-in-whatever chance to go to the Senate only to immediately be kicked out on your ass so that someone else can take your seat: hmm…

In this situation, I’m sure Sarah Palin would be more than happy to kick in $10 or $20 thousand to cover Steven’s recount expenses.
If Stevens is kicked out, rather than loses, Palin can run in the special election to replace him.