...not a whole lot new at this point.
King County is counting ballots very slowly, or turnout is even lower than forecast. Either way, they've only counted a notch under 36,000 ballots since Election Night and turnout measured in ballots counted thus far is a paltry 28.81% as of this afternoon's tally.
Within those ballots there hasn't been much of a shift. Dan Satterberg is holding his 54% - 46% lead over Bill Sherman, with almost no movement between the early absentees, to the poll votes, to the last couple days of absentee counting.
More interestingly, Bill Bryant continues to edge farther ahead of Alec Fisken in their contest for Seattle Port Commissioner. Fisken led 50.6% to 49.1% after the first absentee tally on Tuesday. Poll votes and subsequent absentees have since pushed Bryant to his own 50.8% - 48.8% margin as of this afternoon. Given the trend, Bryant looks to be pulling the race out in what was a bit of a surprise outcome. Fisken, a darling of the liberal left, didn't run a very aggressive campaign by some accounts, but Bryant did, pushing the change theme via radio ads in particular that appear to have resonated with voters.
Up in Snohomish County, things aren't looking good for Tom Greene's bid for Sheriff against Democratic Legislator John Lovick. A first count 285 vote lead for Lovick has swelled to a 1,828 vote margin as the absentees have been tallied. The trend seems to speak for itself there.
Posted by Eric Earling at November 08, 2007 07:39 PM | Email ThisFair point, even in my youthful age I'm so used to the term "absentee" it just rolls off the tongue...or the fingertips in this case. I'll keep it in mind for future posts.
Posted by: Eric Earling on November 8, 2007 08:13 PMA strategy finely tuned under Dean Logan. These are the improper vote count pros. If anyone can pull out a last minute reversal, it's King County.
Posted by: Jeff B. on November 8, 2007 09:08 PMGood golly!
ST was the one who wanted the proposition on an off-year election. They dictated when they thought they could put it on the ballot and figured they could get it passed. They KNOW off-year elections only get 30% turnout.
The arrogance of ST is in high evidence even after their voting FAILURE. This organization has got to go.
Posted by: swatter on November 9, 2007 06:46 AMmy 2 cents.
Posted by: David Anfinrud on November 9, 2007 09:20 AMWe simply don't know what this unexpected influx means, but we DO know that Tom Greene needs to only win a razor-thin majority, just 52%, of those outstanding ballots (assuming same undervote percentage) to win. And even less, about 51% or less, to force an automatic recount. The "trend" is too insignificant in light of that to "speak for itself."
Posted by: pudge on November 9, 2007 11:29 AM/cynical
Posted by: JCM on November 9, 2007 11:40 AMWelcome to the wild world of the County Auditor's office. I'd be lying if I said I was surprised by the fluctuating ballot numbers. As long as I've dealt with that office they've never had an effective system by which to provide an accurate estimate of the ballots they have remaining to be counted (mostly because they seem to make no provision for estimating ballots they have yet to receive through the mail...making their Election Night numbers fraught with error). I've never seen a highly accurate count from them until 2 or 3 days after Election Day when they actually have a chance to process ballots mailed locally at the deadline. Granted, the spreadsheet they provide online now is an improvement, but as you noted there was quite a shift between Election night and later in the week.
As to the Sheriff's race, the first count on Tuesday had Lovick leading 50.06% to 49.67%. Lovick had a margin of 52.43% to 47.39% in the next two days of counts, taking his overall lead to 50.76% to 48.99% (which is what I was obviously working off of when I composed the post above). That sure looked like a trend to me that wasn't helpful to Greene since Lovick was actually expanding his lead as more ballots were counted.
In today's ballots, Lovick led 51.34% to 48.45%, expanding his current lead to 50.86% to 48.91% (or 2,392) votes. Three days in a row of post-Election Day ballot counting where Lovick extends his lead is not a good sign.
So, yes, even before today that was a significant trend. I've seen no indication the post-Election Day tally is going to suddenly switch from roughly 52-48 in favor of Lovick to favoring Greene by the same margin. If you'd like to provide one, be my guest.
Posted by: Eric Earling on November 9, 2007 06:18 PMJust to throw out one of many possibilities, we know the mail comes in from the Post Office in batches, and that mail coming from the same places are likely to be grouped together, and it is quite possible that for whatever reason -- perhaps because it's closer to where the ballots are delivered to -- the South County, where Lovick is likely stronger, has been counted first, and that many North County ballots remain. It's not like the Auditor takes all the ballots and mixes them up so they are counted in random order.
I have no idea if the above is happening. My point is only that it is possible, with the goal of showing you that the trend we've seen does not in any way imply that it will continue.
You have things sorta backward in your mind. You don't need an indication that it is going to "suddenly switch," because you also have no indication it WON'T. We simply do not know, and the existing data, in fact, does not suggest either way.
Greene needs about 53.5% of the reported remaining ballots to get a majority, which is quite within the realm of possibility. But of course I have no real faith in the number of reported remaining ballots. We'll see tomorrow.
Posted by: pudge on November 9, 2007 07:37 PM