Elections can be funny things some times — Take Senator Al Franken winning in Minnesota!
What’s interesting — and what I picked up on Twitter thanks to @KatyinIndy — is that the vote in New York’s 23rd district is still being counted. More importantly, the gap in votes between the ‘winner’, Bill Owens, and the principle ‘looser’, Doug Hoffman, is tightening, though it’s still a fairly wide margin. And that raises an interesting question, exactly how / why was Bill Owens sworn into office on Friday, November 6?
Well, it’s an interesting question — and I do think this is worth looking into and clarifying — but it would very much appear to be a moot question for at least two reasons according to Mark Weiner’s reporting with The Post-Standard. Of particular relevance in Mark Weiner’s article to how and why Bill Owen was sworn in (quoting Weiner’s article) . . .
[John] Conklin [communications director for the state Board of Elections] said the state sent a letter to the House Clerk last week explaining that no winner had been determined in the 23rd District, and therefore the state had not certified the election. But the letter noted that Owens still led by about 3,000 votes, and that the special election was not contested — two factors that legally allowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to swear in Owens on Friday.
“We sent a letter to the clerk laying out the totals,” Conklin said. “The key is that Hoffman conceded, which means the race is not contested. However, all ballots will be counted, and if the result changes, Owens will have to be removed.”
Obviously, it’s a matter of procedure that Owens would have to yield or be removed should the vote result change (or even if it were to possibly tighten to the point of being contested or challenged — automatically or otherwise — through proper procedure). But it would appear the fact thus far is that Representative Bill Owens is just that, Representative Bill Owens, fair and square.
Interesting point to delve into on how democracy works, or at least our Democracy anyway — Thanks, @KatyinIndy!
So, it would appear that @KatyinIndy doesn’t quite appreciate my Thank You. Not sure why, but @KatyinIndy has — get this — blocked me from Following her (his / their?) account on Twitter. My suspicion is that they simply want to control as best as possible their message, not put it out in the market for competition, letting the best message win. Why she, he, they are afraid I’m not sure.
But to run with it a bit, @KatyinIndy posted a link on ResistNet.com in support of her (his / their) allegation against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. I know virtually all Conservatives think she’s the devil, but the article strongly implies that there was some sort of election fraud that caused the Democrat to win. That’s a pretty serious allegation, yet ResistNet.com doesn’t seem to offer ANY evidence to back up their allegation aside from the fact election officials had trouble counting votes that evening.
Trouble counting isn’t something new to Upstate NY (and before anyone thinks that’s a slight, it’s not the first time they’ve had trouble like this in NY). Trouble counting doesn’t mean fraud, and ResistNet.com specifically leaves out any mention of John Conklin, Communications Director for the state Board of Elections, and his statement on the matter (see original post above).
Take it as a word of advice that ResistNet.com would appear to be incredibly biased, at least in the case of this particular storyline.