Wednesday, April 22, 2009

it's . . . navarro and ficker (unofficially) (updated)

12:50: Keep in mind, of course, that these are the UNOFFICIAL results. We're calling it only as far as we can see and, as MPW points out, there are some 600 provisional ballots to count, starting Thursday.

10:58: The unofficial results, from the Board of Elections. For the Democrats, Nancy Navarro (left) pulls through by barely eighty votes, while Robin Ficker (right) thirty points ahead of the closest Republican contender:

Total Votes 7987Total Votes 2050
Nancy Navarro 3557 44.53%Robin Ficker 1187 57.90%
Ben Kramer 3479 43.56%
Cary Lamari 690 8.64%
Louis August 571 27.85%
Andrew L. Padula 292 14.24%

Robert Goldman 104 1.30%
Thomas Hardman 99 1.24%
Michael L. Bigler 58 0.73%

10:43: Unofficially, it's Navarro and Ficker. MPW all but calls them.

10:39: Whoops. There are only 45 precincts to report, so we're at 100% reporting. But, of about 96,000 voters, 10% voted. Fun with statistics.

10:22: It's getting tight. With 45 precincts reporting, Navarro's at 44.5% and Kramer at 43.5%, with the other Democrats splitting the rest. Ficker's leading the Republicans at 58%.

With 40 precincts reporting, Nancy Navarro is in the lead for the Democratic nomination (49% to Ben Kramer's 38%) and Robin Ficker for the Republican nomination (59%). If you'd like to follow this yourself, the Board of Elections is updating their results every twenty minutes.


David Alpert said...

MPW says there are only 45 precincts. The 10% figure seems to be the percentage of registered voters who voted, not the percentage of precincts. There can't be 450 precincts in District 4, can there?

So is the counting done with 45 precincts, with Navarro seemingly having won by 78 votes, or is there more to go?

kreeggo said...

Absentee votes to be counted tomorrow.

Thomas Hardman said...

Well, for what it's worth, I got a dollar a vote so by the measure of selling my ideas, and not being sold by campaign contributions, I win.Of course, that's not how it works.

That being said...

Three runs at office, three abject losses.

I suppose I should be tempted to wonder how I might have done if I'd had funding comparable to that of the front-runners (and eventual victor). But that totally ruins my concept of Democracy, which in my opinion shouldn't be effectively an auction that goes to the highest bidder. But it seems that Democracy is either about a commodity to be bought and sold, or it's about the marketplace of ideas.

If Democracy is a commodity to be bought and sold, I can't afford Democracy. Can you?If Democracy is about the marketplace of ideas, either this isn't a Democracy, or my ideas suck.

As I don't want to face the idea that this isn't a Democracy, I can only therefor conclude that my ideas suck; I won't much be sharing them with anyone.

Three runs at office, three abject losses.

I'm done.