Jubal just posted the revised RE-certified election results for the First District Supervisorial election. As previously reported, Janet Nguyen wound up seven votes ahead of Trung Nguyen. The first Certified count, of course, had Trung winning over Janet by seven votes.
You may have also read in the Orange County Register this morning a quote attributed to Janet that "every vote matters." But, apparently, votes matter only if they are for Janet.
Janet's final total is more than she had in the first count, but SHE IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHO GAINED VOTES! ALL other candidates either lost votes or stayed at the same count.
In the "revised official results," Janet gained six votes. All other candidates LOST a combined 31 votes. Janet's aggressive "recount" efforts took away SEVEN votes from Trung. In fact, Janet's vote total is STILL one vote less than Trung had in the certified election results on February 9th.
I will repeat that: Janet's final tally is LESS than the previously certified total for Trung. On February 9th, Trung had 10,920 votes. Today, they say that Janet now has 10,919 votes (and Trung is left with 10,912).
So, Janet found votes in the manual recount (which is the theory behind a hand recount of manchine-counted ballots). But the aggressive challenge of votes clearly intended for Trung Nguyen cost him a net of eight votes.
Maybe the fairest thing would be to take each candidate's BEST total. That would be Trung:10,920, and Janet:10,919. The winner would be ... Trung by One!
That would truly mean that every vote matters and that every vote counts.
And that would be an election they could sing about around campfires for many years to come.
Yeah Leyes, and Al Gore won Florida.
Posted by: Gore in 2008 | February 27, 2007 at 05:12 PM
ENOUGH!!!!!!!!
Can we scale it back to 5 posts on this race every day instead of 25? When this whole stinking thing is done with, then just give us the results. In the end, a Republican won either way.
You guys probably think you're getting a ton of traffic but it's just both campaigns slamming each other in the comment sections. THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES WHO CARE ANYMORE. Jeeeezzzzzzz.......
I will be re-posting my last item verbatim tomorrow... pretty sure it's more important than this nonsense and very ticked that it spent precisely 13 minutes where anyone would see it before being knocked down by TWO MORE posts on this recount!
The hypothetical case for Trung by one?!!! Get a clue, gang.
If you wanted to say something interesting on this race, you'd name whomever is responsible for making off with that IE money to slam Carlos. THAT is what matters most here.
Posted by: Frustrated Republican | February 27, 2007 at 05:18 PM
To Frustrated Republican:
petulant
One entry found for petulant.
Main Entry: pet·u·lant
Pronunciation: -l&nt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin or Middle French; Middle French, from Latin petulant-, petulans; akin to Latin petere to go to, attack, seek -- more at FEATHER
1 : insolent or rude in speech or behavior
2 : characterized by temporary or capricious ill humor : PEEVISH
- pet·u·lant·ly adverb
Posted by: One Who Knows | February 27, 2007 at 05:24 PM
Intersting viewpoint....is this what they mean when they refer to "new math"? Maybe we should apply your theory to everything else in the world we don't like. That way everybody gets to look at the world through their own rose colored glasses.
Janet operated legally and within the rules of the system. Whether or not Janet's people were "agressive" is irrelevant. The ROV ruled Trung's votes invalid, not Janet. If a court decides otherwise, then so be it.
I know its painful enough that your candidate lost, but it now appears that you've lined up behind Trung and lost again. Could this be the root of the angst?
Politics are rife with tactics used by both sides of the issues. Had Trung come up 7 votes short during the original count, I'm willing to bet his camp would have utilized the same tactics. Mike Schroeder is fully capable of employing the rules to his benefit and I would expect nothing less.
That is why the rules are the rules and that is why your "new math" is entertaining but nothing more.
Posted by: Green Machine | February 27, 2007 at 05:25 PM
Mark is like what we call in the commodity/stock trading business "a great contrary indicator". Whatever stock or future contract certain clients like to bet on, just go the opposite way and you're pretty much assured a winner.
Powder Blue Report
Posted by: Allan Bartlett | February 27, 2007 at 05:57 PM
Interesting idea to compare the result with the previous number and show that all candidates lose vote and only Janet got additional votes after recount.
I think I will sit back and wait for the judge to decide because both sides are verbally attacking each other now. It is appropriate in this case because both Janet and Trung Nguyen were certified the winners of the election but at different times. I'll wait for the court to decide.
Posted by: CentralOCguy | February 27, 2007 at 07:07 PM
Here is the before and after tally
Posted by: UtSay | February 27, 2007 at 07:50 PM
Frustrated Republican - you had some comments on your post. I am not in anyone's campaign although I do have a favorite and I find all the coverage on this election fascinating and educational. This is news, and it is history in the making in OC. You may think the leyes post is a waste of time, but in light of Janet's "every vote counts" comment, isn't it interesting that there are 25 less votes then the original tally? Also, I find it interesting that Trung will be going to court to challenge an as of yet unchallenged interpretation of the recount of electronic ballots. First Trung was the victor by 7 and now Janet is the victor by the same number, it is the craziest OC election by far! And Frustrated to be honest no one but us political geeks read these blogs anyway, and if you don't like an article posted here - don't read it - that's what everyone else does.
Posted by: flowerszzz | February 27, 2007 at 07:51 PM
Mark, I agreed with you. To me, The recount by hand is to find the votes that maybe miscounted by the machine NOT to void the other votes that had marks or intinals on them.
Posted by: MH | February 27, 2007 at 07:57 PM
Mark-
A great post. Frustrated Republican is setting on his armchair bitching about those in the field, those in the game, crying that he’s sick of everyone arguing.
Well some arguments are worth making. The very first ballot that I saw challenged was someone who had marked for Janet, crossed it out, remarked it Trung and then maded a notation “I made a mistake I certify that I meant to vote for Trung Nguyen” and then he signed his name. There is absolutely no shadow of a doubt who that voter intended to cast his ballot for. The Janet representative call out “challenge!” the Registrar Rep asked why, the Janet Rep said “extra markings on the ballot”. The Janet camp didn’t HAVE to challenge the ballot and disenfranchise that voter, but winning is everything even if you win by knocking out votes made in good faith by members of your own ethnic community.
Janet won this election and O.J. Simpson is not guilty of murdering his wife.
Posted by: Jim Bieber | February 27, 2007 at 08:43 PM
Why dont they just do a "Nguyen" run off and use only electronic voting machines?
BTW, I didnt waste my vote sir, I voted for Bustamante which was my choice and still is. Even if he did lose this election. Maybe my one vote is the reason one of the Nguyens lost by a vote? Oops, my fault - sorry
Posted by: BT | February 27, 2007 at 09:42 PM
Anyone heard from Tim Whitacre lately?
Hope he hasn't become a Frustrated Republican.
Posted by: Whitacrebot | February 27, 2007 at 11:18 PM
You are frustrated aren't you? Instead of paying attention to your post about a national election that is at least 1 year away, most of the readers on this blog, and the main stream media is focusing on the Supervisorial Election/Recount contest.
Is this why you are frustrated? If it does, then too bad - OC Blog is Orange County news oriented, if you want to find a news outlet that cares about your beef with Romney, send your stuff to Meet the Press.
Posted by: Re: Frustrated Republican | February 27, 2007 at 11:18 PM
I'm a firm supporter of a runoff between the top two vote getters. I don't give a damn about who wins, but I presume the spread between both Nguyens would not be what it currently is: a statistical tie.
Posted by: Silence Dogood | February 28, 2007 at 12:20 AM
So you think the Libertarian vote doesn't matter?
Think again.
With a proven track record of 2-6% in this district, the LP turnout was somewhere between 850 and 2300 votes.
Most of these votes went to Carlos Bustamante, as he sought our support, and yours truly, the LPOC Chair did in fact support him publicly, in a phone call to all LP voters.
Just like in the Diane Harkey loss and Lou Correa win, the LP vote was greater than the margin of victory.
People seeking public office in Orange County know this: In Orange County, Libertarians often cast the deciding votes!
Posted by: Bruce Cohen | February 28, 2007 at 05:21 AM
Bruce,
Thanks for admitting what a big goof you are. There is NOTHING Libertarian about Bustamante, who is now flirting with the Democrats. I expect he will go Dem within a month.
Seriously, you guys endorse people because they return your calls? That's not very bright. Maybe you ought to ask them what they believe in? As I recall it, your members were not very happy when Bustamante said he was against medicinal use of marijuana. After his huge loss, he may have to use some medicinal pot himself!
All you have done by backing awful candidates like Bustamante is make your party matter even less...
Posted by: Art Pedroza | February 28, 2007 at 06:23 AM
Mark,
Interesting analysis. The numbers may work in your universe, but in the real world your figures do not add up to a win for Mr. Photoshop.
Good writing exercise for your job application if Trung somehow Photoshops his way to the Fifth Floor. Next you should try your hand at some Photoshop work. We have a few examples over at TheLiberalOC.com.
Again, thanks for the entertaining calculations.
Chris @ TheLiberalOC.com
Posted by: clprevatt | February 28, 2007 at 07:31 AM
Why don't we just have a UFC style match between the two Nguyens to determine the winnner. My money's on Janet.
Posted by: James Do | February 28, 2007 at 07:57 AM
Frustrated Republican-
Remember the old saying that timing is everything? Perhaps you should not re-post until the current "hot" subject is over and done. Right now, a lot of us are really interested in the BOS race and not ready to concentrate on the 08 Presidential elections.
Posted by: Morning Coffee | February 28, 2007 at 09:06 AM
Chris - the photo shop stuff is old...no one cares and no one but you and Art made any big deal about it.
Posted by: flowerszzz | February 28, 2007 at 09:44 AM
Dear Chris,
This a shameless bait, trying to get few more hits for your blog site. Is this what your blog site turns out to be, no analysis/news but a photoshop gallery?
Posted by: UtSay | February 28, 2007 at 10:04 AM
Chris,
give up your cheap shots. They're getting old!
Posted by: hp | February 28, 2007 at 10:28 AM
Where is Katherine Harris when you need her?
Posted by: brian | February 28, 2007 at 10:33 AM
Leyes -- we must have thought of comparing the totals at the same time -- my post on the subject came 18 minutes after yours. My thoughts on the subject: Janet really beat the odds to win after being down seven before the recount, when you look at how the other candidates fared in the recount.
Posted by: Martin Wisckol | February 28, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Isn't Bieber a vendor? Since when do vendors engage is candidate trash talk. Not very smart on his part.
Posted by: dumb move | February 28, 2007 at 11:09 AM