Race in NY-20: It’s a tie ladies and gentlemen

April 4th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

jim tedisco and scott murphy

First Murphy seemed to have won the election,then Tedisco took the lead, now they’re tied.

The news coming from New York’s district 20 is becoming stranger and stranger as days go by. The voting machines are recanvassed, which led Republican Jim Tedisco to take the lead (by as few as 12 votes at a certain moment). As it is now, Tedisco and his Democratic opponent Scotty Murphy are tied, however.

Jim Geraghty reports: “The recanvass of the ballots in the NY-20 race has yielded, so far, a 77,225 to 77,225 tie. Saratoga County still has to be recanvassed, and absentee ballots have to be included.”

It’s utterly amazing just how close elections can be. The situation with the NY-20 seat in Congress reminds me of how things are going in Minnesota. Norm Coleman and Al Franken are virtually tied there as well, and both have gone to court over the results. The battle could drag on for months, possibly even longer. It seems to me that we should expect the same thing to happen in New York.

All votes haven’t been recounted yet, however. There are still several thousands to go. Especially absentee ballots will be of crucial importance. Jennifer Rubin explained earlier this week for Commentary why this is probably good news for Tedisco:

According to absentee-ballot numbers I received last night: in Warren, Republicans returned 569 of 764 ballots while Democrats returned only 316 of 437, with 113 of 205 “other” ballots returned. I suppose the Democrat could pick up votes, but he’d have to overcome a tremendous differential in party identification of the returned absentee ballots — 569 vs. 316, or 57% vs. 31%. (That’s a big advantage over registration in the county as a whole, where Republicans have only 49% of the electorate.) How likely is that?…

But the real kicker is in Saratoga. The latest figures there were 1,731 ballots returned, 922 of which were Republican and 502 Democratic (53% vs. 29%), with the remainder “other .” That is a very big  chunk of the absentees, about one third. Tedisco won that county by a 54-46% margin.

None of these figures include the approximately 1,000 military ballots sent out (less than 200 returned). Considering Murphy’s comments on ROTC recruitment on campus and the assumption that military voters are more conservative, these will likely go in Tedisco’s favor. No one knows how it will all shake out, and this is why they count the ballots — to find out who really won.

A victory for Tedisco would be great news for Republicans – they’d have won every election after the November elections of last year – and bad news for Democrats. Especially President Obama would lose face – he lobbied hard for Murphy, knowing that a victory for Tedisco would’ve been interpreted as a defeat for him (Obama) first and foremost.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.