Friday, June 11, 2010

Vic Rawl dominated absentee ballots, Alvin Greene Election Day votes

Posted by Chris Haire on Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 4:52 PM

Gremlins.

That's what did it.

That's how Alvin Greene beat out Vic Rawl.

Judging by a recent Politico post, it was either the handiwork of those green, mischievous beasties or a vast conspiracy.

According to the Politico:

“The election day ballots all favor Mr. Greene. We don’t know what it means,”[Rawl campaign manager Walter] Ludwig said in an interview. “We did significantly better on absentees than Election Day, which is according to the mathematicians, quite significant. The other reason is, it didn’t happen in any other races on the ballot.”

In Lancaster County, Rawl won absentee ballots over Greene by a staggering 84 percent to 16 percent margin; but Greene easily led among Election Day voters by 17 percentage points.

The Politico also notes:

Greene also racked up a 75 percent or greater margin in one-seventh of all precincts statewide, a mark that Ludwig notes is even difficult for an incumbent to reach.

“This may add up to nothing. This all could be a clerical error. We don’t know, but [we] thought it was worth looking into,” said Ludwig, who added that the experts doing the unpaid research asked that their names not be revealed until they disclose their conclusions.

Hold on second. Something doesn't seem right to me here. It's almost like there's a double-standard.

Let me see if I got this right: Greene racks up 75 percent of votes in one-seventh of all precincts and Ludwig says that this is impossible for even an incumbent.

But when Rawl — who isn't an incumbent, just a guy who the party wanted to win — racks up 84 percent of all absentee ballot votes, well, that's means that everything was working out the way it supposed to.

Hmm. Confusing.

Even more confusing is this bit from Politico:

In Spartanburg County, Ludwig said there are 25 precincts in which Greene received more votes than were actually cast and 50 other precincts where votes appeared to be missing from the final count.

Ooh. Maybe something was going on after all.

Fortunately, I like to eat crow.

Then again, it's not dinner time just yet.

Topics: State Politics, National Politics, Local Politics

Tags: , , ,

  |  

Comments (6)

Showing 1-6 of 6

Add a comment

We all know the liberal credo; vote early and vote often! Absentees allow you to do just that...

report   
Posted by screddawg on June 11, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Greene has already pulled off one upset, maybe he can do another in October.
He must be the Tea Party candidate, no prior experience, remember, vote them all out.

report   
Posted by FCB on June 11, 2010 at 10:58 PM

The Tea Party expects individual responsibility out of our candidates, obviously he is a typical liberal "victim" which automatically disqualifies him...

report   
Posted by screddawg on June 12, 2010 at 9:53 PM

There were also a high number of DeMint votes -- more than were cast by voters. The whole thing stinks.

report   
Posted by mmabelle on June 13, 2010 at 10:44 AM

here's my conspiracy theory -- Greene's filing fee was paid by someone like Howie Rich or his ilk.....it seems to me that the paper trail should figure out the true source at some point down the road

report   
Posted by jerry1 on June 13, 2010 at 11:11 AM

The point is Lib voters don't pay attention, why didn't you bitch when 0bama got nominated! Hell, Greene is more qualified than ol' Barry...

report   
Posted by screddawg on June 13, 2010 at 9:04 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
By Email
With RSS
Showing 1-6 of 6

Add a comment

Classified Listings
{ more } Recent Comments
{ more } Reader Reviews
Most Viewed

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2012, Charleston City Paper   RSS