For Winchester 1997, read Virginia 2017

The mantra “EVERY VOTE COUNTS” is an article of faith for political activists everywhere. Liberal Democrats know this more than most, having won one election and lost one in the last twenty years by a margin of two votes (Winchester 1997 and North East Fife 2017).

Now, from the state of Virginia, comes another reminder that every conversation with an undecided voter can swing an election, in a very unusual outcome. On election night last November, Republican David Yancey ‘won’ a crucial state house seat by ten votes, just preventing Democrats from overturning a 32-seat Republican majority. However, his challenger, Shelly Simonds, filed for a recount.

Held in December, the recount appeared to have Simonds winning the seat by a single vote, 11,608 to 11,607. Great news for Virginia Democrats, who thought they would now split control 50-50 of Virginia’s 100-seat lower House of Delegates.

However, their initial euphoria was short-lived. Two days later, a three-judge panel threw out Simond’s one vote win, ruling a disputed ballot should count for Yancey, the Republican, and tying the race. (Veterans of disputed ballot arguments at recounts might want to look away now – here’s a copy of the disputed ballot in question, which shows a mark against both the Democrat and Republican candidates, but then also crosses out the Democrat candidate’s name).

With the race tied, Virginia law demanded a drawing of lots to decide the winner, which occurred on January 4 (it was originally scheduled for December 27, but a court challenge by Simonds, the Democrat candidate, delayed it another week).  The drawing took place live on television, and was won by David Yancey, leaving the Republicans with a 51-49 majority in the House of Delegates by the slimmest of margins. Nevertheless, Simonds didn’t concede for another week, toying with idea of a second recount. But she finally threw in the towel on January 10, just an hour before the House reconvened for its 2018 session.

Aside from standing as a testament to the craziness of close elections, the close result should be renewed inspiration for Liberal Democrats everywhere in 2018 and beyond. Even though on this occasion the progressive candidate lost, it is a reminder that change really does happen from the grassroots up – and you never know how much every vote might decide an election.

* Alex Paul is a Lib Dem member. Originally from London, he now lives and works in Washington, D.C.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in LDVUSA and Op-eds.
Advert

4 Comments

  • I do think there is something fundamentally wrong with drawing lots when an election is tied. It is an election, not to decide which team kicks off in the FA Cup final! Fantastic piece by the way. I found it very informative!

  • I suspect that since every other vote on the ballot went to the Republicans, it’s probably fair to assume that one should have too.

    The thing is – to continue Tom Sutton’s sporting analogies – the only real alternative to drawing lots in a FPTP election is a replay, which (a) costs money, and (b) never goes down well with the electorate.

    Of course, if we had STV, this wouldn’t happen…..

  • And the morale of the story is to keep on getting the vote out until right up until the close of poll.

    I remember phoning up an elderly couple at about 9.30pm in Winchester in 97 who had been to the polling station earlier in the day but had forgotten their polling cards (which of course you don’t need) and had gone away without voting. And when I phoned decided that it was now too late to go again and vote! So we might have doubled our majority if I had phoned earlier!!!!!

  • Tom – thanks, I’m glad you enjoyed the article! As to resolving an election without drawing lots… I agree with Keith. Least-worst option really.

    Keith – I agree, I think the voter’s party-line voting intent is fairly clear, and they just made a mistake with one vote.

    Michael – you are right. And now in the US with early voting in some states (up to two months before election day) and postal voting in the UK – you can never start too early either!

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarIan Sanderson (RM3) 24th Feb - 9:33am
    People who hold guns need to be trained, to keep the guns safe and to be continuously of sound mind. If the gun-holder falls short...
  • User AvatarPeter Watson 24th Feb - 9:15am
    "Radical, distinctive" I agree with the thrust of the article, in particular the need to "grasp the nettle and do something" and the "need to...
  • User AvatarCatherine Jane Crosland 24th Feb - 8:33am
    Russell, the figure that you claim that graduates "benefit by", is clearly vastly exaggerated, or applies only to a small minority of graduates. The reality...
  • User AvatarBarnaby 24th Feb - 7:05am
    " But it’s aimed at starting the ball rolling towards the party finding a handful of policies that can define us as a caring, distinctive...
  • User AvatarKatharine Pindar 24th Feb - 2:19am
    @Roland. Consultation Paper 134 on Tuition Fees does not, of course, represent party policy, which is yet to be decided by Conference, probably next September....
  • User AvatarJoe Bourke 24th Feb - 12:28am
    Roland, Predictions are difficult to make, especially about the future - so goes the quip. Keynes in the 1920s predicted that productivity and incomes would...