Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > United States City Forums > Texas > San Marcos
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 11-06-2007, 11:54 PM  
Member

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 63 | Kudos: +10
Attn: Prather Campaign

curious minds want to know. any plans to contest or ask for a recount?
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 07:01 AM  
Senior Member

San Marcos
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 486 | Kudos: +1
With a margin of 4 votes and the provisional and overseas ballots not counted, I suspect it is too soon to even think about such things. They may still win, without disputing anything.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 07:05 AM  
Senior Member
 
Immis's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 166 | Kudos: +14
I think I heard last night that the provisional votes were counted. I may be wrong though. Can anyone confirm?
__________________
I Never Give Them Hell... I Just Tell The Truth And They Think Its Hell...

?If you can't convince them, confuse them.?
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 07:36 AM  
Senior Member

San Marcos
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 486 | Kudos: +1
The returns on channel 16 (Grande cable) said that they were not included.

I just looked at the returns on the Hays County site and the lead is down to 3 votes. No mention of provisional or overseas ballots anywhere that I could find.

http://elections.co.hays.tx.us/totals/totals.htm
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 07:45 AM  
Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 35 | Kudos: +10
Should be down to 2 votes now, actually. The provisional ballots have not been included in the results as of now. Things are probably about to get interesting. From what I've heard, anyways.
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 09:42 AM  
Senior Member

San Marcos
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 486 | Kudos: +1
Hopefully "interesting" does not mean uglier than it already is, but it probably does.

I thought the interesting thing was that we only had about 2600 voters for City Council. That's less than 5% turnout. It's also interesting that it appears we had 3800 people at the polls and 1200 of them (1/3) chose not to vote for City Council.

Meanwhile, Hays County had an overall turnout of almost 14% and if you remove San Marcos from the equation, the remainder of the county was closer to 20%, unless my math is wrong:

Hays county - 13,000 of 95,000 voters
San Marcos - 3800 of 40,000 voters +/- (based on 85% of population being over 18, plus the students living in town, which brings the total to more than 50,000 voters, I'm sure)

That leaves a little over 9,000 voting in the rest of the county, from a pool of 40,000-55,000.

Why so little turnout in such an educated city? Is it because the issues are not important to the people here? Maybe. Is it because the campaigns got so ugly that people were turned off? Maybe.

I just hope all of the candidates are taking note. Turnout this low is pretty sad. You need to engage the people. And that means people from all areas.
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 10:15 AM  
Senior Member

Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 226 | Kudos: +0
Quote:
Originally Posted by semi-native View Post
It's also interesting that it appears we had 3800 people at the polls and 1200 of them (1/3) chose not to vote for City Council.
The difference probably reflects that some of the provisional ballots were counted. There are three reasons to vote a provisional ballot. The first is you are registered somewhere else and not here, and part of the ballot you would be eligible to vote on in the precinct of your residence, such as the constitutional amendments. The other is you are registered here but did not appear on the role of registered voters due to some clerical error and don't have your voter registration card. The third is you voted at the wrong precinct without your voter registration card.

Those that voted an early provisional ballot for reason one are easy enough to confirm electronically. They are probably a lot of the difference between total voters and those voting in the city council election. I wish they had had that provision of HAVA back when I was a student and not yet a permenant resident (or even the current early voting system).
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 10:47 AM  
Junior Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9 | Kudos: +10
The margin is currently 3 votes. There were no provisional ballots filed as of 10 PM last night according to Ms. Cowan. They had not counted officially overseas ballots.
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 10:58 AM  
Junior Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9 | Kudos: +10
Quote:
Originally Posted by semi-native View Post
Hopefully "interesting" does not mean uglier than it already is, but it probably does.

I thought the interesting thing was that we only had about 2600 voters for City Council. That's less than 5% turnout. It's also interesting that it appears we had 3800 people at the polls and 1200 of them (1/3) chose not to vote for City Council.

Meanwhile, Hays County had an overall turnout of almost 14% and if you remove San Marcos from the equation, the remainder of the county was closer to 20%, unless my math is wrong:

Hays county - 13,000 of 95,000 voters
San Marcos - 3800 of 40,000 voters +/- (based on 85% of population being over 18, plus the students living in town, which brings the total to more than 50,000 voters, I'm sure)

That leaves a little over 9,000 voting in the rest of the county, from a pool of 40,000-55,000.

Why so little turnout in such an educated city? Is it because the issues are not important to the people here? Maybe. Is it because the campaigns got so ugly that people were turned off? Maybe.

I just hope all of the candidates are taking note. Turnout this low is pretty sad. You need to engage the people. And that means people from all areas.
Actually if you go back and look at city elections before the 2005 city council race they were usually lower turnout then this race had.
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 11:41 AM  
Senior Member

San Marcos
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 486 | Kudos: +1
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.heggie View Post
Actually if you go back and look at city elections before the 2005 city council race they were usually lower turnout then this race had.
That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be a lot higher. It was elsewhere in the county.

I'd also question whether 1200 people out of 3800 (or anything close) were excluded from City Council votes because of provisional ballots, as at least 2 of the 3 reasons cited (clerical errors and voting in the wrong precinct, unless they are Wimberley residents voting in San Marcos, or something) would not exclude one from voting on Council.

3800 people (still too low) were interested enough to turn out to vote, but did not vote for City Council candidates. If I were a candidate, I'd see a problem there. The election was split 50/50, so one might make a case that either candidate could have captured 500-600 of the 1200 that did not vote, making this a very different election for either one.

Perhaps there were a lot of provisional ballots skewing the numbers, but it seems unlikely. Even if there were a lot of provisional ballots for people voting here because they could not get home in time, that only means that the turnout in San Marcos was even lower.

Not good, IMO.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > United States City Forums > Texas > San Marcos
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.