*Snoopy Dance*

Congratulations Kim, and way to go you wonderfully procrastinating left-of center Eureka voter!  Now, do we officially change the name from Councilman to Councilwoman to make up for a little lost time?

Also, for some reason, I’ve lost all interest in counting ballots.  Something I thought was nigh for many of us.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “*Snoopy Dance*

    1. Mitch, this is an adversarial system. Those interested are best suited to do the counting. Your system will help to insure the counters sre accountable. If there is any question.

      To be clear, I don’t want to win with fewer votes, elections need to be valid. However, count me out on being a volunteer to count votes to try to verify Mike Newman as the victor.

  1. “I don’t want to win with fewer votes, elections need to be valid. ”

    A good start.

    “However, count me out on being a volunteer to count votes to try to verify Mike Newman as the victor.”

    A dumb finish, because that is not the purpose of counting votes. The purpose of counting votes is to verify the validity of the election results, regardless of the results. If you are only interested in doing it in order to overturn a personal loss, you don’t really believe in the statement you made about elections needing to be valid. That’s OK, Jon, lots of people don’t really believe in democracy — they just don’t usually use the word in their name.

  2. ,” because that is not the purpose of counting votes.”

    That is the job of our civil servants. If I was employed by us to count, you better believe I’d be focused on verifying the validity of the results. But that is not my job, that is theirs and I trust them. Part of that trust is earned knowing that in a close election, thanks to you, motivated people can re-count the votes themselves – or pay a reasonable price to do have the county re-count.

    If I was to recount as a volunteer, I would also put on my fairness hat – doing the best I could to fairly count the results. You know, being democratic about the whole deal. Again, I would have no interest in winning if it meant discarding even one legitimate Mike vote.

    As you understand, sometimes even the best counts are wrong. There is a certain statistical uncertainty in any count no matter how competent the counters or clear the numbers. When the results are within that uncertainty, those in favor of one result or another will be the best proponents for their cause. If there was a close election, and the candidate I favored was on the losing end, I’d be motivated to insure that civil servant count was accurate.

    I believe many of our political differences stem from this conservative-led political phenomena of distrusting, and refurbishing in the private or this case the not for profit sector, things that are best done by competent and awesome bureaucrats. Insuring the best possible count of our voting franchise among something our civil servants can and should do best.

    ” lots of people don’t really believe in democracy”

    I don’t get this, I really don’t. Again, this is a democracy, but it is also a republic, it also has institutional momentum and traditions. The goal is to understand theory, reality, and do everything one can to move good policy forward. Not do everything one can to win, but to educate, motivate all of us about what should be done and why.

    I believe in democracy, but like I wrote today I don’t put my faith in it or in government. Trust, but verify as Reagan might say. With the results the way they are this activist does not have to be the one verifying. The fact that we do have a mechanism to verify the work of our civil servants is a great privilege and I thank you for your work in providing it. It shouldn’t and can’t replace our civil servants doing the important work of a more -than-competent first, non-partisan, democratic, republican count.

    Why this is so frustrating to me goes back to, as I’m sure you know, the Peter Childs definition of democracy. What he has done is continue the current Republican and conservative goal of de-legitimizing and dis-empowering our elected officials. Our election department provides an essential service of democracy. It is part of the great experiment of our government and it’s leaders which we elect every 2 years. BTW, one of them is our County Clerk who is responsible for fair counts of ballots who happened to run unopposed last election.

    If we had votes where 80 to 90% of the people voted, and we had a strong general belief in our civic institutions, that’s when I’d be more outspoken about my skeptism about the governing process. Right now the usually proper and helpful skepticism of governing and government from the left is only fanning the embers of a political dialog from the right with it’s goal of minimizing the public fraction of the GDP and maximizing the private fraction of the GDP.

    Where we disagree is in our belief that in many of what can be described as our “commons” the public sector can do a better job than the private sector which must make a profit.

    1. You are right, and in this sence R was critical to victory in retrospect. I don’t think Kim wins those 40 votes without R, and I hope she and Linda take Don, Verbena, James and Zack out for dinner and bring Natalie too to discuss what, if anything, can be done for Eureka’s under paid working class.

      Also, thoughts on why R failed so badly!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s