newsobserver.com projects - runoffs - Comments

Re: Runoff cost $50 per person, Hall says

WhalerCane — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:40:27 -0400

Mr. Hall's estimate is incorrect. Cost per voter should include those who chose not to vote. If that is done, than the cost was about $1 per voter.

That said, there are better ways to deal with low turnout runoffs other than adding confusion and undermining the integrity of our elections.

1. Change threasholds so runoffs are rare and used only when obviously needed.
2. Mailing ballots on low interest runoffs would be cheaper than current runnofs or IRV. Currently our voting equipement is unable to handle IRV. IRV does not save money because you would have to invest in new equipement and software, and programming costs every election, not to mention the vast educational costs involved.
3. Eliminate Runoffs. 42 states do not have them.
4. Stop electing low interest offices. Even if we had IRV, how many could have intelligently ranked the four candidates viaing for the Democratic nomination for Labor Commissioner.

Re: Tips for unaffiliated voters

FFC1304 — Tue, 06 May 2008 08:29:12 -0400

'Seems' wonderful enough right? How about more choice on the ballot by allowing more parties into the mix? Why wont the demopublicans allow MORE INCLUSION? What are they afraid of? 100+ years of democrat domination has totally corrupted NC! How's that ballot access lawsuit coming?

Re: Will there be a primary runoff?

carolinabluebird — Mon, 05 May 2008 18:10:08 -0400

I think that if Pat Nader and Dan Nader were not in the race, Hampton would easily win outright. With those two in the race, it's gonna be close to see of Hamton can get that 40% the first time around.

Re: Rob: Primary runoffs are misunderstood

johnshaw — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:06:20 -0500

Runoff elections are important when there is a split in the party. Often that split may be between conservatives vs. liberals, or moderates vs. extreme conservatives or liberals. Or it could simply be east side vs. west side or north side vs. south side of a district (or city or state).

What if most of the voters preferred to elect someone from the east side of a district, and geography was the only important issue? If two east side and one west candidates ran, the east side candidates could split the vote, giving the west sider the plurality. Without a runoff, the west side candidate would take office. With the runoff, the favorite of the east side candidates would face the west side candidate. If the majority preferred the east side, their candidate would win.

For similar reasons, both major political parties require that, in the nominating convention, one person must receive a majority of the votes. Multiple ballots are used until one receives a majority (although this hasn’t been necessary for the last half century). Many other organizations require a majority vote for election of officers.

Re: Will there be a GOP runoff?

gboy313 — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:15:24 -0500

Did I hear Mayor McCory say the Governor's job is

"to solve the solutions" ???

Anyone know where to get a transcript of the debate?