rchaos Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Election Results Happy reading. Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 I smell runoffs! Link to post Share on other sites
Cathyhelms Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Looks like the Republican question went with flying colors as did SPLOST :yahoo: Thanks JediRetreat!!!! Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 71,000 voters and only 3,500 voted? Link to post Share on other sites
rchaos Posted July 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 71,000 voters and only 3,500 voted? They are still counting. So far it's only about 5%. It will take some time to see the final results. Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 They are still counting. So far it's only about 5%. It will take some time to see the final results. On the right side of page 1 it says 100%. I guess I misinterpreted that. Link to post Share on other sites
Cathyhelms Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 They are still counting. So far it's only about 5%. It will take some time to see the final results. I thought it said 100% of the precincts?? Link to post Share on other sites
rchaos Posted July 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 I thought it said 100% of the precincts?? 100% of the ballots are in. 4.8% have been counted so far. That's the percentage of the cards cast so far. Link to post Share on other sites
Cathyhelms Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 100% of the ballots are in. 4.8% have been counted so far. That's the percentage of the cards cast so far. OK, thanks!! Link to post Share on other sites
sweet tea Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 100% of the ballots are in. 4.8% have been counted so far. That's the percentage of the cards cast so far. SO we really don't know anything for sure then?? Link to post Share on other sites
bellaprincess Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) Looks like Beverly, Jason, Adam Gregory and Chad Plumley are out. Runoffs for quite a few........it's gonna get ugly. CC, P2 - R REP Polling ABM AIP PRO Total Number of Precincts 5 5 5 5 5 Precincts Reporting 0 5 5 0 5 100.0 % Times Counted (Reg. Voters 13655) 0 62 520 0 582 4.3 % Total Votes 0 61 504 0 565 BEVERLY COCHRAN 0 36 222 0 258 45.66% ADAM GREGORY 0 4 52 0 56 9.91% TODD POWNALL 0 21 230 0 251 44.42% This is what I saw for post 2. Beverly looks ahead to me, but I could be reading it wrong. *** Posted as someone replied they have not counted all votes. Edited July 21, 2010 by bellaprincess Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 100% of the ballots are in. 4.8% have been counted so far. That's the percentage of the cards cast so far. ok, gotcha....thanks for the information! Link to post Share on other sites
Cathyhelms Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 CC, P2 - R REP Polling ABM AIP PRO Total Number of Precincts 5 5 5 5 5 Precincts Reporting 0 5 5 0 5 100.0 % Times Counted (Reg. Voters 13655) 0 62 520 0 582 4.3 % Total Votes 0 61 504 0 565 BEVERLY COCHRAN 0 36 222 0 258 45.66% ADAM GREGORY 0 4 52 0 56 9.91% TODD POWNALL 0 21 230 0 251 44.42% This is what I saw for post 2. Beverly looks ahead to me, but I could be reading it wrong. *** Posted as someone replied they have not counted all votes. Yea, I edited my post. I feel pretty dumb right now. Link to post Share on other sites
rchaos Posted July 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 SO we really don't know anything for sure then?? If we have 71,000 registered voters and let's say for the sake of numbers about 20% of them voted (typical for a primary election) we should be seeing a more accurate count when we near the 20% mark. Don't know for sure that 20% voted; however, I'm pretty sure that more than 4.8% of the registered voters have voted. Link to post Share on other sites
sweet tea Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Yea, I edited my post. I feel pretty dumb right now. Don't worry....it IS quite confusing Link to post Share on other sites
bellaprincess Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Yea, I edited my post. I feel pretty dumb right now. Nah! It is all very confusing! Pubby's numbers do not match these, so I really have no clue! Link to post Share on other sites
rchaos Posted July 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Nah! It is all very confusing! Pubby's numbers do not match these, so I really have no clue! I'd stick with the Official Paulding County Link provided for the real results. Enough said. Link to post Share on other sites
Cathyhelms Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 I don't remember it ever taking this long.................... Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 F.O.R.E.V.E.R Link to post Share on other sites
Bushmonkey Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) I don't remember it ever taking this long.................... in 2008 there was 29 Precincts this year there is only 14, at 9:35pm only 4 of 14 Precincts are reporting. i agree it is slow... it would seem with everything being computerize, the results should only take 30 minutes. Edited July 21, 2010 by Bushmonkey Link to post Share on other sites
gpatt0n Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Nah! It is all very confusing! Pubby's numbers do not match these, so I really have no clue! That's because we are using two different ways of getting the data. The folks at the courthouse have to wait on the data from the precincts and then count them. I had folks at several of the precincts getting that information. What I'm missing are the absentee and early voting figures which are about 3000-4000 votes, I am to understand. So, actually, I've got info that the county hasn't counted yet and the county has info I've not counted yet. I do have the final, apparently, for Post II. It will all sort out. pubby Link to post Share on other sites
Cathyhelms Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 According to Fox 5 run off between Plumley and Lane for DA. Link to post Share on other sites
lowrider Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 FOX5 Called it for Roy Barnes. Link to post Share on other sites
bellaprincess Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 According to Fox 5 run off between Plumley and Lane. How could these numbers be right? That is not a correct amount of votes, is it? Candidate Votes Vote % Chad Plumley 138 46% Drew Lane (Incumbent) 101 33% Dick Donovan 64 21% Precincts reporting: 100% Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 According to Fox 5 run off between Plumley and Lane for DA. Link to post Share on other sites
Cathyhelms Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 How could these numbers be right? That is not a correct amount of votes, is it? Candidate Votes Vote % Chad Plumley 138 46% Drew Lane (Incumbent) 101 33% Dick Donovan 64 21% Precincts reporting: 100% Just posting what I saw, it could be wrong. We can only hope. Link to post Share on other sites
lowrider Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 O.M.G. I can't believe those fools re-elected that crazy man Hank Johnson. ACCORDING TO THIS LINK IT'S BETWEEN DICK DONAVAN AND DREW LANE Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 O.M.G. I can't believe those fools re-elected that crazy man Hank Johnson. ACCORDING TO THIS LINK IT'S BETWEEN DICK DONAVAN AND DREW LANE there are so many numbers floating around that I don't know WHAT is right!! SOS has Plumley ahead... http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/election_results/2010_0720/swda.htm Link to post Share on other sites
Georgia Dawg Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 According to Fox 5 run off between Plumley and Lane for DA. Well then they have it wrong. DA's. :-) It will be a runoff between Donovan with 38.5% and Lane with 37.1%. Plumley pulling up 3rd. That's with 85% of precincts reporting. Of course that could change but most media outlets would project a winner (runoff in this case) with that percentage. O.M.G. I can't believe those fools re-elected that crazy man Hank Johnson. Those voters are the same fools who voted for Cynthia McKinney. Go figure. Link to post Share on other sites
The Sound Guy Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 OK, can someone explain to me how with electronic voting and reporting that they can still have only counted 10 of 14 voting sites? Link to post Share on other sites
feelip Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Well then they have it wrong. DA's. :-) It will be a runoff between Donovan with 38.5% and Lane with 37.1%. Plumley pulling up 3rd. That's with 85% of precincts reporting. Of course that could change but most media outlets would project a winner (runoff in this case) with that percentage. Those voters are the same fools who voted for Cynthia McKinney. Go figure. The bright side is Hank is too stupid to get anything accomplished. Link to post Share on other sites
gpatt0n Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Folks: We had folks in the field getting the data off the doors. Our figures are pretty doggone accurate despite some of the curves the Voting board threw at us (it was easy to double-count the absentee and early voting numbers) With early voting and absentee counts plus 14 of the 16 precincts reporting we have Donovan leading with 4199 votes (40.39%) to Lanes 3772 votes (36.28%) and Plumley's 23.3%. No way is Plumley in the runoff. I can't say if a person might have transposed a number or two but are totals are pretty doggone close ... and are ahead of the other local reporting agencies. pubby Link to post Share on other sites
The Sound Guy Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 OK, can someone explain to me how with electronic voting and reporting that they can still have only counted 10 of 14 voting sites? Hmmm. Thinking about it I wonder if they can't get their vote totals to tally up and since these crappy voting machines don't have a paper trail, they are are having a hard time finding the error. Link to post Share on other sites
NewsJunky Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Hmmm. Thinking about it I wonder if they can't get their vote totals to tally up and since these crappy voting machines don't have a paper trail, they are are having a hard time finding the error. It sounds like it. Link to post Share on other sites
rockster Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 Hmmm. Thinking about it I wonder if they can't get their vote totals to tally up and since these crappy voting machines don't have a paper trail, they are are having a hard time finding the error. or a conspiracy Link to post Share on other sites
workingforaliving Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 or a conspiracy I like that one....lets go with that. Link to post Share on other sites
NewsJunky Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 I like that one....lets go with that. You know that is my middle name! I like it!! Link to post Share on other sites
feelip Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 What the hell? Paulding County voters have some strange criteria when it comes to selecting a state representative. Now I am in a position to back Paulette Braddock and if that fails, Will Avery. There is no way in hell that I am going to sit still and let the rest of the state think that I am being represented by Daniel Stout. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
politicalmonster Posted July 21, 2010 Report Share Posted July 21, 2010 OK, can someone explain to me how with electronic voting and reporting that they can still have only counted 10 of 14 voting sites? The precincts have voting machines that use memory cards to store the votes. Those cards have to be carefully accounted for at the precinct with checks and balances for totals completed before they come back to the main tallying site. If there are any discrepencies or problems they would need to be worked out prior to leaving the voting place. Once all of the totals are balanced, they are delivered to the election office, where the hundreds of individual cards have to be inserted and read into the state election system. Any kind of technical issues can cause delays at this point, and as with any technology, issues usually arise. Plus every step in the process has multiple checks and double checks to insure the validity and integrity of the ballots along the way. So even though it is "electronic" it still isn't "instant". -PM Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now