RICHMOND — The state Board of Elections on Monday certified Democrat Mark Herring as the winner of the Nov. 5 election for Virginia attorney general, even as the board chairman raised questions about the “integrity” of the vote tallies.
A recount seems likely in the closest-ever statewide election in Virginia history, although the losing candidate did not immediately call for one.
Herring, a state senator from Loudoun County, beat state Sen. Mark Obenshain (R), by 165 votes out of more than 2 million cast.
Herring had 1,103,777 votes to Obenshain’s 1,103,612, according to the certified tally.
Herring and Obenshain were running to succeed Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R), who ran unsuccessfully for governor against Democrat Terry McAuliffe. Should Herring’s victory stand, it would give Democrats a sweep of all three statewide offices.
Senator Obenshain has 10 days to ask for a recount. In this close race, there is probably no room for crowing from either side. The results send a strong message that every vote counts.
It even seems a bit premature to congratulate the new Attorney General- to-be.
The race can also be decided by the General Assembly in a “legislative contest.” Now I just wonder who would win if that happened?
In order to throw the race into the GA the “loser” would have to declare that the election was flawed or that there were irregularities.
But there were irregularities, in Fairfax, surrounding the provisional ballots, as well as a higher proportion of undervotes. Let’s see what results the recount produces. As it stands, a vote shift of 1.3 votes per jurisdiction will overturn the certified results. Thanks to the 2008 legislation authored by Senator Creigh Deeds, every single paper ballot will be recounted. We should expect some changes in the vote tallies. Which direction, is anyone’s guess. Maybe Herring’s lead increases. Maybe he ends up losing. With this being the closest statewide race in Virginia history, anything can happen. Yes, premature to declare this race “done”.
Where did the directive come from in Fairfax? Who controlled the election? That’s something to think about.
I am not sure what you are calling an “undervote.”
They just need to do a recount.
The decision was made by the County Electoral Board, but it would appear that they either exceeded their authority, or violated state election law. This will be for the SBE, and perhaps a judge to decide. “Undervotes” are when no vote is recorded for either candidate in a particular race on a ballot, while the votes were recorded for the other races. It could be that the voter chose not to vote in the AG’s race, while casting ballots for the other races. It could also be that the scantron machine did not pick up the vote, when a preference was actually indicated. In more than a few jurisdictions, undervotes were signficantly higher than in other jurisdictions, which could indicate problems with a particular scantron. This is why a recount is needed. These are “irregularities. Fairfax had several different irregularities, in addition to extending the deadline for provisional ballot validation.
That’s what I thought undervote meant but wanted to make sure we were on the same sheet of music.
It was my understanding that the SBE ordered Fairfax to make the people AND their representative (I am assuming that means the committee of 2 Rs and 1 D) come in. It was all rather confusing.
I would think that as long as everyone went by the same rules, all would be ok. It was a Republican controlled situation in Fairfax. That guy who heads it whose name escapes me for the moment looks like he was on the up and up. He seems to have the respect of people in both parties.
I am not going to argue position now. I wasn’t there and don’t know who said what to whom.