Despite earlier predictions, the Humboldt County Elections Office said updated results of the Nov. 2 election won’t be available until tomorrow morning. The office reported late Friday afternoon that the ballot counting is continuing. While staff will be in the office Saturday, it was not clear if the results will be posted online.
I think they meant “when” the results will be posted online, but they have to know that thousands of people are on pins and needles about a few of the races. The close races
1. The D.A. race, though I think the spread is too large to expect Allison Jackson to catch up. And if statistical patterns of past Humboldt County races between progressives and conservatives hold up (with Gallegos as “progressive” and Jackson as “conservative,” Gallegos’ lead will actually widen.
2. The Hospital Board race down here. Estimates of 800 to 1000 votes to be counted, and only 44 votes between the third and (two) fourth place finishers. The progressive/conservative stat dynamics don’t really apply to this race (except that I think Stromstad and Wellborn did benefit from a “conservative” bloc, and to a slightly lesser extent Barb Truitt whose votes actually increased percentage wise at the precincts), but Judy Gonzales actually did outperform Gary Wellborn in precinct votes, though not by much. She seems more likely to catch up to Wellborn than Stromstad who did much better with the early absentees than the precinct voters. But looking at the percentages, 44 votes is significant. It’ll probably be close.
3. Dave Meserve is about 300 votes behind second place Alex Stillman in a race for the second City Council slot. Now, Stillman more than doubled Meserve’s votes in the early absentee count, while Meserve outperformed Stillman in the precinct votes counted on election night by about two percent of the vote. The late absentees and provincials, accounting for those votes to be counted, tend to fall closer to the precinct patterns. There’s about a 300 vote difference. There certainly aren’t 15,000 Arcata votes out there, so the uncounted votes would have to vary dramatically from the pattern of the counted votes. Seems unlikely, but the provincial votes there are probably student-heavy, so it’s bound to get closer.
4. Up in the 5th District, Ryan Sundberg, the “conservative,” holds a lead of less than 100 votes over “progressive” Pat Cleary. It’s close enough that even the slightest statistical anomaly can make the difference. But there’s really no discernible difference between the early absentees and the precinct votes, and I think the Native American vote probably messed up the usual progressive/conservative statistical dynamics. Definite edge to Sundberg.
5. Eureka City Council, Ward 3 – Kuhnel vs. Newman vs. Manns. Conventional wisdom suggests that Xandra Manns run split the progressive vote and thus delivered the win for conservative Newman. The other City Council races were blowouts in favor of the conservatives, so there are two ways to read this race. One is that Ron Kuhnel is personally more popular with Eureka voters than either Larry Glass or Pet LeVallee, and was therefor able to make the race closer. Another possibility is that there is a progressive element in Eureka which was dissatisfied with the progressive slate for one reason or another and so found in Manns a “protest vote” available in lieu of voting for someone more conservative than they. In any case, the vote difference is 171, which allows for a statistical anomaly win, but a solid edge to Newman. Kuhnel did outperform Newman in the precinct vote, and will probably do so in the votes to be counted. But the difference in precinct votes between them was less than 1 percent and Manns actually soaked up most of the precinct vote progressive advantage. There’s no reason to believe she won’t do the same with the late absentees/provincials. But there’s always a chance that Kuhnel’s GOTV brought in 172 votes in the later hour to make the difference. I say that this is the best possibility for a result reversal from election night totals, excluding the hospital race. I give Kuhnel maybe a 40 percent chance.
You can view all the election night results here. Scroll down to near the bottom.

13 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 27, 2010 at 2:44 am
No election results yet – what to look for when they come in … | The Daily Conservative
[...] the rest here: No election results yet – what to look for when they come in … Share and [...]
November 27, 2010 at 8:10 am
Anonymous
A lawyer and an election expert too! Wow
November 27, 2010 at 10:08 am
Eric Kirk
I also fry up same great latkas.
November 27, 2010 at 11:02 am
Dave Kirby
The county elections office has a long history of incompetence. I remember when folks finally got tired of these abnormally long waits for results and voted in Mc Williams whose only promise was to get the votes counted in a timely manner.
November 27, 2010 at 11:07 am
Mitch
And perhaps he did, Dave. The question is whether the results were correct. Certainly, he never passed along the proper instructions to get the Diebold system to count the first deck of ballots.
November 27, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Anonymous
Meserve actually lost ground.
November 27, 2010 at 11:35 pm
Anonymous
More partisan hack disgustingness courtesy Eric Kirk, regurgitating the same biased crap he reads from the Journal/herald axis of drivel. You know, the same ones who predicted Xandra would get 4 percent instead of 14 percent.
For your info Eric, you sad fucks don’t own my vote, and I would have sooner voted for the panhandling veteran down on the corner then vote for either Newman or Kuhnel.
You sad Dem control freaks had your chance to pass ranked choice voting 5 years ago, but Kerrigan and Co. dropped the ball, while Cobb and Kaitlin hijaked the progressive election reform agenda with their Measure T garbage which led to nothing but wasted public resources and a disgusted public.
Keep shining on election reform and we will keep voting against your fake centrist Clintonista neoliberal shills every time. Get a fucking clue or get used to losing, losers.
November 27, 2010 at 11:45 pm
Eric Kirk
Somebody got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.
November 28, 2010 at 12:00 am
Anonymous
Dismissive as ever, unwilling to accept the slightest change in plans — yup, sounds like Eric is following the same playbook Obama’s headed for in his 2012 defeat. Keep that head of yours in the sand Eric, that’s where we enjoy it’s locale while we watch your opponents kick your hind ends and laugh!
November 28, 2010 at 12:02 am
Eric Kirk
And the sun shall turn black as the moon turns red with blood, and the stars shall fall from the sky…
November 28, 2010 at 2:52 am
Tom
This exchange with Anonymous isn’t making you look witty, Eric. More like pathetic. I think there’s a real point being made here about what a real democracy might look like, vs. the winner-take-all gerrymandered sham we have now.
November 28, 2010 at 10:51 am
Eric Kirk
We can have an exchange about ranked choice voting, which by the way is still winner takes all. But the posts come across whiny and nasty, and it doesn’t make me want to engage.
November 28, 2010 at 10:55 am
tra
“disgustingness …regurgitating …crap … drivel… sad fucks…control freaks… garbage …disgusted….fake …shills …losing, losers.”
Tom, it doesn’t seem to me like Anonymous was really inviting meaningful discussion.