Posted on 09/20/2012 11:43:54 AM PDT by verum ago
A Superior Court judge has ordered a new election on Oct. 2 in the deadlocked Democratic primary for the 5th General Assembly District.
Judge A. Susan Peck scheduled the new vote after an uncounted absentee ballot with the potential to decide the race was opened in court Wednesday afternoon — and was found to be cast for the third candidate in the race.
The absentee ballot was in an envelope marked "deceased," but election officials found out Tuesday that it was cast by an elderly Windsor woman who is alive and living in a local nursing home.
The uncounted ballot, still in its sealed envelope, had been seen as the possible election-deciding vote because a recount Monday in Windsor gave challenger Brandon McGee one additional vote, tying the race with party-endorsed candidate Leo Canty at 774-774.
A recount in Hartford Tuesday resulted in no change to the results in the city.
McGee, of Hartford, had filed an elections complaint following an initial recount during which he lost a vote in Windsor. Canty, of Windsor, was declared the winner by one vote.
After a highly unusual second recount ordered by Peck, the court hearing on McGee's complaint was reconvened Wednesday with an intense focus on the uncounted absentee ballot.
Peck considered whether to even open the envelope, saying that to do so would identify a voter and her vote, violating the principle of the secret ballot. Peck noted that the woman's name already had been published, but nevertheless ordered that the voter's name not appear in any news medium until a hearing is held on the issue.
Before opening the ballot Peck said, "the court has to balance the privacy rights of the voter against the rights of the voters of the 5th District to have the race determined."
(Excerpt) Read more at courant.com ...
Interesting also the decision to go ahead and open the "mystery ballot" since that would reveal the voter's identity.
BTTT
VOTE THE MARXIST and every other possible democrat OUT!
YOUR VOTE IS NEEDED!
Another take on this is that the recounts did not change the result because they were both Democrats.
I think they mean a “New DEMOCRAT Primary Election”. The official name of the party is “Democrat”. Pisses me off that almost everyone refers to them as the “Democratic” party.
To use the incorrect, unofficial word softens the fact that they’re socialists; they’re anything but democratic.
It does count decisively—in one State Legislative primary in CT. There are a bit more than 6000 state legislative races, this year, plus more than 500 at the federal level (counting the presidential as 50 different races), plus a number of other statewide office elections. Throw in primaries, and you have at least 10,000 elections where one vote might either create or break a tie—in how many has that actually happened, and what was the largest unit in which it has happened? (The larger the unit the less likely one is to have a tie, and even if one does have a tie, the more likely the lawyers will determine things).
The odd thing is that only six people actually voted in the primary. The rest came from a perfectly matched flurry of ballot box stuffing by the two Democrats. < /sarcasm, maybe>
I was hoping that it was the RREPUBLICAN race that would get a do-over. Rorabach is a Lowell Weicker/Pierre Rinfret style candidate.
Let me see if I understand this.
The court rules that the rights of 1,500 Democrat Party primary voters outweigh the privacy rights of one woman in a single Congressional district.
BUT... Obama's privacy rights in Hawaii outweigh 100 million American voters nationwide?
Did I get that right?
-PJ
I hope Paul Panos will win. He is the Republican in the Race!!
"Deceased", "Illegal Alien", "Felon", "ID Theft", "Registered in Two States"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.