8 Responses to Hoffman Didn’t Lose NY-23 Race After All?

1. Patvann says: 1

   In light of his conceding the race, would it even be legally possible for him to take the seat?

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 9:56 am
2. huh says: 2

   Thieves rarely wait around before hocking thier ill-gotten wares.

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 9:57 am
3. Hard Right says: 3

   OT–obama has rejected all suggestions on Afghanistan and told them to go back to the drawing board.
   I’m sure any minute now the left will scream about obama ignoring the advice of his generals.

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 10:00 am
4. Lorraine says: 4

   But the state of NY has yet to verify the election, so isn’t Owens being sworn in and illegal act

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 11:08 am
5. Patvann says: 5

   http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/11/its_not_over_recanvassing_shows_ny23_race.html

   The new vote totals mean the race will be decided by absentee ballots, of which about 10,200 were distributed, said John Conklin, communications director for the state Board of Elections.
   Under a new law in New York that extended deadlines, military and overseas ballots received by this coming Monday (and postmarked by Nov. 2) will be counted. Standard absentee ballots had to be returned this past Monday.
   Conklin said the state sent a letter to the House Clerk last week explaining that no winner had been determined in the 23rd District, and therefore the state had not certified the election. But the letter noted that Owens still led by about 3,000 votes, and that the special election was not contested — two factors that legally allowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to swear in Owens on Friday.
   “We sent a letter to the clerk laying out the totals,” Conklin said. “The key is that Hoffman conceded, which means the race is not contested. However, all ballots will be counted, and if the result changes, Owens will have to be removed.”

   Could get interesting. If Owens is removed, the vote he placed for the healthcare bill is also removed!

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 11:20 am
6. Missy says: 6

   I’m thinking Sarah Palin just might get a chuckle out of this, and Pelosi might have to be rescued from one of the vats at her vineyard.

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 6:38 pm
7. Old Ez says: 7

   Maybe the reports I read were wrong, but I believe Nancy covered her large A. by passing the bill by two votes. So even if the election were overturned, she’d then claim that Hoffman was not eligible to vote on that bill since he had not officially been declared the winner of the race before that vote was taken. So one of the worst bills (possibly the worst) in American history would still stand.

   There has been precedent of recanting a conceded race because the information available was not accurate. I’m not sure that a race has ever went this long before a recant was successful, but I can’t see why not. The available information was just as inaccurate.(And before anyone asks, I don’t have the exact races and dates in front of me. This is still just a friendly conversation, right?)

   It does seem to me to be impossible to be the legal Rep. before the state has officially verified an official winner. But the Dem’s control any power to enforce the rules, I believe. I won’t be holding my breath on any corrective/punitive action being attempted.

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 8:43 pm
8. Hankster58 says: 8

   The vote was a SHAM anyways…. they got the amount they needed, and the Democrats who voted “against” were ALLOWED to, as they were in areas that they could have suffered election problems had they voted FOR it….. dems won AND covered the Asses of those “vulnerable” seats… Cowards and frauds!!!!

   Reply

   Like or Dislike: 0  0

   November 12, 2009 at 8:47 pm