Only 4.55% of Georgia Registered Voters Voted in November 30, 2010 Statewide Runoff

Georgia held a a statewide run-off election on November 30, 2010, for the statewide positions for which no candidate had received at least 50% on November 2.  The most important office on the run-off ballot was for Justice of the State Supreme Court, a non-partisan race.

Whereas 2,090,164 voters had cast a ballot for that office on November 2, only 263,565 votes were cast for the same office on November 30.  That number is only 4.55% of the number of registered voters in Georgia.


Comments

Only 4.55% of Georgia Registered Voters Voted in November 30, 2010 Statewide Runoff — 13 Comments

  1. Those 42 states are wrong. We need to have at least “run-off” elections – regardless of the cost or the turnout – or we need the IRV system.

    An office holder – whether in the White House or the Court House – should know a majority of the people have supported him or her.

  2. P.R. and App.V.

    NO MORON primaries, runoff primary elections and general election runoff elections.

    ONE election day a year.

    Even perhaps ONE year terms for ALL officers — to reduce the growing arrogance of the party hack MONSTERS in public offices.

    History note – once upon a time CT had 6 month terms — May and Nov. elections.

  3. All 49 of the 50 states that have bicameral legislatures are wrong because they elect both houses by plurality.
    The logic for electing both houses by plurality ended when SCOTUS mandated “one man, one vote” for state legislative reapportionment in the early 60s. Before then, states had been able to take into account tradition, county lines and other factors when drawing district lines. Since then we’ve had mirror-image houses with fundamentally the same constituencies. So one house in each of the affected states has been rendered redundant since the SCOTUS decision.*

    Logic (in most parts of the world)would dictate that at least one of the houses would be elected by a form of Proportional Representation.

    *There’s an exception in NY State. The corrupt bipartisan cabal that rules there has decided for the last 40 years that the main parties should get one house a piece. Over the years,this took more and more creative gerrymandering as the state became more and more “blue”.

  4. #4 Washington, Georgia, and Louisiana do not elect their legislature by plurality. Only in Pretend World was the reason for population disparity between districts in legislatures due to some sort of recognition of a difference between the two houses.

  5. If Georgia would switch to a Top 2 system then the non-partisan judicial offices would be resolved during the primary.

    Given the relative return vote for different candidates, it appears the decisions made in the runoff were more deliberate and intentional, as opposed to random markings at the bottom of the ballot.

  6. The AREA fixation ROT came from the AREA formation ROT in the English House of Commons in the 1200s — a mere 700 plus years ago.

    ROT carried to the British American colonies — subarea ROT starting when colony populations got large enough such that ALL adult makes could NOT assemble in person and make colony laws — see the plantations on the James River in VA starting in 1607.

    Thus the current whining in the U.K. about even thinking about having IRV for electing the gerrymander MPs in the House of Commons in the regime.

    App.V. note — IF the Electors fail to elect executive/judicial officers with majority votes, then perhaps the legislative body by a majority vote could make temporary appointments.

  7. @Alabama Independent:

    Instant runoffs don’t guarantee majorities either.

    Oakland, CA’s mayoral race, for instance, was performed via IRV, and the winner had only about 48% of the ballots when the third-place candidate was eliminated.

    Although he’s a bit difficult to follow, fundamentally I agree with Demo Rep; approval voting and/or proportional representation are the way forward.

    Not that approval voting guarantees a majority either (although, in practice, majority winners are all-but guaranteed) but out of the universe of imperfect voting methods, approval voting is the least of all evils. http://rangevoting.org/BayRegsFig.html

  8. #1: 42 states don’t have party runoff (or second) primaries. Of the eight states that do, all but Oklahoma are in the South.

    In the early 1900s, when states began requiring parties to hold primaries, elections in almost all of the South were decided in the Democratic primary. Runoff primaries were necessary to ensure that no one was elected with a small plurality (Mississippi was first to adopt the runoff [or second] primary).

    Georgia enacted runoff general elections in reaction to the 1966 governor’s election. Lester Maddox (D) finished second in the popular vote, but a write-in candidate prevented anyone from getting 50%-plus. The Democratic-controlled legislature then elected Maddox.

    The “top two” system is actually a two-step general election, so Louisiana and Washington state also have runoff general elections. If its “top two” is upheld, California will join them.

    #4 and #5: Nebraska, with the lone unicameral legislature, uses the “top two” to elect its legislature, which requires 50%-plus to win.

    #6: The “top two” would cure most of the world’s ills, wouldn’t it? The Georgia legislature won’t enact that horror show, and I don’t think the state has the initiative process.

    Arizona tried runoff general elections for a while, in the wake of Evan Mecham’s election as governor with some 40% of the vote.

    New York City has a party runoff primary when no one gets at least 40%. This was enacted in reaction to the 1969 mayor’s race, when Mario Procaccino won the Democratic primary with 32.8%.

  9. Tennessee is the only former Confederate state that has never had party runoff (or second) primaries. Ray Blanton won the 1974 Democratic primary for governor with 22.7%. Algore won the 1976 Dem primary for the US House with 35.7%.

    Virginia eliminated second primaries circa 1970, as did Florida in 2002.

    Louisiana does not have party primaries, except for president.

  10. Are the 8 gerrymander regimes with top 2 and runoffs somehow magically better than the other 42 gerrymander regimes ???

  11. #9 re #6. Top 2 would solve Georgia’s particular problem where a judicial vacancy may draw multiple candidates, such that none are likely to receive a majority in the general election, with a runoff required.

    Louisiana has non-partisan judicial elections, but doesn’t have the problem of low participation in runoffs.

  12. #12: According to the post above, Georgia already has nonpartisan, or “top two,” judicial elections.

    My state has nonpartisan “top two” elections for state and county judgeships. It’s pretty rare for a second round to be necessary, as someone usually gets 50%-plus in the first round (there are often only two candidates running for a judicial post).

    My state has the first round for such nonpartisan races on general election day. Any necessary runoffs are held three weeks later.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.