Unofficial count has charter losing by nine votes. Still eighteen military ballots could come in. I am told the average return of military ballots is 25%.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Saratoga Springs Politics 
Existing charter losing by nine votes, is that what you mean?
Not nit-picking, just want to be sure what you are saying.
LikeLike
Thank you Henry. Proposed charter down by 9
LikeLike
I intend to write a little more about how this all played out, but for now (11pm on 11.14) I’d like to throw in these two relevant facts: 1) at this moment, exactly zero military ballots have been received by BOE.
2) The deadline for receipt of a military ballot is Monday, 11.20,. Those ballots (if any) will be opened and counted the next day/.
LikeLike
Arthur, did you get a sense of from where most of those absentee ballots were mailed? For instance, Wesley, the Embury, etc.?
p.s. the Saratogian’s headline was also a bit confusing “Charter Appears Headed to Defeat” . Or maybe it’s just me? I think adding the word Change makes a difference. “Charter Change Appears Headed to Defeat”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Henry:
1) Absentee ballots can be mailed anywhere a registered voter requests it. It is common sense that this universe would be a greater percentage of seniors / snowbirds , etc. Some are in their winter home well before Labor Day and receive their ballots there. Others who hail from here are students out of state, but that is a much lower %. People in the 25-55 age groupings, however, are under represented compared to the general electorate.
2) The Saratogian has been confusing its readers for well over a century – i see no reason they should stop now,
LikeLike
Ahhhh, “The Game” continues!
The charter fiasco is down to the paltry few (yet important) ballots from armed forces members due back by November 20th. The cons are some 10 votes ahead and the pros are now the proverbial nail biters. Poetic justice or goofy shenanigans of “The Game?”
By-the-way: Nice photo in the Daily Gazette this morning.
A combination of smug tenure and incontinence.
What if, say, certain college students were encouraged to vote in city elections?
Not that any outcome would seriously effect their personal agendas in four years of transitory residency.
Just, what if?
From Skidmore News:
“Candidates for office in Saratoga Springs often win local elections by a small margin of votes.
In the 2005 mayoral race, for instance, Democratic candidate Valerie Keehn triumphed over her
incumbent Republican opponent by just 161 votes with the help of 107 Skidmore students.”
(http://skidmorenews.com/new-blog/2015/11/8/vote-because-you-can)
Let’s just extrapolate from the base line for a moment.
What if a certain skulduggery of odd-fellows, took it upon themselves to play a little game.
A game of power, mockery and intrigue.
They’d have nothing to lose, no negative consequence to suffer; except those not tenured, of course!
Enter one, highly regarded political science college professor (we’re not making this up…hang in there),
two white-top ‘has-beens’ and a few knuckleheads whom have not had external stimulation in a fortnight; throw in a few tag-alongs and there you have it:
A coalition of like minded stirrer-uppers out for the cheap thrill of the old medulla oblongata!
So, the venerable leader of this pack of miscreants (a respected curmudgeon of academia),
manages to persuade millennial-challenged, student progs, to participate in his scheme.
IE: Help sway an election?
“Nay!” Says you?
“Extra credit and an academic nose-browning;” Says Eye!
What if this agenda is not as noble as perceived but that of a simple power play?
What if said agenda is tongue-in-cheek demonstration of the power of academic influence upon nubile neophytes?
What are the chances that a few side-pocket votes would be able to sway an election one way or another?
Ah, there’s the test! And there in lies “The Game.”
And this game is possibly, being enacted on a national scale.
Plausibility cannot be denied.
Congratulations on a game well played, professor.
It has been most entertaining, to say the least.
-JC
LikeLike
Well JC my clear and present danger, my very thoughts 20 years ago.
LikeLike
@JC – should we also go back to limiting the voting population to only land owners?
LikeLike
Hey Bart!
Possibly, consider replacing “land owners” with “those of vested interest.”
Maybe, it has more to do with consequence and accountability.
Some, in common circles, can relate to those antiquated concepts.
While others know their kissing cousins: Risk and Liability.
Be well,
JC 🙂
LikeLike
should be considered at least.
LikeLike