{"id":6586,"date":"2010-08-01T20:07:13","date_gmt":"2010-08-02T03:07:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/?p=6586"},"modified":"2010-08-01T20:07:13","modified_gmt":"2010-08-02T03:07:13","slug":"independent-party-of-oregon-nomination-results-what-candidates-will-get-an-extra-ballot-position-boost","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/2010\/08\/01\/independent-party-of-oregon-nomination-results-what-candidates-will-get-an-extra-ballot-position-boost\/","title":{"rendered":"Independent Party of Oregon nomination results. What candidates will get an extra ballot position boost?"},"content":{"rendered":"

On July 14, I posted the following regarding the nominating process of the “Independent Party of Oregon”:<\/p>\n

They\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re going to get John Kitzhaber on the ballot.\u00c2\u00a0 Which is a little odd, considering that John Kitzhaber is already on the ballot, which means that the original founding purpose of this party is either void or a ballot line in waiting.<\/em><\/p>\n

I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll be sure to put up a blog post on the accuracy or inaccuracy of my prediction that John Kitzhaber will win the Independent Party nomination, and the startling repurcussions and meaning of such a thing.<\/em><\/p>\n

Well here we are.\u00c2\u00a0 Kitzhaber has won the nomination for the Independent Party of Oregon.<\/p>\n

Sal Peralta says:\u00c2\u00a0
\nThis was the first binding statewide election held in the United States to be conducted entirely over the internet.
\nThis was easily the largest election ever held by a minor political party in Oregon.
\nMore people voted and more candidates participated than for any other minor party election in Oregon history.<\/em><\/p>\n

As opposed to Kurt Chapman:
\nI think it very difficult to draw any statewide conclusion from a 4% voter turnout. I’m glad that this party (reluctant to call them ‘Independent’) is trying something new. However let’s get serious, the vote is hardly representative.<\/em><\/p>\n

Dan Meek says: Notably, candidates NOT identified with any major party often did quite well. For example, Scott Reynolds defeated Lee Beyer (D nominee) in Senate District 6 by 46-18. Kevin Prociw defeated Val Hoyle (D nominee) in Representative District 14 by 26-16. Both Reynolds and Prociw are new to politics, having cut their teeth on the recent “Randy Pape Beltway” controversy in Lane County. In Representative District 45, Laura Bell came within one vote of denying the nomination to Kitty Harmon (R nominee).<\/em><\/p>\n

And Kitzhaber won by name recognition.<\/p>\n

The question of the moment, not knowable<\/a>:
\nThe endorsement for governor clearly went to Democrat John Kitzhaber<\/strong>, but a little context is necessary too. Republican Chris Dudley<\/strong> didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t seek the nomination, so his name wasn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t listed. So: Kitzhaber got 850 votes, but two little-knowns, Jerry Wilson and Richard Esterman, got a total of 738. Were some of those de facto Dudley votes?<\/em><\/p>\n

I suppose it increases the chances for all these candidates.\u00c2\u00a0 If the top ballot position is worth some percentage of the vote, if the South Carolina Democratic Primary results are any indication then in a complete absence of information to a 6 to 4 margin — then you figure that people who’s impulse bias is down ticket will snatch behind Kitzhaber.<\/p>\n

Dan Meek again:
\nThe actual candidate receiving the highest number of votes in each race was the winner, even if \u00e2\u20ac\u0153None of the Above\u00e2\u20ac\u009d got more votes. Including \u00e2\u20ac\u0153None of the Above\u00e2\u20ac\u009d as an option was an experiment.<\/em><\/p>\n

In the future, will “None of the Above” winning nab a blank position on the ballot?<\/p>\n

Linda Williams<\/a>:
\nWe will definitely do a comprehensive review which will be publicly available on demographics of the voters, campaign techniques, etc. For example, there is great variablity in turnout by district. In the 4th Congressional District (Eugene, Southern OR coast), which accounts for about 20% of state population and our own membership, the turnout was close to 7%.<\/em><\/p>\n

KJ on the socioeconomic situation:
\nOne thing that is completely overlooked in all the hoopla about internet voting in Oregon is the fact that internet access is not spread evenly across the state. In fact, there are places in Oregon that can only access the internet via the installation of expensive satellite systems. No DSL, no broadband, not even reliable dialup.<\/em><\/p>\n

Hm. \u00c2\u00a0 I guess the Independent Party of Oregon will skew away some older voters and some poorer voters.\u00c2\u00a0 It’s like the upper caste Mugwumps all over again.<\/p>\n

Further Criticism:<\/p>\n

What actually transpired was more like an online convention, but without the glad-handing by politicians and after-hours socializing \u00e2\u20ac\u201d in other words, it was not a lot of fun for most people, which may help explain the extremely low participation rate of 4 per cent by the 57,000 or so voters registered as members of the Independent Party. Those who chose to participate in the online nominating process were required to complete the ballot in one session, all the while wrestling with an unfamiliar website \u00e2\u20ac\u201c a tough challenge for all but the most computer-savvy and committed voters.<\/em><\/p>\n

Whatever — it’s not an entity that is for me.\u00c2\u00a0 I’ll wait for the rebirth of the Whig Party.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On July 14, I posted the following regarding the nominating process of the “Independent Party of Oregon”: They\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re going to get John Kitzhaber on the ballot.\u00c2\u00a0 Which is a little odd, considering that John Kitzhaber is already on the ballot, which means that the original founding purpose of this party is either void or a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6586","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6586","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6586"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6586\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6608,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6586\/revisions\/6608"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6586"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6586"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6586"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}