Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Third-party candidates could deny majority vote [MS Gov Race Could Go to State House of Reps]
The Sun Herald ^ | 10/21/03 | GEOFF PENDER

Posted on 10/22/2003 6:00:37 AM PDT by BlackRazor

Third-party candidates could deny majority vote

By GEOFF PENDER

THE SUN HERALD

Election Day is Nov. 4, but a perfect storm may be brewing that could delay the selection of a governor for days, weeks or even months. Third-party candidates threaten to siphon enough votes to deny either the incumbent, Democrat Ronnie Musgrove, or Republican challenger Haley Barbour the majority vote required by Mississippi law.

The two have been tracking even for most of the campaign season, each polling in the mid-40 percent range, and with Election Day two weeks away, the possibility grows that neither would receive a majority of the popular vote and a majority of electoral votes, which is measured by House districts.

If no candidate reaches both of those majority votes, the House will decide the race as it did in 1999 when Musgrove was selected over Republican Mike Parker by an 86-36 vote. That election, the longest in state history, wasn't decided until nearly two months after election night when the next legislative session began.

Secretary of State Eric Clark on Monday told The Sun Herald, "What I fear is a repeat of the 1999 election, where it took us 10 days to even determine the electoral votes, and then the election had to be decided in the House."

Clark cited a proliferation of split precincts as an issue leading to ever greater confusion on the part of voters. Recent redistricting has created a "mess" that could leave voters bewildered, said Clark, who oversees elections.

"The devil is in the split voting precincts," he said. "When the state Legislature redrew the House districts, computer technology allows you to go in and carve up precincts. It's real easy to do, but it's not good policy. Four years ago, they had been redrawn after the '90 Census to where we had about 200 split precincts. This year we have about 400.

"If this ends up in a dead heat like everybody's predicting, it could be a really, really long and painful process."

The possibility that either Musgrove or Barbour would attain a majority on Nov. 4 is undermined by other candidates on the ballot.

Two in particular could erode the votes of the front-runners. John Thomas Cripps, the Constitution Party candidate, could harm Barbour's total, while Sherman Lee Dillon, the Green Party candidate, poses a threat to Musgrove.

Cripps' role may be the most intriguing of all in the election, given his leadership in the successful 2002 fight to keep the current state flag and its Confederate Rebel emblem. Each vote for Cripps would likely be stripped right off the top of Barbour's effort.

The state Republican Party has campaigned extensively on the flag issue, apparently recognizing that it is important to hold on to those voters to whom this issue has special appeal, largely conservative white males. Barbour wears crossed flags on his lapel, both the American and Mississippi state flags.

Dillon, a well-known blues musician and college professor, appeals to demographics that are traditionally Democratic.

Together these two candidates could make election night a long one in Mississippi.


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections; US: Mississippi
KEYWORDS: barbour; governor; mississippi; musgrove

1 posted on 10/22/2003 6:00:38 AM PDT by BlackRazor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Coop
Thought you'd be interested in this. The article references some polling (I have seen no polls on this race). More importantly, though, is the prospect that this race will be decided by the state house of reps. I didn't realize MS was set up that way. The Democrats currently have a greater than 2-to-1 majority in the house, so Musgrove might be saved after all.
2 posted on 10/22/2003 6:02:20 AM PDT by BlackRazor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackRazor
Third-party candidates threaten to siphon enough votes to deny either the incumbent, Democrat Ronnie Musgrove, or Republican challenger Haley Barbour the majority vote required by Mississippi law.

"Siphon"? Sounds like they have the idea that the "major" parties own the voters.

3 posted on 10/22/2003 6:08:46 AM PDT by alpowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackRazor
If memory serves me right, Haley Barbour was Chairman of the RNC and was a RINO. This sounds like a good election to vote for the Constitution Party and send a message to the Republican Party.
4 posted on 10/22/2003 6:12:19 AM PDT by rcofdayton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackRazor
I didn't realize that a majority was required, either. Could be a nail biter.
5 posted on 10/22/2003 6:13:30 AM PDT by Coop (God bless our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: alpowolf
"Siphon"? Sounds like they have the idea that the "major" parties own the voters.

Well, "siphon" means to draw away from a higher elevation to a lower elevation. If the major-party candidates are polling higher (i.e. have a higher elevation), then anyone who's polling lower (and receiving increasing support) is by definition siphoning away from them. That's just the definition of the word. No malice is necessarily present here.

6 posted on 10/22/2003 6:16:06 AM PDT by BlackRazor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Coop
Whatever happened to Ross Perot. He has not been on Larry King for years. I love to hear his take on the Moslem terrorists. Do you think he would call Islam a religion of peace.
7 posted on 10/22/2003 6:19:59 AM PDT by philosofy123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Coop
Yep. Like the article said, that's what happened in the last race between Musgrove and Parker. What they didn't mention is that while neither one got a majority of votes, Musgrove did get more votes than Parker. If Haley outpolls Musgrove, many of those that voted for Musgrove last time may switch their votes. MS Dems are, for the most part, more conservative that national ones. If Haley pulls more, it'll be interesting to see what happens.
8 posted on 10/22/2003 6:22:42 AM PDT by TheBigB (Remember ladies...spandex is a privilege, not a right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: BlackRazor
I don't mean to imply malice so much as unconcious bias. I follow the analogy you make but there's still a problem. You cannot siphon from an empty tank. Aside from the fact that the election has not yet been held and there are no votes to count (and polls are suspect at best), there is the fact that an election where 50% of eligible voters show up is considered "high turnout". I think that the assumption that third-party votes are "taken" from the "major" parties is shaky, at best.
10 posted on 10/22/2003 7:09:20 AM PDT by alpowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BlackRazor
MS election laws say that if no candidate receives a majority of the vote (51%), then the winner shall be determined by who won the most House districts. If two candidates win an equal amount of House districts, then the MS House will vote for the winner.

This is what happened in 1999. Musgrove beat Mike Parker, 50%-49%. Musgrove won 61 MS House districts. Ditto for Parker. The MS House declared Musgrove the winner. The same scenario might happen in November 2003.
11 posted on 10/22/2003 10:24:54 AM PDT by Kuksool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson