Posted on 09/02/2009 6:48:50 AM PDT by iowamark
Democrat Curt Hanson has defeated Republican Stephen Burgmeier by 107 votes in Iowa House District 90, according to unofficial results released by the Iowa Secretary of State’s office Tuesday night.
Hanson will replace former state Rep. John Whitaker (D-Hillsboro), who was appointed to a position with the USDA. The balance of power in Iowa’s lower legislative chamber remains unchanged, with Democrats holding on to a somewhat volatile 56-44 majority.
Tuesday’s turnout was low compared to recent presidential elections but high for a special election, with 8,046 voters casting ballots in the district, which spans Jefferson County and parts of Wapello and Van Buren counties.
The race, which lasted just over one month, focused less on issues of local importance and more on trivia.
Both campaigns released television advertisements featuring cartoons.
The National Organization for Marriage bought more than $80,000 in ads to support Burgmeier, an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage rights. Two other groups — Iowans for Tax Relief and the Iowa Family Policy Center — seemed to play a central role in the Republican’s campaign, which spent more time criticizing Gov. Chet Culver and Democratic bigwigs than talking about Hanson.
For his part, Hanson received less help from third-party groups, but he enjoyed the undivided attention of the Democrats’ statewide organization. Party volunteers descended on the district from across the state, and surrogates — including U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin — made appearances on his behalf.
Iowa Democratic Party Chair Michael Kiernan was quick to release a statement after the results were in. “Democrats have been successful in the last two election cycles and tonight because we have recruited great candidates, followed through on the promises we’ve made and are governing the state responsibly,” he said.
Republicans downplayed the result, implying that they never should have won the race anyway. “While we are disappointed, the fact that Republicans nearly won a solid Culver-Obama legislative district shows that Iowans are not pleased with the status quo and one-party rule in Des Moines,” said party chair Matt Strawn.
House Minority Leader Kraig Paulsen (R-Hiawatha) sounded a similar note in his statement. “While we’re disappointed in the outcome of this race, it is not a surprise,” he said.
In an election this close, almost any single factor could have made the difference.
Hanson built his margin of victory with absentee ballots and strong support in Jefferson County, where both he and Burgmeier live.
Of all 8,046 ballots cast, 4,805 came from Jefferson County. Hanson’s roughly 600-vote margin there was too much for Burgmeier to overcome, even after winning the more rural parts of Van Buren and Wapello counties that fall within the district.
For a race that was supposed to be decided by turnout alone, both sides exceeded expectations. It is even possible that the Burgmeier campaign met its internal vote goal, only to find that its turnout projection was too low. (Otherwise, it would be hard to explain why he had [some] volunteers waving at cars on election day rather than making phone calls or knocking on doors…)
Hanson banked a lot of votes early, allowing his campaign to focus its time and resources on a narrowing universe of voters, maximizing efficiency.
It was a textbook Iowa Democratic campaign, designed to push Hanson across the goal line with little fanfare and a lot of direct contact with voters. And it worked.
Re-COUNT! Re-COUNT!
Rats are gettting good at knowing exactly how many votes they need to manufacture.
On close votes the Dems appear to be able to win 100% of the time. Talk about 6 sigma.
This is the result of ACORN’s Secretary of State project.
The SoS is in charge of state elections. It’s no coincidence that the Minnesota SoS is one of these ACORN installed guys, and that EVERY decision in the Franken runoff went in his favor.
He who casts the votes decides nothing,
he who counts the votes decides everything.
Stalin
Despite Obama's and the Democrat's declining poll numbers provided by Rasmussen, Gallup or others, the Republicans are NOT winning these elections and I don't see that as a good sign. The public still prefers to elect Democrats right now, whether by tiny margins or large ones and I'm worried.
Just wondering here....Why is it that rats win every "close" election since Bush v. gore?
Yeah, I guess I know the answer. Uncle Joe Stalin said it best, "It's not who votes, its who COUNTS the votes".
This is most discouraging! I thought for sure folk would vote against the LYING SOB RAT!
Hey - if you’re from Texas - home of Landslide Lyndon - you know how the game is played!
This was still a poor showing for a Dem in this district, and winning only by a plurality (I’m unclear the leaning of the 3rd party candidates). The narrowness of the victory, indeed, calls into question potential vote fraud.
I was involved in a campaign last year where this happened. Our guy needed 16,000 votes to win, and we got more than that. We won the election-day vote by a margin of 55-45, a margin of over 2,400 votes. Then the absentee ballots came in and we lost - after the recount the final margin was less than 25 votes. The Obama turnout machine won it for the Democrat with absentee votes and early satellite voting.
Nah, what killed us was the two conservative independent candidates. Had we had those votes Burgmeier would have won.
That and the absentees.
Yes it was. This district has been Dem for the greater part of 15 years. He won Wapello county which is union Dem to the core. I have heard that absentees were why he lost Jefferson, his home county. It’s a heartbreaking loss but really doesn’t spell good for the Dems IMO.
The two indepdendents were conservative, we have a big problem here of people jumping in and then running around attacking good GOP candidates and saying ‘I’m the real conservative here’. If Burgmeier would have got those votes he would’ve won. It’s killing us.
That’s what makes me so angry, when we finally do nominate Conservative Republican candidates, we have these 3rd party idiots shoot us in the head and give the Democrats these gifts. It’s one thing if the party runs liberals (as is the case with a current Congressional race in NY), but instances such as this race simply make no sense. Also makes you wonder if the Democrats bankroll these candidates. Perhaps we should bankroll Green Party candidates to peel off votes on the left. The rodents fight dirty, and we have to match them or we’ll get screwed.
It does indeed. Yeah I’m all for bankrolling a Green party person. Screw ‘em.
Crap.
That’s why I’m reluctant to ever support third party candidates or indies, they’ll run against good Republicans too. Don’t want to encourage them.
Actually, Hanson ran on allowing the citizens of Iowa to vote on the issue of gay marriage. He ran to cut spending and hold the line on taxes. He was blatantly dishonest as well as those pesky “third party” candidates sucked off 300 votes that would have easily given the R the win.
Both of these parasites were running as social conservatives. They are disgusting.
For example, you can find plenty of Illinois conservatives who will fess up to voting for Libertarian Cal Skinner for Governor in 2002, knowing Jim Ryan would have lost anyway... but I've never seen ONE person admit to voting for Gary Shilts, the Libertarian candidate for A.G. that year. Skinner got 73,000 votes, Shilts (who was invisible during the campaign), got 88,000 votes -- 15,000 MORE than Cal Skinner's "successful" candidacy.
The numbers broke down to 50% for Madigan, 48% Birkett, 2% Shilts. If every one of those 88,000 Shilts supporters had voted for Birkett instead, he would have squeaked past her by a narrow 300 vote majority or so. Where are the Shilts supporters to fess up on giving us eight years of little Lisa?
Likewise, try finding any North Carolina conservative who will admit to voting for Bob Barr instead of Sarah Palin in 2008. Thanks to them, Marxist Obama carried that state for the first time since LBJ (and Obama is no LBJ)
Of course I think there's a place for third party candidates, but it should be as a LAST resort. We need them to give conservatives a genuine choice on the ballot when the "Republican" candidate is so incredibly bad that they're indistinguishable from the Dem. But yes even if those cases we need a Greenie on the ballot too, to make a fair fight. That's how we had a Constitution Party guy on the ballot here in Illinois in 2008, the two parties just agreed "I won't challenge the third party guy sucking away my votes if you don't challenge the third party sucking away yours" and as a result every ideologue got to be represented on the ballot.
It's unfortunate there's not more examples of the dummycrats wasting their votes on a third party loon when they have a good socialist as the RAT nominee, though the Naderites in 2000 are perhaps the best example (just shows you how nutty Michael Moore is when Al Gore isn't "green" enough for him) Far more examples of Republicans being the victim of third party spoilers, though.
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.