Burns Predicts Victory in Final Count for 12th District Contest
SAVANNAH, Ga. – Former U.S. Representative and current candidate Max Burns today predicted ultimate victory in the race for Georgia’s 12th District, once all votes have been accurately recorded and certified.
“Based on information in the belated recording of our tremendous showing in Effingham County, I believe a thorough and independent review of vote totals district-wide will result in our winning this race,” says Burns. “I am instructing our staff and supporters to continue aggressively working with state election officials to ensure that final count is timely, comprehensive, and accurate.”
Georgia Secretary of State Cathy Cox today reported Burns carried Effingham County with nearly 74% of the vote. Those results were unavailable last night due to technical difficulties.
The landslide in Burns’ favor all but erased a slim lead in the total district vote by incumbent Democratic Congressman John Barrow, bringing the contest back to a virtual 50-50 tie, with only around 1,000 votes separating the candidates. The narrow margin is well within the 1% threshold margin to initiate an automatic recount.
Burns says that in a race as competitive as that in the 12th District, both campaigns owe the voters an absolutely accurate and clean vote count.
“Regardless of who wins, this election of nearly 150,000 people will come down to just a few hundred ballots,” says Burns. “This is a golden opportunity to let the public know just how much their vote can mean in an election. We need to work together to guarantee that this outcome is not marred by any hint of inaccuracy or fault in the voting process that would negate the vote of any person.”
The Secretary of State will continue tabulating votes until Monday, when a final tally will be certified and reported, opening the way for a formal recount request if necessary.
34 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Both campaigns have conceded that the final tally will reflect a margin of less than 1 percent, which would trigger a recount if Burns asks for one.
But, since Georgia switched to electronic voting in 2002, no recount has changed the outcome, said Ashley Holt, a spokeswoman for the secretary of state’s office.
“When vote tallies have changed,” Holt said, “it typically has been slightly.”
I mean seriously, isn’t it about time for Max to go ahead and call and congratulate John B. on his victory?
It’s not over until it’s over. If the numbers were the other way around, Barrow would be doing the same thing. Obviously, the recount option is built into the system for a reason when races are so close, so let the process work the way it’s supposed to. If Barrow ends up winning, I’m sure that Mr. Burns will call to congratulate him since that’s the kind of guy he is—gracious, honest and always doing the right thing.
Andrea, you’re very right.
In an election this close, it is important that all votes are correctly tallied and that every vote counts. There are still enough votes to swing this election either way, regardless of what Barrow may be claiming, so it is not yet appropriate for anyone to concede or claim victory at this point. Beyond that, when it is this close, a recount MAY be necessary to determine that the outcome is 100% correct.
To my knowledge, the Burns camp is still quite optimistic that the result may be favorable to Max.
Instead of doing the honorable thing, Max Burns has decided to shoot himself in the stomach and bleed to death.
FROM THE ASSOCIATED PRESS:
In an age of electronic voting machines that tally ballots like a calculator, is there still a chance for recounts to change the outcome? Not much, say election officials who have used the machines since 2002.
That’s because in a recount the machines simply add the same votes already stored in their memory, said Judy Suhor, elections supervisor in Effingham County, which voted overwhelmingly for Burns.
“We’re going to punch the exact same figures into a calculator again, and 1-and-1 is still going to come out to be that same 2,” Suhor said. “It’s impossible to really make a difference.”
However, absentee votes and provisional votes _ those cast by voters whose eligibility is challenged at the polls - are still cast on paper ballots in Georgia.
Recounts have turned up minor variations in vote counts in the four years since Georgia implemented electronic voting, but not enough to change the outcome, said Chris Riggall, spokesman for Secretary of State Cathy Cox.
“In every instance, any change that has occurred has been attributed to the paper ballots that have been scanned,” Riggall said. “Errors can be made in any process that involves human beings.”
With all but two precincts reporting Thursday evening, unofficial returns showed Barrow with 50.3 percent of the vote with 142,357 votes cast. The outstanding precincts were in Augusta-Richmond County and rural Montgomery County.
Okay guys,
First of all, there are seven precincts still not reporting. They are in: Bulloch, Effingham, Johnson, Montgomery, Richmond, Toombs and Warren. Barrow won Richmond and barely squeaked out Warren, but in the other five, Burns cleaned house. There could easily be enough votes there to change any potential outcome.
That means, Chis (sic), that the “honorable” thing is to wait until all of the votes are recounted and certified before declaring one way or the other. Barrow, however, would seem to choose to cut the Democratic process short when it favors him.
The Burns camp is right to wait and see the full total of the results before acting, especially when the difference between the two candidates is just barely six-tenths of one-percent.
Lets count all of the votes, the public deserves that much. Neither side should have any problem with that–if they do, we need to know that too! Lets also hope what we all hoped in 2000, that those re-counters would be honest.
I could not agree with you more. All the votes need to be counted. If I were you, I would do some research to learn about the precincts that are not reporting. You will find that they are just provisional ballots, not like the other precincts in the counties. In Bulloch County, for example, you might find that the total number of provisional ballots is less than 20. And the total in the whole district is less than 100. It is funny you bring up 2000 because Max is beginning to look like a sore loserman.
“I could not agree with you more. All the votes need to be counted… Max is beginning to look like a sore loserman.”
Well which is it Chris? I’m hearing rings of John Kerry in your statement: “I voted for it, before I voted against it.”
How can you say that Max should observe the Democratic process by making sure that every vote is counted and the final count is certified, and then turn around and say Max is a “sore loserman” for doing so?
Just saying. Hell, I voted for Max even though he lied. You know, some times enough is enough and it’s time to get on with your life.
This blog is full of lies. Two days ago you guys were saying there were roughly 4,000 votes left to be counted.
Just yesterday, at Max’s press conference, he stated that the number of votes left to be counted was not in the “thousands and thousands”.
I’m not at all surprised the Max Burns era will end on another lie.
SOS office has it at (Burns vs. Barrow)- 70,023 vs. 70,986
each of these counties has one precinct out:
Bulloch, Effingham, Johnson, Montgomery, Richmond, Toombs, Warren
CNN has it: 70,684 vs. 71,573
the numbers they use are the same as the SOS for
Bulloch, Effingham, Johnson, Richmond, Warren
they have different, higher numbers for Toombs and Montgomery.
BULLOCH 17 18 8,226 4,398
RICHMOND 43 44 9,261 17,009
EFFINGHAM 22 23 7,964 2,799
JOHNSON 8 9 1,216 803
WARREN 7 8 727 801
so lets play a game with the numbers we have now to try and see who will win
please note that this game is not accurate since precincts are not uniform and do not vote congruent to other precincts - its just for kicks
take warren county. it has 8 precincts. first, we try to determine how many TOTAL votes it has (x). 7/8x = 1528. so we assume that 8/8, or the total votes (x), will be 1746.
now we take the split reported now (Barrow 52%) and multiply the total votes (1746) by .52 - we get 907 final votes for Barrow. we can do the same for Burns (1746 * .48) to get 838 final votes, but its really only nessecary to do it for the candidate with the percentage advantage. we are looking to see how many votes will be added by each county
Warren: 106 (adding 106 to Barrows 889 vote lead)
new total: Barrow 995
Bulloch: 12,624 total votes
13,366 final votes
8687 for Burns
- 462 (taking 462 votes away from Barrows lead)
new total: Barrow 533
Effingham: 10,763 total votes
11.252 final votes
8,327 for Burns
- 363
new total: Barrow 170
Johnson: 2019 total votes
2271 final votes
1363 for Burns
- 147
new total: Barrow 23
Richmond
26,270 total votes
26,880 final votes
17,472 for Barrow
464
final total: Barrow 487
itll be interesting to see how this matches up to the final results
interesting for me, anyway.
Well “john barrow” (we would appreciate it if you used your real name) a lot has changed over two days. At the time, the estimates were 4,000. Since then, much of those have been counted and the number has become clearer and is now in the hundreds. That’s not a lie, that’s a passage of time.
And updater,
We appreciate that breakdown. If anything, like our previous breakdowns, it shows that this race is STILL way too close. A mere 487 (as you predict) out of more than 140,000 is such a close amount that: a.) Neither candidate should concede or claim victory and b.) Voters deserve to know the winner was actually the person with the most votes, not simply the first person to claim victory. What all of this “number-crunching” shows us is that these results are too ambiguous right now and absolutely need, at least, a recount.
No rush, guys. Max Burns will concede within a week and John Barrow can start looking for a much bigger, nicer office suite. Maybe he’ll get Charlie Norwood’s office now that Republicans will have to move to the basement. But one thing is certain, Max Burns won’t ever be able to run for Congress again. I doubt any Republican would give him a dime of their money. His political career was a fluke from the start. No one, not even Republicans, thought he could win in 2002, but he managed to barely beat the son of a convicted felon. It says a lot when two trips from the President, deep in red-state country, can’t get you the 600 votes you need. Maybe Burnsy can team up with Guy Millner. I hear some political graveyard headstones need scrubbing.
Matthew,
If by “barely… in 2002″ you mean “won by 10 percent (14,574 votes) in a pretty Democratic district (Cook rated it D +8) that most considered safely Democrat at the time,” then sure.
As to the rest, your claims are undignified and warrant no response. Period.
So…if there were “roughly” 4,000 votes left to count a few days ago, that would mean that something like 3,500 more votes would have been counted.
That has not happened.
Listen “john barrow,” you’re desperately digging for something that’s not there.
The numbers since the election, all the way through now, and until at least Monday, have been rough at best. We estimated 4,000 votes on Wednesday because those were the numbers we were hearing. Nobody knew for sure and we even SAID we could be off by a few hundred votes or more.
And even NOW nobody knows for sure, which is why a decision has not been made. I’m not sure where your numbers are coming from, because the official total still shows only 98% reporting. If you do the math on the remaining two-percent, you’ll find there could be at least 2,500 hundred votes left.
We all know that’s not true, but you should see the point. And we made our estimate with less than 94-percent reporting.
Obviously, we have all heard numbers that show only 200 or 500 or 800 votes still uncounted, but that’s the point, NOBODY KNOWS. Those numbers are all estimates. So if someone is off by a few hundred votes right now - and especially a few days ago - it actually makes more sense than if they were dead on.
How you can come on here and throw down a definite number on an undetermined count and then have the GAUL to say we lied, is beyond me. But this is the last time I will argue you on something so petty and trite.
At any rate, until you can prove that you are indeed John Barrow, you are banned.
What Max Burns is now doing is really shameful. The voters deserve more than for a candidate for office to call into question the accuracy of votes when there is no evidence that votes were miscounted. It is one thing to ask for votes to be counted, it is another to say that there are large inaccuracies when there is no proof to that effect.
So, your God-given name name must be “admin”, right? Quit being such a hypocrite.
I’d appreciate it if you used YOUR real name before you ask for mine or anybody elses for that matter.
why dont you guys make a bet about whos going to win the election instead of bickering about whos using their real name or not?
how about the loser has to buy me a carton of cigarettes?
or, if Burns wins, the Barrow guy has to buy and read the FairTAx book. if Barrow wins, the Admin has to buy and read “It Takes a Village”
cmon, pony up! hey, we need something to do to pass the time before wednesday, right?
I voted for Max and truthfully wish he could win. I do not think at this point that he can, but I wish it were so. I do not however hope that he would congratulate Barrow until every single vote is counted and reported. If a candidate doesn’t wait until every vote is counted and reported, then it implies that every vote isn’t important. I don’t care if one guy thinks he is going to win or not, the proper thing to do is to wait until it is final. Personally, I can’t stand John Barrow and I will do everything in my power again next time campaign against him. I can’t stand him or his “Dawgs”. The add where he claimed he supports “them dawgs” was stupid. We all know why he won. He captured two districts big. Both are more of an inner-city, Democratic slanting,…we all know. What a shame! I personally would hope that Max would run again. He would get my vote and I would work to help re-elect him again.
For the record, Max has never been re-elected to Congress… So you will be hard pressed to “help re-elect him again.”
Also, if I were you, I would work on your grammar before calling anyone or anything stupid.
Also, Baldwin, Hancock, Jefferson, Warren and Washington Counties are hardly “inner city.” Barrow won those counties, too.
Hell, I voted for Max even though he is a rotten, mean spirited liar but sometimes enough is enough.
Well Chis or “Chris”, we all make typographical errors, especially at 3:22 in the morning. You shouldn’t take yourself so seriously as no one else here does. I realize that Max may not have been re-elected this time, but that didn’t mean that I didn’t try to help him get re-elected, or that I wouldn’t help to get him re-elected if he were to run again. You yourself could use a little more education on grammer and typographical errors, but what excuse do you give, was it really late when you replied?
So Barrow won Baldwin, Hancock, Jefferson, Warren and Washington Counties. I congratulate him on those modest wins. He certainly didn’t win them by a large margin did he smart guy. But winning 8 of 22 counties doesn’t say much for an incumbent.
Funny how the world always needs a smart butt to try to correct others. I seriously doubt that you voted for Max. You seem in your posts to be the sort of person that would never vote for a position of integrity. I don’t believe Max is rotten, nor mean spirited, nor a liar in general, but I guess that would depend upon what you used as a measuring stick. He certainly would be none of those things as compared to our current 12th District Elected Congressman. You are correct, enough is enough. If Barrow does end up re-elected this time…I will do my very best to make sure when his term expires that he is put out into the yard with them stinkin “Dawgs”.
Oh, and “for the record”, YOU ARE AN IDIOT! Anyone who votes for a candidate that feels as you have expressed about Max here, has to have something wrong with them. I am sure I can guess what that is. Take yourself a little less serious as the other here take you, and go await the final results with the Barrow camp.
Well, it’s not my fault you don’t like the Georgia Bulldogs. Did you not get in?
I was accepted to The University of Georgia School of Law…thanks for asking. Still can’t stand “them Dawgs”. More importantly, it was stupid for Barrow to say something like that when there are many other schools in the 12th Congressional District like Armstrong Atlantic, Savannah State, East Georgia, Georgia Southern, satelite campus for Georgia Tech, Savannah College of Art & Design, and others. I am not certain if Brewton Parker or MCG are in, but you get my point. Not everyone in Georgia supports UGA and it is a bit presumptuous for him to have assumed so.
Well, I see this thread has deteriorated into cheap name calling… let’s try to keep it kind of civil guys/gals. Please.
We fiscal conservatives took the imposter Burns out.
He is now a TWO TIME LOSER and is finished.
Good luck, John Barrow and may you bluedogs keep the loony left fringe under control.
Next time, GOP, run someone who holds true to party principles!
May I interrupt the name-calling for just a moment and ask, what is the latest developments on this race? I’m from PA. and was interested in how many votes were still left to be counted and from where.
The desire to become a public servant unfortunately now comes with a barrage of negative comments that could conceivably be very hurtful if not to the candidate, to the candidate’s family.
I don’t know Max Burns or John Barrow personally, but I applaud both of them for putting themselves out there for the public to scrutinize- all in the name of a strong desire to be of public service to everyone in District 12.
Those who throw out personal attacks toward candidates like candy in a parade really need to take a step back and reevaluate themselves…personally.
I do, however, believe like the Burns Voter, that if someone believes that a candidate is a rotten, mean spirited liar, and votes for the candidate anyway, they have some serious issues.
Consider this…maybe if we all respected candidates for wanting to enter public service and focused debate on real political issues, more desirable candidates with high moral principles would enter the political arena.
Last thought-A man is truly ethical only when he obeys the compulsion to help all life which he is able to assist, and shrinks from injuring anything that lives. Service is what life is all about.
t.k.,
I just posted a brief update on the front page.
i’ve got the inside track from the Secretary of State’s office … it looks like Max Burns is going to win! I can’t get into specifics but it’s a safe bet for conservatives to break out the champagne! Great job this election … and lets congratulate Max on his re-election to the House!
I wish what you are saying were true Inside Job, but it is highly unlikely. Savannah Morning News has apparently called it for Barrow. He has posted a Thank You letter on his site. The SoS site still has Burns down and it is unlikely that a recount would change that result. I hate it, but it may be time to just accept it. I will still wait until the last vote has been counted!
I think that “admin” has done a great job with this blog. I don’t live in Georgia so I wasn’t able to vote for either candidate, but I have enjoyed reading the information presented here. It’s unfortunate that some of your readers chose to take their comments to such a low level. It’s easy to be brave when you aren’t face to face with people. Keep up the good work “admin”!
And “John Barrow”…I think you missed the point about the way in which you identified yourself. There is a difference between impersonating someone and being the unidentified administrator of a blog.