Saturday, November 19, 2005

It's a Green!

Please Note: If you would like an (almost) realtime blow-by-blow of the ups and downs of the returns as they came in, please feel free to move from top to bottom through the posts and comment threads from 'Election Night' on the sidebar to the left; please take it in the spirit it was intended - by no means definitive just, mostly my own opinions and reactions as things were unfolding...short-attention-span-blogging up close and personal, if you will.
The best overall discussion thread that we saw (and played around in) followed Charles Campbell's predictions piece at the Tyee. We were disappointed that the UBC JSchool group packed it in Friday, guess they take weekends off....
We now return to our regularly scheduled blognoramity.......

Vancouver numbers are here.

Sullivan beats Jim Green by 3747; James Green takes 4273.

Differential, 526 (Jim).

And Christy Clark* says, "you can't steal an election in a democracy".

Say what?

*Statement made on CKNW, Election Coverage, Nov 19, 2005, late.
Update, Sunday Noon: Lots of people are taking me to task both gently, and not so, for making a fuss about this scandale Vert business. Look, I realize, based purely on numbers, that it is not likely that this led to Jim Green's demise, but there are two things that stick in my craw. First, it seems that intent means nothing with so many people, which to me borders on the old Nixonian (and should I add newMartini?) saw that it doesn't matter what you do as long as you don't get caught. Second, if the growing realization that even 3% to the imposter Green could lose it for vision in the final days led to a shift in resources, well that would also be a victory for the big blue, red and white machine, wouldn't it?
Update, Sunday afternoon: An off-line message from old friend and reader Big Audible Dyne-O-Mite raises a crazy speculative point.....How do we know that the Big Bus wasn't put on the road by the would-be visionaries as a scare tactic/lever to get out the vote? I can't see it, because that kind of twisted strategy is worthy of of an uberMachievelli that I'm not sure even lurks in the deepest darkest depths of, say, Gordon Campbell. Besides, it's like playing with fire and it failed anyway - I have the vote in the low 30's.


No comments: