« Support Voter Action Investigation of Missing Votes in FL | Main | Republicans Explain What Happened »

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

UPDATED: Madrid Concedes

UPDATED HERE AND BELOW: The Patricia Madrid campaign held a press conference at DPNM headquarters in Albuquerque this morning and conceded victory to Heather Wilson. No recount will be requested. According to a report on the Albuquerque Journal website, Madrid won't ask for a recount but the Democratic Party of NM may ask for a limited hand tally:

But state Democratic Party Chairman John Wertheim said he still is considering asking for a hand tally of 2 percent of ballots in the district's precincts to test the accuracy of the new optical scan tabulators.

Madrid, New Mexico's attorney general, said she decided against a recount because she felt it would not change the outcome of the election.

After the final canvass found several small errors, vote totals in the NM-01 congressional race between Dem challenger Patricia Madrid and Repub incumbent Heather Wilson were as follows:

Wilson: 105,921
Madrid: 105,046

The final margin was 875 votes among approximately 211,000 ballots cast, or under 0.5%.

ANOTHER UPDATE 11:52 AM: According to the Albuquerque Tribune:

Democrat Patricia Madrid, defeated by incumbent Republican Heather Wilson in the 1st Congressional District, conceded Tuesday, saying a recount would cost too much and there was no guarantee it would change anything.

She said the cost of a full recount could be as high as $250,000 to $300,000 across the 1st district, which includes parts of five counties, and that the Democrats didn't have enough money.

She also said there is no evidence a recount would reverse the outcome of the election.

Madrid said Wilson's margin was less than one-half of 1 percent, which in other states might have resulted in an automatic recount, but said the cost in New Mexico was prohibitive.

"If only one person in each precinct had voted for me instead of my opponent, I would have prevailed," Madrid said.

UPDATE 2:53 PM: A new Albuquerque Tribune article quotes Madrid on her future in politics. Excerpt:

"Whatever I do, if I look at it, will very likely be a statewide race," she said.

"Certainly, I don't ever want to run for attorney general again, because I don't believe in going backwards in your life," Madrid said. "But there are only two statewide races that I think would be higher and that's, of course, governor and Senate."

Asked whether voters can expect to see her on a ticket in 2010 with Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, Madrid replied: "I won't say in what order."

The article also quotes Madrid on why she may have lost:

Madrid also attributed her loss, in part, to being outspent.

"That buys a daily barrage of negative advertising to your mailbox, daily on the television. Go back and look at how much more television she had than I did, how much more mail-outs she did, how much more field operation is funded. It simply comes back to money."

... What could Madrid have done better?

"Started earlier, raised more money, not been so timid on my last debate," she said. "I think I did well in my first debate, but I don't think that was the defining moment."

November 21, 2006 at 10:23 AM in Candidates & Races | Permalink

Comments

Too bad she didn't ask for a recount. With no audit of the results required until 2007, we really have no idea how accurate the scanners that counted the ballots were. This could have been a service to the voters to check the system, even if Madrid only asked for a recount of certain precincts, but she couldn't even do that I guess.

I read at Monahan that she didn't want to prolong the election any longer so she could preserve good will for running for another office in the future. Face it, this is the end of the road for Madrid as a candidate but she seems to be taking her cues from Kerry.

Posted by: I Vote | Nov 21, 2006 10:32:28 AM

I just saw your update and I strongly urge the Party to pay for the hand tally as a form of audit. We need it so badly.

Posted by: I Vote | Nov 21, 2006 10:49:33 AM

Just hate letting Wilson and the Repuglicans off without an extended fight.

Posted by: Tom in Paradise | Nov 21, 2006 11:15:15 AM

I think we should all contact the DPNM and Wertheim to urge them to do the proposed 2% recount that would serve as an audit.

Posted by: Roadrunner | Nov 21, 2006 1:06:21 PM

A big thank you goes out to Madrid, her entire campaign staff and all the volunteers for the many hours and hard work that went into getting this close to victory. There will be time later for monday morning quarterbacking, but I think we should all thank everyone involved for working so darn hard.

Posted by: Old Dem | Nov 21, 2006 1:08:28 PM

Sorry to say it guys, but the machines are not to blame... they will read the ballots the same way it read them on election night and a hand count of those ballots will reflect the count 100% correct. The only variations in counts you will find is when a person recounts another person's hand count. I work elections every week from bonds to tribal elections, etc. It is very rare to see a machine count change or found to be incorrect. We just did a recount in Mescalero for the Mescalero Apache Tribe. Almost 1000 ballots read. All 1000 ballots recounted by hand - same exact results as machine count. For the upcoming elections devote more time to the candidates and their activities and less to the process. That way we would be able to perform more of the necessary campaign functions that it really takes to win as outlined by Ortiz y Pino.

I will try to bring a machine to one of the upcoming DFNM meetings to really go over all of your concerns. Ask Mr. Stokes, I have always been very open at certifications poll official training sessions about the machines or any other part of the process.

Posted by: Westside Voter | Nov 21, 2006 1:57:02 PM

Regardless of what Westside says, the new scanner counters should be checked by at least a 2% audit, just to show voters how accurate they are. I personally think mistakes were mostly in the hand counting and approval of provisional ballots and absentees, if there are any. Human error is usually present in these elections, especially when those doing and running the counting are without much sleep, poorly trained and such.

I've been hearing there were many problems with the provisionals because the election judges at the precincts were not informed as to how the voter needed to complete and sign them correctly. Again, human error.

The bottom line though is that we should have won this race by 8-10%. We would have if we had gotten all the Dem absentee votes in and more emphasis was put on Madrid working various areas in the NE Heights, which she neglected.

Posted by: KL | Nov 21, 2006 2:27:25 PM

I'm an atty for one of the counties in this district. My county, which Madrid carried, was very liberal in the counting of provisional ballots. 1 signature was sufficient and we counted every provisional that had minimum information to identify the voter. We did have a lot of folks who cast provisionals who were not registered. We need same day registration in N.M. I also like the Oregon system, which is an all-mail election. No polling locations in Oregon. No worry about the weather, etc.

Posted by: david | Nov 21, 2006 6:12:44 PM

Post a comment