Please vote for Stan Hammer

But as embarassed as I am to say this, I can't (for the life of me) remember who my 2nd and 3rd choices were. :(

I did.

Has been recommended, endorsed, or listed as a first pick by many organizations: the NC Assoc oF women attorneys, Orange County Democratic Party, Durham Dems-recommended him.

He is the judge sitting in that seat vacated by Wynn when he was selected By the President.

Hammer is highly qualified also.

But I am concerned with 13 people on the ballot, that we need to unite behind one person to be sure we are not defeated by the right wing recommendations.

I like Judge Thigpen. But hammer is my friend and one of the finest lawyers I know. Governor Perdue doesn't get to pick judges yet. :)

and nobody will get 50 percent. The problem in the last big race was that a plurality won. Not this time.

And I hope you are not advocating Single Shot, because that would be a disaster. We need to vote for a top three.

I realize these candidates are qualified, but so is Harry Payne. I heard early on that no one knew of more than three of these candidates. I am not so certain.

Payne has held state-wide elective office as Labor Commissioner, so more than a few folks must have heard of him.

He has a varied background as attorney in private practice, legislator, and later as elected official as Commissioner of Labor.

I also am opposed to any Party endorsements, and Wake is one that did endorse, in this race. It is inappropriate for the party to be involved when there are several qualfied Democrats running for the same non-partisan elective office.

...is deliver a slightly larger plurality win.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/10/16/742915/in-instant-runoff-race-you...

In a field of 13 candidates, Abraham Lincoln edged Thomas Jefferson 27-26, but that was beside the point.

Ashe's demonstration started with 13 candidates "running" for favorite president and 100 ballots to be cast. Voters, in this case the handful of Durham citizens who attended, marked their first, second and third choices. Then the ballots were counted. In the real election, that will be done by machine.

No candidate got a majority, so the top two - Jefferson and Lincoln, with 13 votes each - were in the "instant runoff." Ballots on which either Jefferson nor Lincoln got a first-place vote were discarded, then the second-place votes were counted for each. In the real election, that will be done by hand.

In the second round, Jefferson picked up four more votes and Lincoln, 12. Those ballots were discarded and third-place votes for each tallied up - nine for Jefferson, two for Lincoln. Adding all together gave:

Jefferson: 13 + 4 + 9 = 26

Lincoln: 13 + 12 + 2 = 27

Lincoln won.

100 voters had the opportunity to get a great explanation of IRV from Mike Ashe, one of the state's best election directors. Compare that to the short answers most poll workers will give to voters on election day - do you really think that all voters will pick 3 choices? Do you really think that many voters will even know they are supposed to rank any choices when they show up to the polls? Those who don't have this foreknowledge won't be able to make a meaningful pick at the polls, so they will "donkey vote" (pick names at random). That's a hell of a way to run a race.

So Lincoln won a 13-way IRV race with 27% of the vote - and this is supposed to be better than Newby winning with a 23% plurality win in 2004? Please tell me why the extra time, expense, confusion (and I mean that damn near everyone involved with election administration is pulling their hair out over IRV this year) is worthwhile?

I mean - they still don't know how they are going to count the IRV votes in DRE touchscreen counties - Winfree from Greensboro is pushing the use of MS Excel to tabulate the votes. Problem is - ours law specifically prohibits the use of any election system that has not been fully tested and certified by the EAC. MS Excel has not been tested by the EAC.

The law requires that the vendor of the software put the code into escrow. Microsoft has said they will not do this. The law also requires the vendor put up a bond to guarantee payment for a re-do of the election in case the software messes up. Microsoft hasn't put up such a bond. The plain fact of the matter is that no matter how much FairVoteNC, DemocracyNC, Paul Leubke and Anita Earls advocate for IRV and want this to appear easy - we still have laws we have to follow.

And the SBOE shouldn't be recommending breaking any more laws when dealing with elections in our state.