With only 197 votes separating him from victory, Doug Racine asked for a statewide recount today to determine who won Tuesday’s Democratic gubernatorial primary.
Standing outside Town Hall in his hometown of Richmond, just hours after official tallies were released, Racine told reporters that the razor-thin margin of victory tipped the scales toward a recount for him. He said he owes it to his supporters and to all Vermonters to be sure the 74,634 Democratic ballots cast were counted accurately.
The official tally puts Racine 197 votes behind Peter Shumlin, who all but declared victory Wednesday after unofficial tallies put him 190 votes ahead.
“This is about making sure that all Vermonters know their votes were properly counted and that the outcome is the right outcome,” Racine said. “It’s on that basis — the closeness — that this race should be recounted. It’s less than one vote per town in the state of Vermont.”
This article appears in Aug 25-31, 2010.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“Shumlin released a statement Friday afternoon saying he respects Racine’s choice to seek the recount. On Thursday, Shumlin told WDEV-FM’s “Mark Johnson Show” that if he were Racine, he would not seek a recount.”I am encouraged by the unofficial certified numbers released by the Secretary of State today, which show me receiving more votes than the other contenders,” Shumlin wrote. “Doug is a great candidate who ran a great race. I understand that Doug is going to exercise his legal right to a recount and I respect his decision.””Flip.Flop.Nevermind what I said yesterday.
Recount is in Order Considering everything at stake, I fully support Doug Racine’s decision to request a recount of the Vermont Democratic gubernatorial primary election.Some rank and file Democrats and also others who voted in the election as well, including some supporters of Peter Shumlin, had stated online that a recount should be done when final unofficial results had not yet been called by the press.They stated their opinions that it was indeed crucial to make sure all votes were properly counted and accounted for so there would be no doubts of whom got the most votes and is rightly the Democratic nominee.The fact is the race was way too close, especially knowing how easy it is for things to go wrong during the initial vote counting process in a statewide race, which the state auditors race from several years ago helped to illustrate, when one candidate seemed to win and on a recount another of candidates had been found to have actually received the most votes and had been duly elected.In addition, since this was a primary election with a lower total of voters, it will not take as long as the aforementioned recount had, so this cannot be an excuse not to do so.This election is far too important to allow any doubts or questions to linger over it, which would be the case if an official recount was not performed.Morgan W. BrownMontpelier
VPT Vermont This Week airing 1-hour live special broadcast tonight (7:30 pm – 8:30 pm; re-airing Sunday at 11:30 am):email questions or comments: connect@vpt.org or call: 1-866-424-live
Sore loser?
Sorry Ted, but getting the “final” vote correct is very important to most Vermonters. I would bet if Peter, Brian or any other politician found him/herself within 0.28% of the winner, he/she, too, would be asking for a recount. It only makes good sense. I want to know that my vote was accurately counted.
One would have to be quite simple minded to see Shumlin’s two statements vis-a-vis a recount as a flip flop, Webber. He said he wouldn’t do it if he were Racine, but since Racine is doing it, he respects his decision. So what? Your mind isn’t supple enough to accomodate those two concepts? Or are you just pining for the good old days of the 2004 Republican convention when the ‘flip-flop’ thing was all the rage? You obviously want to attack Shumlin, but I’m afraid you’ll have to do better than that.
Vote on:How does a Democratic Gubernatorial primary election recount harm/help general election prospects? (here; via AllOurIdeas).In addition, add your own ideas via the submission form found on the above page.
Haik,I’m sure Shumlin appreciates your attempts to add subtlety and context to his repertoire. Considering that he is the most nuance-free, subtlety-free, context-free public orator in recent Vermont history. He speaks as if everything were 100% black-and-white, and there’s only ever two options, yes or no, up or down, black or white. His way or the wrong way. His inability to engage in subtlety is particularly painful considering that he himself regularly contradicts what he said yesterday, or a month ago, or a year ago. If you don’t think Shumlin’s two statements about the recount are contradictory, then why did Andy Bromage juxtapose them in a two sentence paragraph? Is he also simple-minded and un-supple? We have a difference of opinion on this (and, apparently on Shumlin in general). Name calling wasn’t appropriate.
@ Webber – Give me a break. A “flip-flop”?! the guy is coming off a hard fought campaign and is trying to figure what this historical moment all means. he is excited he’s ahead and he wants to stay ahead so he pushes for Racine to concede. After actually having a day, 1 day, to think about it he came to a conclusion that the best way to proceed is by stating his support for Racine’s decision. I applaud him for considering all sides of this process and clearly stating what he did.Geezh, a guy can’t even think about something and alter his statement very appropriately. You can have the guy unwilling to do that, I’ll stick with Pete.
” . . . is trying to figure what this historical moment all means.”What it means is that “Good Luck Peter” is oh-so-close to his dream of ruling the world and Racine is trying to ruin it for him.
Throughout the campaign, all five agreed to run with some civility in the best interests of the party, and defeating Dubie in November. I think Peter’s “flip-flop” is simply him acting in the best interests of his party (and his probable campaign against Dubie) by first promoting himself and then quietly going along with Doug’s choice. So no, no “flip-flopping” here in my mind. Plus, I don’t think that anyone, either for Peter or Doug, or any of the other Dems, is going to walk away from the party vote because of the recount. Money and GOTV may be an issue, but any true Dem who voted in the primary is already locked up.
“Considering that he is the most nuance-free, subtlety-free, context-free public orator in recent Vermont history. He speaks as if everything were 100% black-and-white, and there’s only ever two options, yes or no, up or down, black or white. His way or the wrong way…”That’s like…your opinion man. You haven’t given any examples at all.No offense to Andy Bromage, but what he chooses to juxtapose does not move me very much.You have to do better Webber. Explan why were Shumlin’s two statements were a “Flip. Flop.” How does saying one prefers decision A, but respects decision B a “flip flop?”Do you even still see it as a flip flop, or do you now see that it wasn’t?
By the way, besides the Vermont Democratic primary vote recount making either Peter Shumlin or Doug Racine the nominee (Deb Markowitz’s chances are perceived as highly doubtful by most political observers), as highly unlikely as the odds of such occurring were said to be for the primary election, the fourth potential result — no one else seems to be mentioning as a possibility — could be a tie (emphasis mine):
Just saying …