Tom picked up one vote. Now leads by 31.

Someone on the Daily Progress site commented on the variance in the vote totals, and how that is weird. It is weird — there should be only one source, and that is the SBE. They have had Tom ahead since 9 pm on. It was a 2,000 vote lead at around 10, and then shrunk to 200 when I went to bed around 2 pm, after walking around the White House, soaking in the atmosphere.

Anyway, here are the SBE numbers. I cannot imagine provisionals moving the numbers away from Tom. But we wont know until we know.

By the way, I hope Tom has some cracker jack lawyers on this. Creigh Deeds should know.

RACE CANDIDATE VOTE VOTE% STATISTICS DETAILS
Member House of Representatives
(05)

Last Reported: Nov 5 2008 3:37PM EST

Tom S. P. Perriello 157,456 49.97%
Virgil H. Goode, Jr. 157,425 49.96%
Precincts Reporting:
307 of 307 (100%)

Voter Turnout:
315,055 of 435,905 active voters (72.27%)
315,055 of 443,740 total voters (70.99%) Votes by County/City

See History of Changes

Write In 174 0.05%

Posted by Wyatt on 5 November 2008 @ 4pm

never was good at math.

His lead is 26, up from 25 at 2:30 pm.

Posted by Wyatt on 5 November 2008 @ 4pm

It will be a real shame, though unsurprising if the total margin either way is less by far than the undervote for the district (the undervote being the number of voters who cast ballots for president or senate, but who neglected to cast a ballot in the house race).

Bet there are organizers kicking themselves for not adding down-ticket names to their local literature and yard signs.

Posted by Scott Nolan on 5 November 2008 @ 5pm

According to the SBE website, the undervote for congress (compared to president) in the 5th district is a whopping 8,903! When compared to only 31 votes difference, there ought to be nearly nine thousand voters kicking themselves this morning.

I am shocked that the undervote for senate is even bigger (over 9000 votes); which baffles me as the Warner vs Gilmore race was a no brainer choice; though perhaps it got very little attention because it was so one sided.

Posted by Scott Nolan on 5 November 2008 @ 5pm

My boss recently moved to the area from Hampton Roads, and did not feel qualified to vote in the 5th District race (despite my efforts to educate here), though she voted for Obama and Warner. Thus, she is part of the undervote.

One explanation … and it had nothing to do with yard signs.

Posted by U-Hoo on 6 November 2008 @ 12pm

In Albemarle County, the undervote for the Congressional race is no bigger than the dropoff from Presidential to Senate, so I have a feeling the campaign did what it could in that department.

What impresses the heck out of me is that something like 4000 people who voted for McCain in Albemarle also market their ballots for Perriello.

That’s a testament to Perriello’s having communicated trustworthiness, ability to handle the job, etc., but also to Goode’s having blown it personally. You can’t explain it as generalized voting for change, because surely not all those 4000 thought McCain was a real change from Bush.

Posted by Nell on 6 November 2008 @ 12pm