Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Why, it's Grrreat!

sandy feller Saint Marys, GA Reply » |Report Abuse |Judge it! |#7 21 min ago there is an additional issue. plurality voting. St. Marys in Atlanta enacted a local law permitting "plurality, not majority". in 2005 they moved from majority vote to plurality vote. this enables someone with less than 51% of votes cast to win an election. I am told that this has never been challenged. this means that Tom Cyphers and myself are denied a run off election. what do you think about this situation?

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think you would both get your butts kicked again. Quit it with the sour grapes, and move on.

Anon #23

Anonymous said...

Anyone who wishes to contest election law, policy, guidelines, or generally accepted policy should do so in a non-election year. If you or aany other candidate cared for the community (like you professed) then the caimpainging/lobbying is OVER.

Anonymous said...

I would not like to be in office and know I got there with only 38 percent of the vote. The majority voted for the others. We must get it back to majority rule. Cyphers, haney and feller should have had a run off.

Jay Moreno said...

Maybe you wouldn't but I'm quite sure all of the winners will be quite happy there. On second thought, maybe not Sydney, as he and Bird will be irrelevant.

Anonymous said...

Why will Howell and Bird be irrelevant? Are you admitting what we all know? Backdoor politics ?

Jay Moreno said...

i thought I was stating the obvious, but just for you, I'll break it down.

"No conflict" Bird's sole reason for seking office was to look out for his personal business interests at the airport. Now that we have 4 council persons and a mayor who are very much in favor of moving the aiport, 3 of whom were just electdd on that promise, Bird has no more numerical chance of saving the current airport and therefore no real remaining interests. He may show up and go through the motions but for all intentions, we can stick a fork in him - he's done.

Howell ran an open pro- airport status quo campaign and a sub-rosa anti progress per se, anti-damned outsider, anti demon rum campaign.
On the airport, he has one ally out of 7 - Bird. Squelched. On anti progress, he likely has NO allies. Squelched. Anti demon rum: one ally. Squelched. Anti-damned outsider: ZERO allies. Squelched.
Like I said, he might as well bring a good book.

Anonymous said...

Jay,

Are you a connoisseur of fine beverages? I prefer good single malt 12 year old Scotch. I will bet one of my favorites against one of yours that a replacement airport will not be in place and operating by the target date of 2015. What say you?

Buzzard

Jay Moreno said...

Yes, but A, I dcon't bet; and, B, given the continued resistance of sore losers and the Green eco-weenie whackos, I don't believe it will be completed by then either.
Frankly, I don't care if a new one is ever built, so long as this one is closed and sold. And bedfore I here a bogus $10,000,000 assertion again, the fact is that of it is sold and not rpeplaced, the FAA demands only the repayment of the depreciated value of all improvements they have paid for in the last 20 years. That value is estimated at $500,000, leaving a net profit of $9,500,000, or about a million short of an entire yers' budget for St. Marys.