Tuesday, November 12, 2024

Shannon O'Malley below 60% in latest vote count update

The trend had been positive for Judge Shannon O'Malley, but it is no longer so: As of the most recent updates available, O'Malley has fallen below the 60% threshold required for retention.

Voters in the City of Chicago have apparently sealed O'Malley's fate: In the most recent update available online, O'Malley has 357,290 "Yes" votes out of a total of 653,861 votes cast in his retention race. That translates to only a 54.64% "Yes" rate.

O'Malley has more "Yes" votes in the Cook County suburbs (457,050 in the latest update) and a higher favorable percentage of 63.28%... but when the vote totals are aggregated O'Malley has only 814,340 "Yes" votes out of a total of 1,376,091 votes cast in his race. Taken together, O'Malley has only a 59.18% "Yes" vote -- insufficient, at this point, for his retention bid to succeed.

The City says there are still 47,664 VBM ballots returned, but not yet counted, and another 6,100 provisional votes yet to be examined. Those figures date to Sunday. The County's numbers, updated as of yesterday, show only 1,128 uncounted VBM ballots actually received -- and no provisional ballots remaining.

Both the City and County report large numbers of VBM ballots sent but not received. The City states that 38,208 VBM ballots were sent out but not yet returned; the County reports 51,987 such ballots. A week after the polls close, it becomes increasingly likely that many, if indeed not most, of these are never coming back.

Given these figures, it seems likely that O'Malley will not be retained. He is over 11,000 votes shy, at this point, of a 60% favorable vote at this point. Three out of four of the remaining ballots actually received would have to break his way for him to claw back to the 60% mark. Given that most of the remaining ballots actually received appear to be from the City, where Judge O'Malley has fared worst so far, that seems unlikely. Time will tell.

4 comments:

Albert said...

Analysis is coming...but I'd better wait until they stop counting.

Anonymous said...

No judge should go through this

Jack Leyhane said...

I sympathize, Anon 11/12 @8:42 p.m. -- this long, drawn-out vote counting process serves no one's best interests, and it has to be torture for anyone stuck in it.

It isn't just retention judges who face this, as FWIW readers will recall: We've had a few razor-thin primary contests in the last few election cycles where seemingly safe leads vanished or candidates were ahead or behind with each update.

It doesn't have to be this way. We can set an earlier deadline for the postmark on VBM ballots so that they can all be counted -- or the vast majority can be counted -- on Election Night along with all the other votes. It just takes some legislative action.

We can do this!

Anonymous said...

Nah, several judges should have gone through this. But the cowardly bar associations did not give them the ratings they truly earned. Or, in one instance, gave the correct rating just one day before an election to protect their past president who is a presiding judge of First Municipal. Nice to have friends. Meanwhile, someone else will continue wreaking havoc in Law Division and Evans will only do something until he is forced to.