One Vote Win... Re-Vote?

When there is a race between two or more individuals, the person who comes in first is usually declared the winner. Suppose it is a 100-meter race, and there is a “photo-finish” result. In that case, various mechanisms, such as replay, are used to determine the winner. In the game of football, if there is a controversial call by an official, the head coach has the right to challenge the call. Again, instant replay is used from a variety of angles for the referee to get the call on the field right. When everything is done right by the rules, most, if not everybody, is happy with the results. It doesn’t matter if a racer wins “by a nose” or by one point; the event's integrity is preserved. Well, so we thought, but not in Caddo Parish. People are still talking about the sheriff’s race in Caddo Parish with Democrat Henry Whitehorn and Republican challenger John Nicolson, where Whitehorn supposedly won the race by one vote out of 43,000 cast. Yes, one vote. Now we know that “every” vote counts, as it is highly unusual for someone to win by one vote out of thousands cast. Unusual, but not impossible. Naturally, a recount was held, and the result was the same. Maybe lightning does strike twice. But a Louisiana judge says “not so fast”; he maintains that there should be another go for the sheriff’s position because “it defies logic in this particular case to conclude that it is possible to determine the accurate results of the runoff election, especially considering the one vote margin,” so said Judge E. Joseph Bleich.

It was 11 votes that Nicholson found deemed to be illegal by the judge that made it impossible to know the race’s true winner, according to the judge’s ruling. The judge also said that “just one illegal vote could have affected the outcome, and here multiple votes were cast and counted”. But perhaps the judge left one thing out in his ruling. Were there widespread voting irregularities or illegal votes out of the 43,000 cast? We will never know because, according to reports, the phrase “widespread voting irregularities” was not mentioned by Nicholson’s counsel, nor did the judge ask if Nicholson believed that there were widespread voting irregularities.

The state did not cite any widespread voter irregularity or even suspect that any had occurred. In his ruling, Judge Nicholson said some ballots should have been disqualified, as some voted but shouldn’t have done so. In response to the judge’s ruling, Whitehorn said that he “was disappointed” that the court overturned the will of the people and that he was taught that the person with the most votes wins. “My opponent conveniently questioned the integrity of the election only after he lost not once but twice, adding that the rules of the game are different depending on who the players are,” said Whitehorn. Whitehorn said he would appeal to the Second Circuit of Appeals and the Louisiana Supreme Court if necessary. Whitehorn received 21,621 votes, while Nicholson received 21,620, proving that every vote matters. There is no such thing as a “perfect” election because some irregularities will happen in every election. That is the one thing that Republicans will cite if they disagree with the results when they believe they should have won. Most of the time, it will get a judge’s attention if it is mentioned. It wasn’t in this instance because, as Whitehorn said, “the rules of the game are different depending on who the players are.”

If a new runoff election race is held, the earliest would be March 23. The world is watching. So is God.