In Ann Arbor City Council races, is sportsmanship for losers?
On June 18, 2009, the PTB (Powers That Be) in Iran made what, I’m sure they considered a generous offer, to recount the votes cast in the disputed presidential election there. The offer, according to a piece in the New York Times was met with a “resounding refusal” from reformist politicians. Only a new election would satisfy them, opposition candidate Mir Hussein Moussavi said. In our own country, we’ve had recount nightmares: just mention the AL Club (Gore and Franken) at a cocktail party and watch the martini glasses tremble as Democrats struggle with the what ifs.
Here in Ann Arbor, Leigh Greden was quoted in an Aug. 4th piece by Ryan Stanton as saying, “Initial results indicate that Mr. Kunselman is ahead by six votes. I believe strongly in the democratic process, but with a margin of less than one-half of 1 percent, it’s appropriate to request a recount.” Commentators on Stanton’s article differed with Greden’s opinion. One commentator wrote, “Yesterday voters you currently represent went to the polls and cast a lot of votes for 2 other candidates. It is obvious you have lost the support of a majority of concerned voters. Be gracious, step aside while you retain some dignity.” Another wrote, “Ann Arbor voters are more than smart enough to draw lines accurately on a ballot. Chances are pretty slim the vote totals will change with a recount.” On June 17, 2009, an essay in the New York Times posed what I thought was an intriquing question: Has the art of conceding defeat been lost? Vote-wrangling is nothing new. In fact, the writer brought up Lyndon Johnson’s 1948 Senate primary “win” in which the “state Democratic committee voted to certify the ballots of dozens of loyal, albeit dead, voters.” What is new, the writer suggests, is the lengths politicians and political parties will go to in order to avoid the inevitable: defeat. Nowadays, fewer understand how to shoulder defeat. We litigate more readily, like so many schemes devised to cheat death. Should Leigh Greden just slip out of sight and watch while the show goes on without him? Given what I’ve read in the emails he wrote to his fellow Council members, this would be out of character. After all, could we expect Greden, who e-mailed 2nd Ward Councilman Tony Derezinski paragraphs consisting of exactly what Derezinski should say when he next spoke, to relinquish that power easily?
Be that as it may, the question still stands: Should Greden shoulder his defeat more like Robert E. Lee and less like Norm Coleman? The end of the Civil War, of course, wasn’t decided by six votes, nor for that matter, was Al Franken’s defeat of Norm Coleman. On the one hand, shouldering defeat smacks of hang-dog resignation. On the other, there is nothing so inspiring as a good sport: we tell this to our children as they rant about this soccer referee or moan about that Little League umpire. Leigh Greden was quoted as saying that “initial results indicate that Mr. Kunselman is ahead by six votes.” The results have to be certified, about that he is absolutely right. It’s equally true that any of the 3rd Ward candidates may request a recount. However, it should be noted that he didn’t lose by six votes. Leigh Greden garnered a mere 36.1 percent of the total vote — almost two-thirds of his former 3rd Ward constituents chose another candidate. Ryan Stanton wrote that, “Several voters said after leaving polls they were voting Greden out of office because they considered the e-mails unprofessional and rude. One 3rd Ward voter was quoted as saying, “I'd never vote for anybody who sat there and sent e-mails like that.” Demanding a recount overlooks this sobering fact. Since all of votes are tallied electronically by machine, it’s highly unlikely the outcome of the 3rd Ward vote will change. The one thing I hope any recount of the votes cast in the 3rd Ward City Council primary election changes is this: the overall level of sportsmanship on our City Council.
Note: Patricia Lesko served as the campaign manager for LuAnne Bullington, who ran against Leigh Greden and Stephen Kunselman in the 3rd Ward primary.
Comments
Patricia Lesko
Wed, Aug 12, 2009 : 11:59 a.m.
Yes, I drew a connection between our "little" dem primary, where the incumbent was backed a national congressman and a state senator, and I agree that we need to think for ourselves. I'm inclined, however, to read national media while I'm thinking. :-) I'll be at the recount, and I'll write about the experience.
pseudo
Tue, Aug 11, 2009 : 6:19 p.m.
Two things: I wrote the "vote for" comment" and wow, you somehow drew some sort of connection from our little dem primary all the way to Iran's latest election via a NYT opinion essay? And from there, posit that Leigh Greden should be more sportsman like in his 6 vote defeat? Wow! I think you are way off in the weeds with that. Which is why I think for myself and don't let local or national media interpret the "messages".
Patricia Lesko
Tue, Aug 11, 2009 : 4:56 p.m.
My columns are supposed to be about local politics. I actually wrote this because I saw the New York Times piece and found the topic fascinating. To be frank, Leigh Greden served as a local example, to go along with the others. Peregrine's comment that our system is set up so we vote "for" a candidate and not against one, strikes me as not how national media are inclined to treat election results, particularly, for example, when control of Congress passes from one party to another. When John Dingell lost his chairmanship, it was interpreted as BOTH a message from the White House in support of the work of Henry Waxman, and against John Dingell's continued political leadership.
Peregrine
Tue, Aug 11, 2009 : 2 p.m.
@lorie, I appreciate your principled stand. The test for any of us is whether we would use the same standards for our favored candidates and for opponents of our favored candidates. In the seven days since the election, on these very "pages" of AnnArbor.com, Greden has been accused of lacking "sportsmanship", being a "whining lawyer", and goaded to "walk away like a man", and "step aside while you retain some dignity". I strongly suspect that those who've written such words would be singing different tunes if the situation were flipped around, with Kunselman behind by six. Anyone who fits that description would do well to learn something from your principled stand.
pseudo
Tue, Aug 11, 2009 : 1:18 p.m.
I think I may have said this before in another spot but it is VERY important to understand that our system is set up to vote for someone, not against. Each of these votes being counted here were FOR Ms. Bullington, Mr. Greden and Mr. Kunselman. If one of these people was missing, the votes for the missing candidate would not go to one of the remaining candidates in total. Leigh is within his rights to ask for a recount. I don't have a problem with that. I voted for someone else and am pleased with the result so far. I will be happy to see this concluded with a re-count. Mr. Greden will be in Norm Coleman territory if he appeals beyond this recount should it not go his way.
Peregrine
Tue, Aug 11, 2009 : 11:09 a.m.
If Patricia Lesko really believes what she stated in this piece, she would have urged Al Franken to concede to Norm Coleman since the initial count put Franken 477 votes behind. While the recount in Minnesota was automatic (Ann Arbor doesn't have an automatic recount), Franken could have exhibited the "good sportsmanship" that Lesko calls for simply by practicing the "lost" "art of conceding defeat". And then Minnesota could skipped the drama, avoided the costs of a state-wide hand recount, and had the benefit of a sitting Senator for a half-year. Except that would have been wrong since more voters cast more valid votes for Franken than Coleman. How come more people on AnnArbor.com are not standing up for the principles of democracy rather than the throw-away, narrow arguments they are only making because they don't like the candidate who is slightly behind?
Tony Dearing
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 : 10:09 a.m.
We are continuing to investigate this, but what we've determined so far makes us confident in saying that regular users of this site do not have access to the personal information of other users. When we have fully determined what occurred here, we will take the appropriate steps to deal with it. The steps we've taken already allow us to assure users that their personal information is not currently being compromised.
Tony Dearing
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 : 9:21 a.m.
A user of this site should not be able to determine the IP address of other users who submit comments. We're looking into this right now and I will address this more fully as soon as I have more information.
B. Corman
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 : 8:36 a.m.
I can guarantee that these posts were not from the same IP address unless of course both work at the same company and the IP's come up the same at annarbor.com However, what is more disturbing is that posters DO have access to our personal email addresses. Pat Lesko previously listed my email address in the comments section but since has been taken down. That is not right. Do contributors have access to our passwords also? Something needs to be done about this. Is annarbor.com going to allow their poster's to be silenced by intimidation and threats for having an opposite viewpoint?
Moose
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 : 7:14 a.m.
Both of the responses to Pat's op ed piece are from the same IP address. They were most likely written by the same person or at least sent from the same computer.
Isabelle Noah
Fri, Aug 7, 2009 : 4:23 p.m.
I am soooo disappointed in annarbor.com for allowing this article to be posted. Patricia Lesko ran Luanne Bullington's campaign and has a vested interest in seeing Mr. Greden defeated. Annarbor.com at the minimum should have identified Ms. Lesko as the campaign manager and should never have allowed such political gaming to occur. This is not opinion, it is political move in order to fool the public once again into believing Ms. Lesko's lies and false accusations. I hope that in the future annarbor.com does a better job of screening their contributers to verify that they are credible.
B. Corman
Fri, Aug 7, 2009 : 4:14 p.m.
Ms. Lesko clearly you are the one playing politics. The difference is six votes! How can anyone not call for a recount? Your suggestion alone shows that you are not connected to reality. Vivienne Armentrout asked for a recount last year and there was a difference of 60 votes; ten times the amount here. There were no complaints from you or anyone else when that occurred. Are you afraid that the recount may actually change the outcome? Are you afraid that actually counting all the ballots again might show that Greden actually won after all? Also, you insinuate that 2/3 of the people voted against Greden. Well, 2/3 of the people also voted against Kunselman. Does that challenge his stature as the next councilmember if the recount verifies the numbers? Our system allows for a plurality to win and not a majority because in Michigan we do not have run-off system. I say let the votes be counted! It is the democratic way.