9:02 is correct. The total number of votes cast was divided by the number of registered voters to get this percentage. One would think that somebody would have caught this error. So what is the correct percentage? Whatever it is, it is pitiful.
Some of you are missing the point here! It clearly says these numbers are based on TURNOUT - not actual votes! Read it again. Yes, the percentage is WAY off! No wonder we have a problem in this country. People cant add and subtract anymore using simple math. At the same time, it is apparent that many can't READ either!
The Daily Times ought to just hang it up. By the time we read news stories on there the blogs have had the stories posted for days already. I don't like their new format either.
@9:02...so voters could cast 3 votes? So the total number of voters is actually closer to one third of votes cast? If that's true.....wow....that's horrible. Can city voters mail in absentee ballots fornthe main election?
12:03, You are wrong. The quote from the DT is "2,938 residents hit the polls." That is not true. 2,938 votes were cast, but that was because people could vote for up to three. You gotta be careful when you chastide people for not reading carefully, and then don't read carefully!
The DT has since changed the article online to reflect reality.
The actal turnout is close to 9%, pretty pathetic but typical for a local primary in which 8 candidates were running for 6 spots. And yes, you can vote via absentee ballot if you are registered in Salisbury.
1:15 - I was going by what JOE posted. Read HIS post again and before you accuse me of chastising people read MY comment again. What I stated is correct based on what is here on this blog. I don't read the Daily Times!
That sucks right?
ReplyDeletelooks like it should be 25% to me, BUT i do not see the whole article.
ReplyDeleteIt does suck but I can remember a 12% year.
ReplyDeleteYou can vote for 3 people--the total votes cast is not the total # of voters.
ReplyDeleteI guess proof readers can't do simple math either??? just looking,10% would be 1152.2 i'd hate to be the waiter he or she was tipping lol
ReplyDelete9:02 is correct. The total number of votes cast was divided by the number of registered voters to get this percentage. One would think that somebody would have caught this error. So what is the correct percentage? Whatever it is, it is pitiful.
ReplyDeleteSome of you are missing the point here!
ReplyDeleteIt clearly says these numbers are based on TURNOUT - not actual votes!
Read it again.
Yes, the percentage is WAY off!
No wonder we have a problem in this country. People cant add and subtract anymore using simple math.
At the same time, it is apparent that many can't READ either!
The Daily Times ought to just hang it up. By the time we read news stories on there the blogs have had the stories posted for days already.
ReplyDeleteI don't like their new format either.
@9:02...so voters could cast 3 votes? So the total number of voters is actually closer to one third of votes cast? If that's true.....wow....that's horrible. Can city voters mail in absentee ballots fornthe main election?
ReplyDelete12:03,
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong. The quote from the DT is "2,938 residents hit the polls." That is not true. 2,938 votes were cast, but that was because people could vote for up to three. You gotta be careful when you chastide people for not reading carefully, and then don't read carefully!
The DT has since changed the article online to reflect reality.
9:02 here,
ReplyDeleteThe actal turnout is close to 9%, pretty pathetic but typical for a local primary in which 8 candidates were running for 6 spots. And yes, you can vote via absentee ballot if you are registered in Salisbury.
1:15 - I was going by what JOE posted. Read HIS post again and before you accuse me of chastising people read MY comment again.
ReplyDeleteWhat I stated is correct based on what is here on this blog.
I don't read the Daily Times!