Challenger Paula Copenhaver gets three additional votes to Deery’s one as Fountain and Montgomery county election boards certify May 5 primary results.
Wow this certainly is the closest race to be decided in Indiana that involved where I live.
I have become curious though. Were these rural counties going to be redistricted in anyway had that proposed map been put into play? Did those people not know one way or the other?
I know that had that map been ok’d, we would have been gerrymandered again since we got in Deery’s district before the last election moved from Alting’s. Maybe the rural counties weren’t going to be affected, maybe they are just die hard Trump fans and will do whatever he wants or maybe we will never know. The way the voting is distributed shows how voters are not on the same page in this state.
Very true, but this primary election demonstrates what you get when you maximum-gerrymander: expensive, close, one side affixes itself to an outsider. It is wild that it happened first in a primary.
The way Alting's district changed should have made it harder for him to win a general election, and for sure his plan for the general is to bury everything he has done in the last year. Or he has determined that Indiana Democrats are just not a threat. Or, to Mo's point, the rural voter is a pod person.
On redistricting, Deery may have concluded that there was a strategic advantage in having fewer competitive (purple) districts, especially if he might one day he want to join the US House and accumulate some seniority. He talks about principles but you can reach the same conclusion by pure cynical analysis.
Yes, you are correct. I just know something happened to move us from Alting to Deery last time. We were with Alting for as long as I can remember then suddenly last time it was Deery. I don’t know if we had Baird as our US rep before but we do now.
Did you see his “apology” for his vote(Alting) this week? Trying to cover his tracks because he knows there was a lot of criticism and disappointment with his vote.
Deery I think really did vote his way for the reasons he stated and he did get a lot of input to vote no from his “local “ constituents. Of course, he had Daniels saying no, and if anyone knows how that would affect the state in a negative way, Daniels would. It must have been important enough for Daniels to come out of hiding to speak publicly. He tries to wield his power behind the scenes.
So to be considered the winner, she would need to pick up all three votes. If she picks up 2, Deery wins by 1 (or they tie is 1 is thrown out). If she picks up 1 Deery wins regardless.
Regardless of who wins, the “loser” will push for a recount.
Ballotpedia says this (I assume they're credible but not 100% sure):
"Indiana law does not allow for automatic recounts. Candidates, party chairs, and voters may request a recount, depending on the situation. The requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount but a refund is available if the recount changes the election outcome."
This is interesting, thanks. I assume the loser would request recounts across the whole district, but I wonder what the calculus is in deciding which precincts to recount if not all of them? I guess I could imagine Copenhaver, being MAGA, would want Lafayette/WL recounted under an assumption of fraud and shenanigans, but I assume all votes were counted in good faith and that any tabulation errors will be pretty random.
Are Fountain County Rs now going to demand five indictments for voter fraud? No? Hmm, wonder why not.
Wow this certainly is the closest race to be decided in Indiana that involved where I live.
I have become curious though. Were these rural counties going to be redistricted in anyway had that proposed map been put into play? Did those people not know one way or the other?
I know that had that map been ok’d, we would have been gerrymandered again since we got in Deery’s district before the last election moved from Alting’s. Maybe the rural counties weren’t going to be affected, maybe they are just die hard Trump fans and will do whatever he wants or maybe we will never know. The way the voting is distributed shows how voters are not on the same page in this state.
These redistricting efforts are solely aimed at U.S. House seats, not state-level House or Senate seats.
Very true, but this primary election demonstrates what you get when you maximum-gerrymander: expensive, close, one side affixes itself to an outsider. It is wild that it happened first in a primary.
The way Alting's district changed should have made it harder for him to win a general election, and for sure his plan for the general is to bury everything he has done in the last year. Or he has determined that Indiana Democrats are just not a threat. Or, to Mo's point, the rural voter is a pod person.
On redistricting, Deery may have concluded that there was a strategic advantage in having fewer competitive (purple) districts, especially if he might one day he want to join the US House and accumulate some seniority. He talks about principles but you can reach the same conclusion by pure cynical analysis.
Yes, you are correct. I just know something happened to move us from Alting to Deery last time. We were with Alting for as long as I can remember then suddenly last time it was Deery. I don’t know if we had Baird as our US rep before but we do now.
Well, those two kinda surprised us, certainly on the redistricting issue. I'm still trying to figure out what happened to Ronnie's spine.
Did you see his “apology” for his vote(Alting) this week? Trying to cover his tracks because he knows there was a lot of criticism and disappointment with his vote.
Deery I think really did vote his way for the reasons he stated and he did get a lot of input to vote no from his “local “ constituents. Of course, he had Daniels saying no, and if anyone knows how that would affect the state in a negative way, Daniels would. It must have been important enough for Daniels to come out of hiding to speak publicly. He tries to wield his power behind the scenes.
So to be considered the winner, she would need to pick up all three votes. If she picks up 2, Deery wins by 1 (or they tie is 1 is thrown out). If she picks up 1 Deery wins regardless.
Regardless of who wins, the “loser” will push for a recount.
Hello, Mike. With any race this tight, a recount is necessary.
Does anyone know who pays for a recount?
Ballotpedia says this (I assume they're credible but not 100% sure):
"Indiana law does not allow for automatic recounts. Candidates, party chairs, and voters may request a recount, depending on the situation. The requester is responsible for costs associated with the recount but a refund is available if the recount changes the election outcome."
Ind. Code 3-12-11 seems to be the relevant statute:
https://iga.in.gov/laws/2025/ic/titles/3#3-12-11
It looks like the challenger identifies precincts they want recounted. Then the other person can identify additional precincts they want recounted.
This is interesting, thanks. I assume the loser would request recounts across the whole district, but I wonder what the calculus is in deciding which precincts to recount if not all of them? I guess I could imagine Copenhaver, being MAGA, would want Lafayette/WL recounted under an assumption of fraud and shenanigans, but I assume all votes were counted in good faith and that any tabulation errors will be pretty random.
Thanks, Townie. Good find!
So I assume that if Copenhaver loses, she’ll demand a recount and those who funded her campaign would also fund the recount.
I would assume that whoever is the loser will demand a recount.
Which given the 2 vote lead by Deery and the 3 remaining votes, with 2 in Tippecanoe County, Deery will likely be the “winner” with a 3-5 vote lead.
Yeah, thinking that Copenhaver will probably have more resources to pay for a recount, but I would definitely expect either one of them to ask for one
Thank you, A Person. I appreciate it. Do you think there will be a recount?
Oh, without a doubt. after all the money that went into this race neither party is gonna just shrug off a single-digit defeat