Return Day

In the post-election excitement, I neglected to mention Return Day -- the Sussex County, Del., tradition that dates back to 1792.

Every two years, two days after Election Day, Delawareans gather on The Circle in Georgetown to hear the official reading of the election returns. That's anachronistic these days, with the results available online as soon as the votes are counted, but the event has come to serve another function. Candidates -- winners and losers -- ride together in a parade and bury a ceremonial hatchet.

Riding next to each other in horse-drawn carriages, the candidates are forced to be civil to one another -- civil in every sense. This is what makes democracy work. It's not just the voting and the honest counting of votes. It's also the willingness of the defeated to get up and go, to clear out their desks without coercion and to accept, along with everyone else, that these are our new leaders (at least until the next election).

I like the idea of this very much, and I agree with the editors of The Bethany Beach Wave that "We could use a nationwide Return Day."

That call for a nationwide Return Day isn't really realistic. Georgetown's celebration is too off-the-beaten path, at this point, to expect it to be duplicated on The Mall in D.C.

But if I were the mayor of some struggling county seat -- somewhere like Clearfield, Pa., for example, or St. Johnsbury, Vt. -- I'd look into embracing a local version of this tradition. What's not to like? It'd be good for the local economy, good for local pride, good for civil society.

Plus, it's a party. The Georgetown event is a bit like Groundhog Day in Punxsutawney, Pa., with the top-hatted pomp providing a respectable sheen of tradition for two days of revelry. I've been to Clearfield. They could use a party.

Get enough county seats doing this every two years and eventually the idea of a national Return Day wouldn't be so far-fetched.

Anyway, more on this year's Return Day here and here.

Comments

[daniel]

That would be beautiful.

[Josh Sholes]

Wow, I think that's the closest city to me I've ever heard mentioned by someone I respect online.

[cjmr]

I'm picturing 435 carriages parading up and down the Mall with the candidates riding in them. Sitting as far apart as possible. Glaring in opposite directions.

Wouldn't that be a sight to see...

[Reg]

One of the (rather few) things I've always liked about the UK's voting system is that, instead of each candidate holding a separate party for their supporters in a venue of their choosing, all the candidates for a particular seat go to the same dull conference room or sports hall and watch the (paper) ballots being counted (by hand). They stand side by side as the results are read out. There are handshakes, polite nods, and concillatory gestures all around. Dignified, yes, but it also makes for some wonderfully British political humour - see http://tinyurl.com/qvcoa . All the candidates stand awkwardly and try not to laugh at the Legalize Cannabis Alliance and act very politely so as not to offend the vote counters. I like this. They look as nervous as any other job applicants - which is what they are. We the people invited them over to our place and we expect them to behave. That's what democratic politics should be. Why should a candidate hear results at a private party surrounded only by their supporters?

[throatwarbler mangrove]

More on the English approach:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rooOWZnFYkI

[treeandleafster]

And it allows for such wonderful moments as the expression on Portillo's face when he realised he'd lost in 1995... though I admit that's not really in the spirit of concilliation Fred is advocating. As far as humour goes, one of the funniest scenes in Blackadder is a spoof of these scenes, including a send up of the (real life) Monster Raving Loony Party.

But yes - it seems odd that in America the candidates don't have to await their fate together, in front of the returning officer.

[Jesurgislac]

I wonder if it might not be because in the US, there exist far more genuinely "safe seats" than in the UK - and incumbents are far harder to turn out?

Look at what happened with Lieberman, when the Democrats in his state told him that they didn't want him representing them any more: rather than swallowing his ire and accepting that the voters had decided, he abandoned his party and got the Republicans to fund and vote for him instead. (I shall be interested to find out if the Republicans feel they got the full benefit of their money over the next six years: Lieberman's caucusing with the Democrats - assuming he holds to that for the next two years - is what gives the Democrats an unCheneyable majority in the Senate.) Granted there are floor-crossers in the UK, but Lieberman's motivation seemed to be quite simply "That's my job! I'm the Senator! How dare those damn voters tell me to go!"

[wintermute]

> I wonder if it might not be because in the US, there exist far more genuinely "safe seats" than in the UK - and incumbents are far harder to turn out?

Well, when this system was put in place in Britain, we had a wonderful system of "Rotten Boroughs" - constituencies with very few voters, often a single one, who would often be the local MP. These are surely the ultimate "safe seats".

[Jesurgislac]

wintermute: Well, when this system was put in place in Britain, we had a wonderful system of "Rotten Boroughs" - constituencies with very few voters, often a single one, who would often be the local MP.

Actually, I think the smallest "rotten borough" on record had a dozen voters. ;-)

But I was talking about the multi-party gathering Reg describes. I don't know how old that tradition is, though.

[wintermute]

> Actually, I think the smallest "rotten borough" on record had a dozen voters. ;-)

You may well be right. History classes at school skimmed over the detail. Wikipedia lists Gatton in Surrey as having 7 voters, so it looks like we're both equally wrong ;)

> But I was talking about the multi-party gathering Reg describes. I don't know how old that tradition is, though.

Yeah, so was I. I'm pretty sure that it's about as old as elections are, but I've already demonstrated how good my knowledge is on this subject, so who knows? Certainly not The Interweb, so far as I can tell.

[Jesurgislac]

detail. Wikipedia lists Gatton in Surrey as having 7 voters, so it looks like we're both equally wrong ;)

Actually, you were out by 6 voters, I was out by 5, so if we're being really, really picky, I was slightly less wrong than you. :-p

I'm pretty sure that it's about as old as elections are

I would guess it could only be as old as elections with real competing parties: but I will go re-read the chapter about the election in Middlemarch, and see if there's any description of how the results were announced and to whom.

[cjmr]

There was an election results scene in the PBS (or was it BBC?) TV production of Middlemarch, but I don't know if it is in the actual novel or not.

[Jesurgislac]

Oh yes. I read Middlemarch about ten years ago, I think (it's not one of my favorite George Eliot novels, and Eliot is not one of my very favourite 19th-century novelists) but I do remember the election chapter. The character who stands for election expects to win handily and makes a rotten speech, and is very, very embarrassed when he loses.