Talk:2022 Arizona gubernatorial election

Revisions

My most recent recision is correct for 3 main reasons: 1. The space between the declared candidates in the Democratic primary is too big 2. Hobbs should be before López since her last name comes before his alphabetically. 3. Lesko endorsed Yee, as we have noted, therefore it makes no sense that she should be in the "Potential" category in the Republican primary. BazingaFountain42 (talk) 17:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Endorsements

I don't see why the endorsements of the groups such as FreedomWorks, Club for Growth and individuals such as Bernard Kerik and Ted Nugent were removed from Salmon's endorsement list. They are all notable people and sourced as explicitly endorsing him. I restored all endorsements because they meet all criteria for WP: Political endorsements--AZpolitico (talk) 00:57, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

New Trafalgar poll

Republican Lake is gaining ground and expanding her lead to more than 4 percentage points. In the Senate race Masters has closed the gap substancially.

https://twitter.com/trafalgar_group/status/1571528082141372416?cxt=HHwWgICzqdydmM8rAAAA

80.131.56.43 (talk) 21:23, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Problems in Maricopa County

Why can't this article mention the many problems going on with Maricopa County's elections? Many news outlets are discussing it and it's kind of a big deal. 98.20.132.107 (talk) 11:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

An edit added something about this on the 11th, but then it got removed for only citing "a Gannet news org", apparently. —twotwofourtysix^{(talk || edits)} 12:01, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/hobbs-seeks-sanctions-lake-election-suit-dismissed-rcna63274

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/arizona-governor-elect-asks-court-sanction-election-denier-lake-2022-12-26/

Update Maricopa County and Governor Elect Katie Hobbs filed a sanctions complaint against Kari Lake and her legal team over the 2022 elections lawsuit.2601:640:C682:8870:8D2:40D4:8CD9:75D2 (talk) 15:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/motions-for-sanctions-filed-against-kari-lake-in-maricopa-county

https://www.12news.com/article/news/politics/elections/decision/maricopa-county-superior-court-judge-denies-katie-hobbs-motion-for-sanctions-against-kari-lake/75-85deb32b-4479-4188-84dc-cd72f7e729e8

Update Kari Lake must pay $33k as a result of the 2022 election lawsuit.2601:640:C682:8870:6946:184:80D4:16EF (talk) 20:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Results

Katie Hobbs has not won. While may news outlets have called the race, that mean nothing officially. Not all of the votes have been counted. The Arizona Secretary of State's office has not declared a winner. The final results could be within .5 percentage points, triggering a recount. The results could change. As a neutral fact-based website, a Wikipedia article cannot definitively say someone won a race when that is not true. Master Editor 10 (talk) 03:12, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm not trying to pick one side over another but adding a winner after news outlets have called the election is a practice in other articles too, not just this one. —twotwofourtysix^{(talk || edits)} 03:34, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

That is a problem that needs to be fixed. I haven't looked at other articles, so wasn't aware of that. I'm not trying to pick sides either. People across the country just don't realize that the Associated Press is not the final call on elections. Especially with such a close race, with more votes left to count than difference in votes between the two candidates. Wikipedia can't be relying on the Associated Press's guesses over facts. Most likely, when the results are finalized in the next few days, then we can put Katie Hobbs as the winner, but until that is final, the article cannot state that she won. Master Editor 10 (talk) 04:24, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia reports on what reliable sources have said. Many reliable sources have now said that Katie Hobbs has won the election, not that she will win. You're advocating for a standard (official certification of a result) that doesn't accord with Wikipedia's core policies. SS451 (talk) 04:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Only the headlines say she has won. If you read the articles, and visit the official Secretary of State's website, you will see she has not won. It is still anyone's race. The articles are just making projections, and Wikipedia can't have speculations delivered as facts. Master Editor 10 (talk) 04:42, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

They aren't "speculation," they are projections based on the remaining vote and observed patterns in the vote. You may disagree with these news sources' methodology, but your opinion does not matter.

Also, you keep referring to the possibility of a recount as if that changes anything. It doesn't. SS451 (talk) 05:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

I never shared my opinion. A projection is, "an estimate or forecast of a future situation or trend based on a study of present ones." It is purely speculative. There are more votes remaining to count than there are differences in the counts for the candidates. Also, the possibility of a recount does mean a potential change in the vote count. Just because a news source thinks a candidate will win, doesn't mean they will. The AP isn't always right. This is a fact based encyclopedia. It should not be claiming anyone won. Master Editor 10 (talk) 11:46, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

For some information: There are an estimated 48,000 ballots left to count. [1] Kari Lake is only loosing by about 19,500 vote. Also, in the state of Arizona, If the results of an election are within .5 percentage points, there is an automatic recount. Therefore, this race is not over, no matter what the Associated Press says. Therefore, the article cannot say anymore than it does right now, "The Associated Press called the election for Hobbs on November 14." The article cannot say that Katie Hobbs won.

I understand your thinking, but it's an accepted standard on Wikipedia that we accept calls from reliable news networks that a candidate or political party is unlikely to make up how far they're behind. (Forgive me, I can't find a link to this now.) For comparison, here's a link to Joe Biden's Wikipedia article as it looked exactly two years ago. Blythwood (talk) 11:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

That is a flawed logic. Just because a reliable news source thinks a candidate or party will not make up, doesn't mean they won't. These reliable sources have been wrong before. As I stated above, these news sources make projections which are purely speculative. Once an official winner is announced by the appropriate authorities, then a Wikipedia page can declare the winner. Master Editor 10 (talk) 11:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Again, I understand your thinking. Such sources have been wrong-about Hobbs herself, in fact. But my point is that it's an accepted standard on Wikipedia. If you want to change it, you need to make a case to change it generally, not for one specific election result. I'm not sure where this was most discussed, but probably during the 2020 election, if you root around the talk pages you might be able to find it. The normal way to change an accepted policy is by filing a request for comment. Blythwood (talk) 12:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Belatedly jumping in here to say that Wikipedia doesn't "declare the winner". We reflect what the sources say, which is that Hobbs defeated Lake. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Cochise

With the county refusing to certify, I think that if there's no clear solution the county should probably show up as "no data" on the map with the note about certification Littlepagers (talk) 11:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

• We can't predict the future, just wait two weeks or so. starship.paint (exalt) 13:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

apparently more like a week, according to elections director lorick; if they don't certify by next week, cochise county's votes won't be part of the statewide canvass Littlepagers (talk) 15:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

We know that this process is ongoing. Marc Elias is involved. We are not a newspaper and don't have a crystal ball to see the future, so we wait. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

• @Littlepagers: - Cochise has now certified [2] starship.paint (exalt) 09:12, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

@starship.paint: Already knew, updated the page with that Littlepagers (talk) 11:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC)