♪♪ >>> THIS IS "METROFOCUS."

>>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO "METROFOCUS."

I'M JENNA FLANAGAN.

IN THE PAST 24 HOURS, THE RACE TO BECOME NEW YORK'S NEXT MAYOR HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY WILD.

IT'S HARD TO PUT IT ANY OTHER WAY.

JUST YESTERDAY, THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS RELEASED ITS RESULTS FOR THE FIRST UNOFFICIAL RANKED CHOICE COUNT.

THEN IN AN EXTRAORDINARY TURN OF EVENTS, THE BOE ACKNOWLEDGED A DISCREPANCY IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF VOTERS AND TOOK THE RESULTS DOWN FROM THEIR WEBSITE.

WHAT WE DO KNOW AS OF OUR TAPING THIS MORNING IS THE ORIGINAL NUMBERS SHOWED BROOK BOROUGH PRESIDENT WAS IN THE LEAD.

THE SANITATION COMMISSIONER AND THE FORMER COUNSEL TO THE MAYOR REMAINED IN THE RUNNING FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY.

AS OF OUR TAPING, IT'S UNCLEAR HOW OR IF THOSE NUMBERS MIGHT CHANGE.

THERE ARE ALSO STILL OVER 100,000 ABSENTEE BALLOTS THAT NEED TO BE FACTORED IN.

THE RACE IS STILL VERY MUCH UNSETTLED.

HERE TONIGHT TO HELP US MAKE SENSE OF THIS MAYORAL MADNESS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION, ARE TWO EXPERTS ON NEW YORK CITY ELECTIONS.

UP FIRST WE HAVE J.C. PLANKO.

A POLITICAL COMMENTATOR AND FORMER -- WANT TO EMPHASIZE FORMER PRESIDENT OF NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

WE ARE SO GLAD TO HAVE YOU ON THE PROGRAM TONIGHT.

>> I'M SO HAPPY TO BE HERE WITH YOU.

TRUST ME.

>> WE ARE ALSO JOINED BY BEN MAX.

HE IS THE EXECUTIVE EDITOR AND HOST OF THE MAX POLITICS PODCAST, AN EXPERT ON ALL THINGS NEW YORK CITY POLITICS.

WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

GOOD TO SEE YOU.

GOOD TO SEE YOU, J.C. >> LET'S START WITH JUST TRYING TO MAKE SENSE OF WHAT I THINK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE FELT LIKE NONSENSE FROM LAST NIGHT, I GUESS, WOULD BE THE CORRECT TERMINOLOGY.

BEN, IF YOU COULD LAY OUT -- I TOUCHED ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE INTRO.

WHERE DO THINGS STAND AS OF -- AGAIN, OUR TAPING IS THIS MORNING.

>> RIGHT.

WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT SEEMS TO HAVE HAPPENED WAS A SIGNIFICANT HUMAN ERROR.

THIS DOESN'T REALLY SEEM TO SPEAK TO ISSUES AROUND RANK CHOICE VOTING OR REALLY ANY OTHER PART OF THE ELECTORAL PROCESS OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT SEEMINGLY, FROM THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, THEY HAD TRIED TO USE THE MACHINES AND THE NEW SOFTWARE TO RUN A TEST RUN, WHICH IS GOOD PRACTICE, OF COURSE.

BUT THEN THEY DIDN'T CLEAR THE MACHINE OF THE BALLOTS THEY USED FOR THE TEST RUN.

THOSE GOT MIXED IN WITH THE ACTUAL BALLOTS THAT THEY TRIED TO RUN THE FIRST UNOFFICIAL PRELIMINARY RANK CHOICE RUNOFF, WHICH WOULD NOT HAVE INCLUDED WELL OVER 120,000 ABSENTEE VOTES IN THE DEMOCRATIC MAYORAL PRIMARY.

THIS WAS VERY PRELIMINARY ANYWAY.

IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WAS SOME HUMAN ERROR THAT MUCKED THINGS UP.

THEY HAD TO THROW OUT THE RUN THAT THEY DID AND REDO IT AGAIN.

>> OKAY.

J.C., WHEN ALL OF THIS HAPPENED, I THINK THE BEST WAY TO DESCRIBE THE REACTION THAT I SAW FROM MOST NEW YORK CITY JOURNALISTS WAS, YOU HAD ONE JOB.

HOW WAS IT THAT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE AT LEAST, SOMEONE WHO HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE ORGANIZATION, HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN?

>> LOOK, FIRST OF ALL, THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, LIKE EVERY SINGLE OTHER AGENCY AND ORGANIZATION, IS ALWAYS IN NEED OF A FORUM.

THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY REFORMS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE.

THIS TIME AROUND WITH RANK CHOICE VOTING, THERE WAS A TRIAL RUN.

AS YOU COULD IMAGINE, I'VE BEEN ON THE PHONE WITH MY SOURCES NONSTOP TRYING TO GET INFORMATION.

WHAT WE HAVE IS THIS.

THERE WAS A SYSTEM IN PLACE PUT IN FOR THIS RANK CHOICE VOTING.

THAT NEEDED A TEST RUN AS BEN MENTIONED.

THAT SYSTEM TAKES A PICTURE OF THE BALLOT.

THAT WAS USED THIS TIME AROUND FOR PURPOSES OF RANK CHOICE VOTING.

IN THAT PRACTICE RUN.

HOWEVER, THERE IS ANOTHER FOOLPROOF MECHANISM WHERE THE DATA IS STORED.

THOSE TWO ARE SEPARATE AND APART.

I AM TOLD THE VOTE TALLY ON ELECTION NIGHT IS THE ACTUAL TALLY.

UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF HUMAN ERROR -- THERE'S NO EXCUSE ABOUT IT -- THE PICTURES WEREN'T CLEARED FROM THAT PRACTICE RUN.

THOSE NUMBERS MADE THEIR WAY INTO THE ELECTION RESULTS THAT WERE PUT IN YESTERDAY THAT WERE ERRONEOUS.

THIS WAS A FOOLPROOF -- THIS WAS PICKED UP AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE ACTUAL DATA.

EVERY SINGLE BALLOT VOTE WILL BE COUNTED.

THE BOARD MUST COME OUT AND TELL THE PUBLIC EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.

TAKE THE HITS FROM BEN AND FROM YOU.

YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE HITS.

YOU HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.

NEW YORKERS AT THE END OF THE DAY NEED TO KNOW WHAT HAPPEN AND FEEL CONFIDENCE IN THE BOARD.

WHAT BETTER WAY THAN TO NOT ONLY ALLOW FOR THE CAMPAIGNS TO BE THERE, FOR THE PRESS TO BE THERE AND SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING, BUT TO EXPLAIN, HEY, THIS PERSON MADE A MISTAKE, AND NOTHING HAPPENED AS FAR AS THE FINAL TALLY IS CONCERNED, COME AND SEE FOR YOURSELVES.

IF NOT, THE PRESS IS GOING TO BE ALL OVER IT.

IF I WERE THERE, MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A PRESS CONFERENCE TODAY.

BE AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE.

>> BEN, WHEN IT COMES TO THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS TAKING HITS FROM THE PRESS, DESCRIBE IT THAT WAY, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING WHERE THIS IS THIS THING THAT HAPPENED THIS ONE TIME.

THIS SEEMS LIKE THIS IS A RECURRING EVENT WITH THEM EVERY SINGLE ELECTION.

BIG ONES, SMALL ONES, LOCAL, NATIONAL.

FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE AT LEAST THE PUBLIC'S TRUST IN THIS ORGANIZATION?

THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME THAT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS HAS BEEN IN THE NEWS FOR SOME SORT OF MISTAKE WHEN IT COMES TO COUNTING BALLOTS.

>> YEAH.

I THINK THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

THERE'S BEEN A SERIES OF MISHAPS OVER MANY YEARS, EVEN DECADES, LOOKING BACK.

PEOPLE WERE TAKING THE TIME YESTERDAY, AS EVERYBODY WAS STUCK WAITING TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, AT LEAST IN NEW YORK POLITICS AND JOURNALISM, LOOKING BACK AT OLD CLIPS OF REPORTING ON THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS FROM THE '80s AND '90s.

THERE HAVE BEEN REFORMS.

THERE HAVE BEEN IMPROVEMENTS.

AT THE VERY BASIS OF THERE IS A VERY DEEPLY FLAWED STRUCTURE OF THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS THAT REALLY NEEDS REFORM AND RE-EVALUATION.

THAT IS BECAUSE INHERENTLY IT'S A CREATURE OF STATE LAW UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

IT'S A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION MEANT TO BE A CHECK ON HYPER PARTISANSHIP OR CORRUPTION BY HAVING A DEMOCRATIC AND A REPUBLICAN COMMISSIONER FROM EACH BOROUGH AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO MAKE DECISIONS.

BUT WE ARE PAST THE POINT WHERE THAT IS THE RIGHT SYSTEM TO HAVE.

IT SHOULD BE PROFESSIONALIZED.

IT SHOULD BE DEPOLITICIZED.

THERE'S SOMETHING OF A DECENT MODEL WITH HOW THE NEW YORK CITY CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD IS STRUCTURE AND RUN.

THERE ARE VARIOUS MODELS OUT THERE.

THIS IS A DEEPLY FLAWED ORGANIZATION WHERE THERE IS JUST A LEVEL OF INCOMPETENCE AND ACCOUNTABLE THAT CANNOT GO ON.

THE POLITICAL POWERS THAT BE NEED TO FINALLY REALIZE THAT.

THE CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE AT THE STATE LEVEL, AND IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

QUICK, I DO WANT TO SAY, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF FRAUD.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF MALFEASANCE.

WE COULD HAVE DIFFERENT EVIDENCE COME OUT, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE AT THIS POINT AN EXAMPLE, AGAIN, OF INCOMPETENCE, HUMAN ERROR.

ONE TIME, YOU COULD CHALK THAT UP TO A PROBLEM.

WHEN IT HAPPENS OVER AND OVER, THE SYSTEM REALLY NEEDS TO BE REFORMED.

>> I DO WANT TO COME BACK TO, OF COURSE, THE ISSUE OF PUBLIC TRUST IN THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

J.C., I WANT TO GO TO YOU AND TALK ABOUT JUST HOW IS IT THAT THIS ORGANIZATION FUNCTIONS OR SEEMINGLY LACK THEREOF FROM AN OUTSIDER'S PERSPECTIVE?

AGAIN FROM HEARING FROM NEW YORK CITY REPORTERS, I HAVE HEARD EVERYTHING FROM THIS IS NO LONGER A REFORM ISSUE, IT NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY RESTRUCTURED OR ELIMINATED.

I HAVE HEARD IT REFERRED TO AS A RELIC OF TAMINY HALL.

ARE THERE ISSUES OF NEPOTISM THAT GO ON WITHIN THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE ORGANIZATION THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE OVERSEEING NEW YORK CITY ELECTIONS?

>> I BELIEVE THE BOARD HAS BEEN IN NEED OF REFORM SINCE THE INCEPTION.

THE IDEA OF NEPOTISM AND PUTTING PEOPLE IN AND SOMETHING THE PRESS AND SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE REPORTED ON, THOSE ISSUES ARE VERY COMMON IN GOVERNMENT.

WE NEED TO LOOK NO FURTHER THAN THE WHITE HOUSE 2017 TO 2021.

WHAT I NEED TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR -- THIS IS WHERE I DISAGREE WITH BEN A LITTLE BIT.

WE NEED TO HAVE BIPARTISAN SYSTEMS THAT ARE PROFESSIONAL.

THE IDEA OF A NON-PARTISAN OR WHAT SOME IN THE PRESS CALL PROFESSIONAL NON-PARTISAN LIKE THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD WILL LEAVE AN ORGANIZATION THAT COULD IN THEORY BE COMPLETELY CONTROLLED AND STAFFED BY DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICAN.

COULD YOU IMAGINE A SYSTEM WHERE THERE IS NO CHECKS AND BALANCE AND THAT EVERYONE THAT WORKS AT THAT AGENCY IS OF ONE PARTY?

I THINK THE CONSTITUTION RECOGNIZES THAT PEOPLE WILL NATURALLY COALESCE AROUND AN IDEOLOGY OR GEOGRAPHY OR WHAT HAVE YOU AND IT RECOGNIZES A TWO PARTY SYSTEM.

PARTIES WILL FORM.

IT DOESN'T SAY DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN.

IT SAYS TWO PARTIES WITH THE HIGHEST VOTES IN THE LAST ELECTION.

PARTISANSHIP IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S ADMITTED TO THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

LOOK AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE SEC AND SO MANY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ARE PARTISAN.

THERE'S NO BETTER WAY TO KEEP A CHECK AND BALANCE ON EACH OTHER.

CAN WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL BIPARTISAN SYSTEM WHERE THERE IS SERIOUS CHECKS AND BACKGROUNDS AND QUALIFICATIONS AND THAT REFORMS ARE TAKING PLACE AND THAT THEY ARE BEING RESPONSIVE TO THE COUNCIL AND TO THE MAYOR?

THERE ARE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE FIXED.

THINGS HAVE BEEN FIXED.

AS FAR AS WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

YOU CAN HAVE A ONE SIDED ONE PARTY RULE BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND NOBODY WANTS THAT.

LET'S RECOGNIZE PARTISANSHIP EXISTS AND PROFESSIONALIZE IT.

>> BEN, WHAT WERE YOU GOING TO SAY?

>> I DON'T NECESSARILY FEEL THAT A NON-PARTISAN SITUATION IS 100% THE BEST CASE TO GO.

THERE'S ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES.

J.C. MAKES A SOLID ARGUMENT ABOUT HAVING A BIPARTISAN STRUCTURE.

WE DO VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE CITY AND STATE UNDER POLITICAL ELECTED OFFICIALS.

WE DO ALMOST EVERY OTHER FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT UNDER THOSE PARTY ELECTED OFFICIALS.

IN NEW YORK, THEY HAPPEN TO ALMOST ALL BE DEMOCRATS.

PEOPLE AREN'T ACCUSING THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT, THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS OF BEING THESE HIGHLY POLITICIZED THINGS.

ELECTIONS ARE DIFFERENT, OF COURSE.

WE CAN RUN FUNCTIONS OF GOVERNMENT WITH PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE LONG HISTORIES OF POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT WHO ARE NON-PARTISAN ACTORS.

>> WELL, THAT LEADS INTO WHAT I WANTED TO GET AT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

J.C., YOU KEPT EMPHASIZING A PROFESSIONAL -- A PROFESSIONAL GROUP OF PEOPLE RUNNING THIS ORGANIZATION.

HOW ARE THE MEMBERS GETTING APPOINTED?

WHAT IS IT THAT YOU ARE FEELING THAT IS NOT AS PROFESSIONAL AS IT SHOULD BE?

>> WHEN I SAY PROFESSIONAL, I MEAN HAVING QUALIFICATIONS FOR EACH JOB.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK YOUR VIEWERS SHOULD KNOW IS THAT THE CITY COUNSEL ULTIMATELY DECIDES WHO GETS TO BE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

THEIR INVESTIGATION PROCESS IS LENGTHY.

YOU DO GO THROUGH A COMMITTEE PROCESS.

THEN AFTER THAT, YOU GO BEFORE THE FULL CITY COUNCIL.

THEY VOTE AS A BODY ON THAT INDIVIDUAL FOR A FOUR-YEAR TERM OR TO FIT IN WHATEVER VACANCY IS LEFT ON THE BOARD.

IT'S A LENGTHY PROCESS.

WHEN I SAY PROFESSIONAL, I MEAN THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE GREAT WOULD BE FOR A NATIONAL SERVICE FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR POSITION WHEN IT OPENS UP.

HAVE A SEARCH COMMITTEE OR A HIGHER COMMITTEE TO LOOK INTO RESUMES AND QUALIFICATIONS.

I THINK THAT IF YOU HAVE -- IF YOU CAN ASCERTAIN A PROCESS BY WHICH THE HIGH END STAFFERS AT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS ARE PICKED, YOU WILL HAVE A NO CITY PRESS POOL THAT WILL BE MORE RELAXED AND HAVE MORE CONFIDENCE IN THE SYSTEM IF THERE'S ACTUAL SEARCHES.

ONE OF THE THINGS I PUSHED FOR AND GOT THROUGH WAS THAT NOW YOU HAVE JOB POSTINGS ON THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS WHERE YOU CAN LOOK AT A JOB, SEE IF YOU HAVE QUALIFICATIONS AND APPLY AS OPPOSED TO WHERE IT WAS WHO YOU KNEW.

THAT WAS THE SYSTEM WHICH YOU GOT IN.

I THINK THAT A PROFESSIONAL BOARD WOULD BE WHERE YOU HAVE QUALIFICATIONS, INTERVIEW PROCESS AND THAT IT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE.

I THINK YOU HAVE A MORE PROFESSIONAL SYSTEM.

>> BEN, DO YOU THINK A CHANGE LIKE THAT MIGHT HELP CHANGE THE PUBLIC'S PERCEPTION?

WE KEEP HAVING SIMILAR ISSUES OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

>> YEAH, THERE'S A COUPLE LAYERS OF REFORM THAT ARE POSSIBLE AND ON THE TABLE.

A MORE IMMEDIATE ONE, THERE'S A BILL IN ALBANY THAT COULD DO THIS, IS TO PROFESSIONALIZE THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND THE HIRE PROCESSES AND THE STAFF THAT RUN THE OPERATIONS.

THEY RUN THE OPERATIONS BASED ON A LOT OF DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE BY THE COMMISSIONERS WHO J.C. WAS TALKING ABOUT GET APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

THERE'S A VETTING PROCESS.

DECISIONS MADE BY THE STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS THAT TRICKLE DOWN TO THE CITY.

FOR THE STAFF, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND THE STAFF AT THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS WHICH ARE SO ESSENTIAL IN TERMS OF SMOOTHLY RUNNING THINGS AND NOT HAVING ALL THIS HUMAN ERROR, WHICH, AGAIN, PEOPLE CAN HAVE A BAD DAY, BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE THE FIRST TABULATIONS, YOU CAN'T HAVE A BAD DAY.

WHAT ARE THE LAYERS OF OVERSIGHT, CHECKING THINGS?

THERE'S THIS ISSUE OF TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY WELL BEFORE EVERYTHING FELL APART YESTERDAY.

ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS SAYING WAS, WHY WHEN WE DO A FIRST RUN OF RANK CHOICE VOTING IS THERE NOT A WIDE OPEN TELEVISED PRESS CONFERENCE WITH THE LEADERSHIP OF THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS EXPLAINING WHAT HAPPENED, EXPLAINING THE PROCESS, SHOWING THE MAP, TALKING ABOUT THE CHOICES THEY MADE?

THIS IS DEMOCRACY 101 THAT SHOULD BE HAPPENING IN NEW YORK CITY, THE BIGGEST CITY IN THE COUNTRY.

WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO TO BLAME OR CREDIT.

WE SHOULD BE HAVING A LEADER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND A PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD WHO ARE VERY PUBLIC AND VERY TRANSPARENT AND VERY ACCOUNTABLE.

>> BUILDING OFF OF THAT, I DO WONDER IF THERE NEEDS TO BE A MUCH HARDER, I GUESS, PR PUSH ON THE PART OF THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, BECAUSE IN THE LACK OF THAT PRESS CONFERENCE THAT BEN MENTIONED, THE TRANSPARENCY THAT YOU BOTH WERE CALLING FOR, WE HAVE SEEN VIA SOCIAL MEDIA SOME CONSERVATIVE ACTIVISTS AND PEOPLE CERTAINLY WHO ARE ATTACHED TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT AND HIS CLAIM OF ELECTION FRAUD STEPPING INTO THAT VOID AND SAYING, SEE, THIS IS PROOF, THIS WAS OVER 100,000 BALLOTS AND OTHER STATES IT WAS 45 AND THEY WERE -- THE POINT IS, IS THERE ROOM AT THIS PARTICULAR JUNCTURE, NOT JUST IN NEW YORK CITY BUT AT THIS POINT IN AMERICAN HISTORY FOR THERE TO BE A VOID OF TRANSPARENCY, FOR THERE NOT TO BE CLEAR INFORMATION IF A MISTAKE IS MADE IN AN ELECTION WHAT EXACTLY HAPPENED?

J.C., I WILL THROW THAT TO YOU.

>> TO BE FAIR, THAT'S WHAT WE SAW YESTERDAY.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.

EVERY BOROUGH OFFICE AND AT THE BOARD, THE CAMPAIGNS ARE THERE.

A BIPARTISAN TEAM IS MONITORING, MAKING SURE NO ONE IS TAKING ADVANTAGE.

IT'S OPEN TO THE PRESS.

PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT HAPPEN.

TO THEIR CREDIT, THE ISSUE WAS FOUND AND THEY REPORTED ON IT IMMEDIATELY.

THE PROBLEM IS THE FOLLOW THROUGH.

IF YOU WATCH TODAY, MICHAEL RYAN AND THE TEAM AT THE BOARD HAVE A PRESS CONFERENCE.

YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

COME OUT AND TALK TO THE PRESS, TALK TO THE PEOPLE AND BE HONEST.

OPEN EVERYTHING UP.

I THINK THE MORE TRANSPARENT YOU ARE AND THE MORE YOU TAKE THE HITS AND ADMIT THIS WAS HUMAN ERROR, THE BETTER OFF YOU WILL BE IN THE LONG RUN.

IT WILL BUILD CONFIDENCE THAT YOU NEED WITH THE OPINION MAKERS.

>> BEFORE WE MOVE ON, SORRY, BUT YOU MENTIONED MICHAEL RYAN.

I'M SURE THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW THAT IS.

>> MICHAEL RYAN IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS.

HE RUNS THE EVERYDAY OPERATION.

HE HAS A TEAM THAT WORKS HARD.

THEY NEED CRISIS INTERVENTION.

CRISIS COMMUNICATION TIME.

COME OUT AND TALK TO US.

LET US KNOW HOW IT HAPPENED, HOW YOU WILL FIX IT.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU DO.

>> BEN, YOU WERE GOING TO ADD?

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY, THERE'S A COUPLE KEY POINTS THAT ARE WORTH UNDERSCORING.

ONE IS SOMETHING THAT I SAID EARLIER.

THERE'S NO EVIDENCE OF FRAUD OR MALFEASANCE.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS A HUMAN ERROR, A PROBLEM.

AS J.C. SAID, THE SYSTEM IN A WAY IT BROKE DOWN, BUT THEN ONCE IT BROKE DOWN, IT WAS ADDRESSED.

THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS WORKED HERE IN TERMS OF PEOPLE WERE CHECKING ON THE RESULTS, PEOPLE WERE SAYING, THESE NUMBERS DON'T ADD UP.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF MAYORAL CANDIDATES DOING THAT.

THEN THE BOARD LOOKED AT IT AGAIN, TOOK DOWN THE RESULTS AND IS PLEDGING TO GET IT RIGHT.

IF THERE'S GOING TO BE PROBLEMS -- THERE IS HUMAN ERROR IN LIFE -- IT'S GOOD TO CATCH IT.

THAT'S WHAT HAS HAPPENED WITH THE CLAIMS OF FRAUD ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

THEY HAVE DOUBLE AND TRIPLE CHECKED JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING.

YOU HAVE REPUBLICAN SECRETARIES OF STATE AND OTHERS SAYING, NO, NO EXAMPLES OF FRAUD.

THE SYSTEM IS WORKING, EVEN IF IT'S UNDER GREAT STRESS AND MISTAKES HAPPEN.

>> YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE IS GOOD TO KNOW?

THERE IS A PAPER TRAIL.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE CAN VERIFY THE VOTES.

EVERYONE SHOULD REST ASSURED THAT IF THERE IS A DOUBT, WE HAVE A PAPER TRAIL THAT WE CAN ALWAYS CHECK.

>> WE WANT VOTERS TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE SYSTEM.

A LOT OF MISTAKES UNDERMINE THAT.

THE SMALL PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY DID TURN OUT TO VOTE, WE DON'T WANT TO DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FURTHER FROM ENGAGING IN THE PROCESS.

WE DON'T WANT TO GO THE OTHER WAY.

>> AMEN.

>> IF WE WERE ENDING THE SHOW, THAT WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT NOTE TO LEAVE IT ON.

I DO ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT THAT PERHAPS A RECOUNTING OR REASSESSMENT OF THE BALLOTS, ET CETERA, MIGHT HAVE ON THE RESULTS.

AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED IN THE INTRO, INITIALLY, WE THOUGHT ERIC ADAMS AS THE LEADER WITH KATHERINE GARCIA AND MAYA WYLIE TRAILING.

BUT PERHAPS THOSE NUMBERS COULD CHANGE.

I DON'T WANT TO PUT SPECULATION ON EITHER ONE OF YOU.

THAT'S CERTAINLY UNFAIR, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WE DO NOT KNOW.

I AM WONDERING IF THERE COULD BE ANY MAJOR CAMPAIGNING TAKEAWAYS, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT THIS WAS NEW YORK'S FIRST RANK CHOICE VOTING, IN TERMS OF HOW TO CAMPAIGN INTO A POSITION TO PUT YOU IN THE BEST CHANCES OF PERHAPS BEING A SECOND RUNNER OR THIRD RUNNER-UP BUT ACTUALLY GARNERING VOTES YOU NEED TO ULTIMATELY WIN.

I'M WONDERING, WHAT DO YOU SEE AS THE CAMPAIGNING TAKEAWAYS FROM THE NEW SYSTEM THAT WE ARE USING?

J.C., YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE.

I WOULD LOVE TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS AGAIN.

>> I REALLY DON'T LIKE THIS SYSTEM AT ALL.

ZERO.

I THINK IT'S COSTLY.

IT KEEPS A LOT OF CANDIDATES THAT HAVE NO SHOT ON THE BALLOT.

THEY ARE ALL QUALIFIED FOR MATCHING FUNDS.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE INTENT WAS TO REDUCE COSTS OF A RUNOFF.

WE'RE NOT DOING IT WITH THIS SYSTEM.

I THINK NOW WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT WE HAVE WELL OVER 120,000 PLUS MAIL-IN BALLOTS WE HAVE TO COUNT THAT COULD THROW THIS ELECTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

WE WON'T KNOW WHO IS REALLY AT THE TOP.

I THINK A LOT OF THOSE MAY GO TO ONE CANDIDATE OVER ANOTHER.

WHICHEVER CANDIDATE HAS THE BEST MAIL-IN ABSENTEE CAMPAIGN WILL PULL THIS OFF AT THE END OF THE DAY.

MOVING FORWARD AS FAR AS STRATEGISTS, I THINK IF WE STAY WITH RANK CHOICE VOTING, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT ALLIANCES.

I CALLED IT COLLUSION A COUPLE OF TIMES.

IF I JOIN FORCES WITH BEN SO JENNA DOESN'T WIN, THAT'S NEFARIOUS.

IF THAT'S THE WAY IT'S GOING TO BE, WE WILL SEE MORE ALLIANCES FROM THE BEGINNING.

VOTE FOR ME OR JOHN, EITHER ONE WILL BE FINE.

THAT CAMPAIGN WON'T BE NEW.

IT MAY NOT FEEL WELL.

THAT'S THE WAY IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE MOVING FORWARD TO FORM ALLIANCES AND HAVE AN EDGE ON PRIMARY DAY.

>> BEN, DO YOU SEE MORE ALLIANCES AS J.C.

PUT IT IN OUR FUTURE WITH CAMPAIGNING?

>> I'M GLAD J.C. IS PARTIALLY WORKING BACK THE USE OF THE WORD COLLUSION.

I THINK ALLIANCES IS A PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE STRATEGY.

IT'S ALSO AN -- GETTING AT THE POINT ABOUT RANK CHOICE VOTING KEEPS CANDIDATES IN THE RACE WHO MIGHT OTHERWISE DROP OUT, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S TRUE IN THIS CASE.

EVEN IF A CANDIDATE DROPS OUT, USUALLY, THEY WIND UP ENDORSING SOMETHING.

IT'S SIX ONE WAY, HALF A DOZEN THE OTHER IF YOU ARE ENDORSING SOMEBODY OR YOU ARE FORMING AN ALLIANCE.

ANDREW YANG WAS ACKNOWLEDGING THAT HE WAS VERY UNLIKELY TO WIN AND WAS SAYING, I PREFER -- I'M TELLING MY FOLLOWERS, I PREFER KATHERINE GARCIA TO WIN IF I'M NOT GOING TO WIN.

THAT'S PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE.

IT'S NOT THAT DIFFERENT FROM A CANDIDATE DROPPING OUT AND ENDORSING SOMEONE.

IT'S NOT THAT DIFFERENT FROM THE ENDORSEMENTS WE SEE ACROSS THE BOARD.

I DO THINK J.C. IS RIGHT, WE WILL SEE -- WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE ALLIANCES.

I WAS SURPRISED WE DIDN'T SEE MORE.

I WAS SURPRISED THAT EVEN MAYA AND KATHERINE DIDN'T FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL A LITTLE BIT TOGETHER AND SAY, VOTE FOR ONE OF US.

WE BOTH PREFER THE OTHER TO ERIC AS THE NEXT MAYOR.

WE ARE TROUBLED BY SOME OF THE POSITIONS THAT HE HAS.

OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.

OR ERIC AND SOMEBODY ELSE FORMING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IT WILL BE VERY INTERESTING TO WATCH.

I SORT OF WISH THAT RANK CHOICE VOTING HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A TEST RUN WITHOUT A MAYORAL RACE ON THE BALLOT.

A ROUND OF CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS LIKE MID TERM IN 2023 BECAUSE OF REDISTRICTING.

THERE'S THIS FUNKY CALENDAR.

TO LET PEOPLE KICK THE TIRES A LITTLE BIT MORE.

I DO THINK THERE WERE MISSED OPPORTUNITIES BY CANDIDATES AND CAMPAIGNS TO NOT COORDINATE A LITTLE BIT MORE IN A RANK CHOICE SYSTEM.

IT'S WHY YOU MIGHT SEE KATHERINE GARCIA PULL THIS OUT ON THE STRENGTH OF A LOT OF NUMBER TWOS, BECAUSE THROUGHOUT THE CAMPAIGN, SHE STAYED POSITIVE, SHE STAYED STEADY.

SHE WOUND UP LINKING UP WITH ANDREW YANG BUT DIDN'T TELL HER SUPPORTERS TO RANK HIM SECOND.

SHE SORT OF RAN HER CAMPAIGN IN A CERTAIN STRATEGY THAT LOOKS LIKE IT WILL PAY OFF, EVEN COMING IN LIKELY A CLOSE SECOND, MAYBE A CLOSE THIRD OR EVEN WIN.

>> WELL, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE COULD HAVE BEEN OTHER ELECTIONS WHERE WE COULD HAVE STARTED THIS OR GIVEN IT ANOTHER PROFESSIONAL TRIAL RUN, IF YOU WILL.

THERE WERE OTHER ELECTIONS ON THE BALLOT.

I'M WONDERING IF EITHER ONE OF YOU SEE ANY OF WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH THE MAYORAL PROBLEM AFFECTING ANY OF THE OTHER DOWN BALLOT RACES?

CONTROLLER AND, OF COURSE, MANHATTAN D.A.

'S OFFICE.

THOSE SEEM SETTLED.

DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS THAT THIS RECOUNTING OR REASSESSMENT OF THE BALLOTS MIGHT CHANGE SOME OF THOSE OTHER BIG RACES?

THE OTHER BOROUGH PRESIDENTS.

>> RANK CHOICE DOESN'T AFFECT THE MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S CAMPAIGN.

RIGHT, BEN?

SO I THINK THOSE RACES ARE SETTLED.

AGAIN, THE CONTROLLER RACE SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE WIDER IN NUMBERS.

I THINK LANDER IS RUNNING A LARGE MARGIN AGAINST HIS NEXT OPPONENT, COREY JOHNSON.

WE KNOW WILLIAMS REALLY RAN AWAY WITH THIS PRIMARY.

I THINK THAT'S SETTLED AS WELL.

IT GOES TO SHOW YOU THE DISCUSSION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE PROGRESSIVE WING OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS A LOT OF STRENGTH, I THINK AS OF RIGHT NOW, TWO OF THE THREE CITY ELECTED OFFICES IN NEW YORK CITY ARE CONTROLLED BY REALLY, REALLY, REALLY PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS.

IT'S THE TOP OF THE TICKET THAT WE MAY SEE A MODERATE DEMOCRAT.

HOWEVER, IF MAYA POSES OFF, WE WILL SEE A FULL-BLOWN CITYWIDE ADMINISTRATION.

>> BEN, 30 SECONDS LEFT.

>> RANK CHOICE VOTING IN SOME WAYS IS SUPPOSED TO BUILD CONSENSUS AROUND CANDIDATES.

I THINK THAT WAS KATHERINE GARCIA'S PLAY.

IN THE CONTROLLER RACE, THERE'S A LARGE NUMBER OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS TO BE SEEN AND THE RANK CHOICE RUNOFF.

ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN.

THE ABSENTEES PLUS RANK CHOICE WILL DETERMINE A LOT OF THE BOROUGH PRESIDENT RACES AND CITY COUNCIL RACES.

>> THANKS FOR JOINING ME TO HELP MAKE SENSE OF WHAT TOOK PLACE.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE SECOND PRELIMINARY RELEASE OF NUMBERS ON THE ELECTION.

THANK YOU BOTH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> BE PATIENT.

THANKS.

>> THAT IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT.

THANK YOU.

>>> "METROFOCUS" IS MADE