Lee Hawkins and Tom Graves finishing 1-2 in our 9th District U.S. House special election was no surprise. Steve Tarvin's third place surprised me.

Still, the runoff candidates combined won less than 60 percent of the total low-turnout vote. Here's my analysis of the runoff.

Special election runoff turnout generally is smaller than the first round. Many voters in the more than 40 percent who cast losing votes won't vote again. The key to runoff victory is voter turnout.

Some of each candidate's first-round voters won't vote again. Some just won't go back; some of Graves' voters thinking he has it won, some of Hawkins' voters thinking he can't win. In reality, it can be a very close race. Each must get his voters to the polls.

Statistics show about 70 percent of front-runners win the runoff. What's not as well known is that a big majority of that 70 percent had more than 40 percent of the first vote, often just 2 to 4 percent short of a majority. The more below 40 percent the front-runners got, the less their chance of winning the runoff.

Clearly the underdog, Hawkins must work harder while Graves tries to get his voters back out. From where do the runoff voters come? What do the candidates need to do to win them?

Losing candidate endorsements (some won't endorse) can produce a few who can be motivated to return to the polls. I suspect the biggest mine is the huge majority who didn't even vote the first round.

If you did vote, you can again. If you didn't vote the first time, you also can vote, whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent or whatever. This is a special election with no party labels. Both a Democrat and Independent ran in the first special election.

Hall, Dawson, Forsyth and Cherokee counties form the biggest bloc of voters in the district. Many might be persuaded it would be better to have a congressman from this region of the district who understands the area best. Graves' region is the carpet center. Hawkins' features poultry, other textile, health and Lake Lanier. Both have education and tourism interests.

Both candidates will have to go after those who didn't vote with emphasis perhaps on Democrats, who have no horses in the runoff but do have a vital interest in who the winner is if they realize it.

The campaign mailers and news reports I've seen as of this writing show Graves painting some of Hawkins' votes as not truly conservative, and himself as the darling of the tea party. Hawkins refutes those claims, pointing out that Graves didn't mention he also voted for some of the specific votes he criticizes Hawkins' votes for.

It was the tea party movement in Graves' home territory that endorsed him, not the district as a whole. Hawkins would do well to gain the endorsement of his area tea party supporters.

The major differences I've found so far are: Graves would work to repeal Obamacare. Period. Hawkins would keep the few good points it contains that both sides agreed upon and work to change the rest of it to an acceptable, less costly bill.

Graves has real estate expertise. Hawkins' background is in the medical field and has expertise in the water problems this area has. They'll get more specific in coming days.

Pay close attention. This is a very important runoff.

n

My grandson, graduating from Gainesville High and heading off to college this fall, just lost his beloved pet, a registered female black Labrador he got as a puppy before he started school. He insisted the pup was male and named her Benjie. They were together throughout his school.

As Benjie was following Andrew's father and stepmother, he suddenly whimpered. As they turned, he fell to the driveway pavement shuddering. They grabbed and held him. He was gone in a few seconds. Now Andrew doesn't have to leave his aged, sick pet. Things work out.

Ted Oglesby is retired associate and opinion page editor of The Times. You can reach him at P.O. Box 663, Gainesville, GA 30503. His column appears biweekly on Tuesdays and at gainesvilletimes.com.