Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
I would have thought having to write in a candidate on a ballot, spelled properly, in Alaska, would prove difficult enough on its own.
I hope one of them is Linda Meerconsky.
The unintended consequences of a court that confused "write-in" with "copy-in".****wv = plizemepliz plizme, LOL Beatles song.
"I would have thought having to write in a candidate on a ballot, spelled properly, in Alaska, would prove difficult enough on its own."You would think. However, this particular candidate is the current Senator so she won't be hard to find. Plus, considering the recent wrong-headed ruling on write-in rules, the court will probably end-up ruling that the worst spellings of her name will still count.Any confusion added is a good thing.
It's a low trick, but if we didn't allow low tricks in elections then the number of Democrats in Congress would be in the low double digits.
That is great!
I would have thought having to write in a candidate on a ballot, spelled properly, in Alaska, would prove difficult enough on its own. The tolerance and open mindedness of liberals is breathtaking!Thanks for reminding us again, garage.
Libtard: I would have thought having to write in a candidate on a ballot, spelled properly, in Alaska, would prove difficult enough on its own."...another easy way to identify the Libtard is its distinctive morning chirp: I can handle things! I'm smart! Not like everybody says... like dumb... I'm smart and I want respect!The Libtard is very insecure about its own intelligence. And will frequently demean other animals to make itself feel less stupid than it really is"
Why do you have to file to be a write-in candidate? If you write in a candidate's name that's not on the list, does it not count?Oh, I see, this is a just a list of write-ins handed out at the polling places. Never mind.It's an interesting story, I like efforts to defeat recalcitrant imcumbents.
Short GMSniff. Sniff. Snark!Yay for those Alaskans with a great sense of humor.
I bet Mercowsky has already paid with whiskey for 99% of indigenous peoples votes. In a small state like Alaska, that makes her the winner. wv = crume thing to say I know but it is true
Another great sign for the Tea Party movement is the way they handled this. When it looked like "the system" was going to screw them over, they didn't go all ACORN and start planning to steal votes, they stayed within the rules and the law. The Dems should take a few notes.
Heh....Sounds like Operation Chaos again.i
I'm not normally a fan of election "antics", but it's really time for the 4-time-state-bar-failing, Senator-by-nepotism, daughter of a Gore (mother's side), Murkowsi, to go. So I support all legal methods to derail her campaign. Let's go Joe (Miller)!
I foresee pushback. I think voters will see this as a dirty trick, maybe as bad as Murky's behavior.
Commenter "daddy" at JustOneMinute got the ball rolling, when prodded by Hit & Run, who got the idea from Ace of Spades, who got it from Dan Reihl.link
Has ACORN gotten Mikulski Mouse added to the list yet?
At last count, it looked like there were 148 write-in candidates on the list for the Alaska Senate race. I absolutely love this. I simply love that when someone changed or ignored the rules to give someone an advantage never before given, people rose up to obliterate that advantage in a lawful, irreverent way. These folks stuck a finger in the eye of the Powers That Be, and I find that to be a very American sentiment. Meek submission is for the ruled. We're citizens, not subjects, which is why this just delights me so.
I assume from his patronizing tone garage would have an equally low opinion of the primitive rubes of the Chicago Machine who could not even manage to spell the name of a major candidate correctly on their ballot (Rich Whitney), and who whined that they were totally incapable of correcting their error in time for election day. I don't recall his savaging their incompetence, but I'm sure he must have.
Megaera @ 3:16:Most excellent ownage!
As those of us who observed the MN senate vote recount know, some people even have trouble when the task is simply to fill in an oval next to your preferred candidate's name.
I thought the "write in" springs from the right of voters to vote for whomever they want, not merely an alternative to the party system for the candidates. As such, isn't the requirement that write in candidates register nonsensical, defeating the whole purpose of the write in vote?
Good for them. I don't doubt some are motivated in part by the Lefty harassment that drove Miss Sarah to resign.Karma = Payback.You know the rest.
I think procedural whimsy is beautiful.
tim maguire said... I thought the "write in" springs from the right of voters to vote for whomever they want, not merely an alternative to the party system for the candidates. As such, isn't the requirement that write in candidates register nonsensical, defeating the whole purpose of the write in vote?If I understand it correctly, the Alaska Supreme Court has allowed for a list of "official" write-ins. I don't know the case, but I'm guessing it's for spelling purposes. After all, not everyone is a spelling expert, and names are especially prone to misspelling. As I learned Michigan election law way back when, if the name wasn't spelled exactly right, it didn't count, period. (It's possible Michigan law isn't as clear cut as I remember it, but that's what I learned.) Under normal circumstances, a list like this would help the write-in voter to check spelling.Although this scheme makes me chuckle at the sheer inventiveness, it makes me shudder more. It's an abuse of the system. As much as I think Lisa Murkowski is an asshole, this behavior ranks right up there in the asshole department. It is a conscious attempt to disenfranchise voters. I don't like it when Democrat officials conveniently "forget" to send out military absentee ballots in time, and I don't like this any better.
I heard the candidate list had no basis in Alaskan law until the wacko judge approved it, so these new candidates think they're thwarting something unlawful.
Having to search for Murkowski's name to get the spelling right isn't going to keep anyone who wants to from voting for her. If she was hoping for uninformed voters to receive the "official" list of write in votes and think, "Cool beans! I'll go with the outsider!" then she's going to be out of luck.The write-in list more or less circumvents the process of getting on the ballot because it lends an official air to her name. It ALSO, as we've seen from comments right here, implies that to write in a candidate the candidate needs to be on the official list.That's misleading. And if one is worried about disenfranchisement, that is more of a disenfranchisement than having her supporters have to look on the list to find Murkowski.
It's phonetic.Mur-kow-ski. Mur-cow-sky.Mir-cow-skeeMore Cows Skiing.That's a platform.
Thanks Martin, I've since learned you are right. I have mixed feelings--they have every right to do this, but their intention is not to win but to procedurally thwart someone else's chances of winning.Not exactly admirable, but this is an outrageous rule--some write-in candidates are more write-inable than others?
Please understand that the word "Franken" now is also a verb, not merely an adjective!Cheers, and don't let them Franken you over.
tim,Thanks for the confirmation. I haven't had time to research.What bugs me about this more as I think about it is not that Murkowski will lose -- she's a bitter candidate with a sense of entitlement, and I hope she would lose regardless -- but that this technique has the express purpose of deceiving people to vote for the wrong person. Essentially, to deny them their vote. It's roughly as deceitful as Harry Reid's phony Tea Party challenger, or similar phonies the Democrats have propped up here in Michigan. I wonder how many people who condemned those dirty tricks are celebrating this one.A dirty trick is dirty no matter which side uses it.
ahhhh palin....anything to win.vanity is so ...well so....i dunno
I would have thought having to write in a candidate on a ballot, spelled properly, in Alaska, would prove difficult enough on its own.I know you think you're being clever, but you're just parroting the same sentiment felt by a metric ass-ton of people on the Left. And that should clue you in as to why the Democrats are about to be steamrolled this election. You would think that you might learn something by looking at 2008 and 2010.2008: Appeal to the better nature of Americans and talk about inclusiveness and not a separate Red and Blue America, Win.2010: Despise Red America as ignorant scared hicks who don't appreciate the good done to them, Lose.I know they're going to lose because the economy is tough, but the Democrats sure would have made it easier on themselves if they didn't constantly disparage unhappy Americans as whiny ingrates driven purely by our amygdalas.
edutcher said... Good for them. I don't doubt some are motivated in part by the Lefty harassment that drove Miss Sarah to resign. Karma = Payback."ohh that's a hoot.she quit to make money from your pockets.karma=paybackpalin=paycheck (hers)lucky the pied piper is a legend
And she's appalled by their lack of honor.I remember one write-in campaign that won when the candidate sent out stickers with his/her name on them, and the law allowed them to affix those as legal votes. The Court would probably allow that, too, no matter what the state law says. This insistence on following the law is discriminatory!
I fail to see how getting yourself on the write-in list is a dirty trick or disenfranchising. It was open to anyone who applied. If people want to vote for Murkowski, they'll find her on the list. There's been a Murkowski on their ballots and holding high office for decades and plenty of fuss over her candidancy, so it's hardly an obscure name for them.A dirty trick would be getting the printer to misspell her name on the list.
hdh,Interesting you are so blinded by your ignorance that you think Sarah came up with this idea and is pushing it. Sorry but it came up in an entirely different way that had nothing to do with Sarah and does not have her support. Have not heard that she said anything about it. Just read the comment earlier that traces out how this whole idea came about and realize that it all happened in half a day from start to finish by people who were upset that Murkowski tried to circumvent the whole electoral process herself.
First Juan Williams was silenced on NPR. Now talkshow host Dan Fagan is silenced in Alaska. What Lisa Murkowski has done is shameful!
OK, I formally withdraw my outrage. When I read this:Fenumiai said early Friday morning that she could not give a specific number yet of how many candidates signed up with a name similar to "Lisa Murkowski" because she had not seen all of their names yet.I assumed the goal was to list a bunch of similar names to confuse the voters on the proper spelling. That was the basis of my outrage, and it is incorrect.Via Instapundit, I noticed Dan Riehl has the full list. There are no intentionally similar names there that I can see.If such a list is judged legal, I have absolutely no problem with people adding as many valid names to it as possible. After all, any eligible citizen of Alaska may be written in.I won't delete my prior comments. When I make a mistake, I would rather correct it than hide it. I apologize for believing these write-in candidates were orchestrating a dirty trick.
I don't think that Rita Mudcowski thought that this would happen.
I added knuckledragger to my profile. I like the sound of it.
A vote for Lisa Noclueski is a vote for saving the polar bears!
I love it.
Post a Comment