Throwing votes out in San Diego....

[Milo_Bloom]

/TIRADE ON

This is officially driving me insane. A judge ruled today that the despite the fact that thousands of people wrote in Donna Frye's name for Mayor of San Diego, but failed to fill in an idiotic bubble, those votes would NOT be counted.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/cities/20041122-2303-mayor-staff.html

Why has it become okay in society for VOTES not tbe counted? First, NOWHERE in my election pamphlet or when going in to vote did it say ANYWHERE that to write in Donna Frye, I had to fill in the oval. The only reason I knew that was because I heard a reporter mention it, when doing an interview just before I voted.

We have this bit of brilliance from DICK Murphy "The rules have always been that you must fill in the bubble if you want your vote to count," he said. "Following the rules, following the law is what our society does." "

No, actually, following the rules ISN'T what our society does. In fact, this entire VOTING THING and this ENTIRE SOCIETY was based on BREAKING THE RULES and acknowledging the WILL OF THE PEOPLE OVER THE RULES IMPOSED UPON IT!

Where is the outage? This is just a microcosim of what is going on all over the country. For some reason it has become okay for the will of the people to be ignored if the people didn't fill in the right bubble or vote at the right table?

Soon they won't need to use fraud to steal elections, they will just say all the democrats didn't follow the "rules" and the complacent sheeple will kick the dirt and say, "aw shucks, maybe next time"

/TIRADE OFF

Okay, I think I feel a tiny bit better now.... no, not really, I still feel violated.

[Liberal Veteran]

1. Some people go through a lot of trouble to write a candidate...

...just so they can NOT vote them.

At least that's the theory they are working under apparently.

What idiocy.

Seems to me if you wrote in a name, that's who you meant to vote for assuming you didn't fill in the bubble for a non-write in.

[slackmaster]

3. If they wrote in a name and didn't fill in a bubble, intent is obvious

This ruling is a travesty. I hope it gets appealed aggressively and overturned.

[rinsd]

5. It will have to go to a higher court....

I don't think San Diego has anything in regards to "voter intent". I'm not even sure if the state does.

[slackmaster]

2. I hate to put it in these terms, but...

...Even people who are too dumb to figure out the instructions deserve to have their votes COUNTED if it can be reasonably done.

:argh:

BTW - I wrote in Donna Frye's name and filled in the bubble.

[rinsd]

4. I'm not so sure about that....

I remember the instructions as being very specific as to filling in the oval and doing so correctly, that an "x" for instance would not be acceptable. However I do not remember anything specific about the write-in candidate.

I'll have to wait till I go home to look at my guide. I think I still have it and I can't find anything except sample ballots without instructions on the web.

[MindPilot]

6. what part of "WRITE-IN" is unclear to this dumbass judge?!

It's not a color-in-the-bubble candidate. It is write-in. The clear connotation is that this is not someone on the ballot therefore to vote for them, you have to write their name on the ballot. It it quite possible that someone would think coloring in the bubble might void the write-in choice.

Do we the people of San Diego have any recourse?

[rinsd]

7. Well here's the law.....(I highlighted the relevant section)

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=elec&group=15001-16000&file=15340-15342

"Any name written upon a ballot for a qualified write-in candidate, including a reasonable facsimile of the spelling of a name, shall be counted for the office, if it is written in the blank space provided and voted as specified below:
(a) For voting systems in which write-in spaces appear directly below the list of candidates for that office and provide a voting space, no write-in vote shall be counted unless the voting space next to the write-in space is marked or slotted as directed in the voting instructions.
b) For voting systems in which write-in spaces appear separately
from the list of candidates for that office and do not provide a
voting space, the name of the write-in candidate, if otherwise
qualified, shall be counted if it is written in the manner described
in the voting instructions.
(c) The use of pressure-sensitive stickers, glued stamps, or any
other device not provided for in the voting procedures for the voting
systems approved by the Secretary of State to indicate the name of
the write-in candidate are not valid, and a name indicated by these
methods shall not be counted.
(d) Neither a vote cast for a candidate whose name appears on the
ballot nor a vote cast for a write-in candidate shall be counted if
the voter has indicated, by a combination of marking and writing, a
choice of more names than there are candidates to be nominated or
elected to the office.
(e) All valid write-in votes shall be tabulated and certified to
the elections official on forms provided for this purpose, and the
write-in votes shall be added to the results of the count of the
ballots at the counting place and be included in the official returns
for the precinct."


The key here may be in the instructions and whether they were given. I still need to go home to see if I have my original guide.

[Milo_Bloom]

11. THAT is exactly the problem!

"Any name written upon a ballot for a qualified write-in candidate, including a reasonable facsimile of the spelling of a name, shall be counted for the office, if it is written in the blank space provided and voted as specified below:
(a) For voting systems in which write-in spaces appear directly below the list of candidates for that office and provide a voting space, no write-in vote shall be counted unless the voting space next to the write-in space is marked or slotted as directed in the voting instructions."

First, the instructions did not say ANTYING about write in candidates and the need of the oval to be filled for that.

Second, THIS is exactly the problem I am talking about. How can someone even dignify this idiotic law that allows the peoples' will to be subverted? This law exists SOLELY to disinfranchise voters and have clear votes thrown out.

There are a TON of laws that have been on the books at one time or another that had to be overturned because such a law was so repugnant to what this society is all about.

Laws, especially relating to something as precious to us as voting, should be seen as GUIDELINES, not, technicality specific rules in which votes not comporting to the exact specifications should be ignored.

The OUTRAGE should be over the fact that a law like this is allowing thousands of votes to go uncounted. That the will of the people is being controlled not by their actual votes, but by some legal technicality that has no basis in logic or reason.


Too bad this isn't happening to a republican canddiate... then at least something would be done. I have little doubts that the GOP and the media would hold up the law to the ridicule it deserves, explaining how our troops right and die for the right to vote and it shouldn't be taken away by some technicality. I can hear O'Reilly now... "Our men and women face REAL bullets, REAL torture, REAL death fighting for your right to vote, but the demcorats would rather bow to a legal technicality than acknowledge what our troops are fighting for".

[Milo_Bloom]

8. I am sure... I have my book right here...

It has instructions about filling in the bubble, but NOTHING about a write in candidate. Since the only way to mark your choice for one of the main candidates is to fill in the oval, that makes sense as instructions for voting for them.

However, when actually writing in a name, no where in my book does it say that the oval must be darkened for the vote to count. I voted early, so I am not sure if people who went to the polls received different instructions.

We went in as a group of about 20 and a woman shouted instructions from behind a desk. She NEVER mentioned having to fill in the oval for write ins and nowhere on the actual scnatron, did it have any such requirement.

[MindPilot]

10. And you can bet your ass

if the write-in had been some Hedgecock clone, they'd be screaming "voter intent!! voter intent!!"

I'm wondering just how much influence Diebold had on writing those rules.

[MindPilot]

9. Here's my LTE

Apparently America’s Finest City really does play in the big leagues now. The big leagues of cronyism, that is.

Retired Judge Charles Jones appoints retired judge Eric Helgesen to rule against democracy and insure former judge Dick Murphy remains in power.

Meanwhile Katherine Harris wannabe, Sally McPherson ignores the democratic process by conveniently interpreting rules to favor the status quo.

San Diego can now boast of a good old boy network and political machine that would make Richard Daley proud.