Are write-in votes a waste ?

Post Reply New Topic

In 2008 I wrote in Ralph Nader for president. I was quite angry at both for what they had done to keep him off the ballot here in Pennsylvania. Note, I strongly suspected Obama would win PA anyway. I felt I sent a small message.

That depends on how much the idea of President Romney scares you.

I'll gladly waste my gasoline to write in my guy if he doesn't make it. There's no way I'm going to choose between a douche bag and a crap sandwich.

Not at all. Especially when you're writing in "None of the Above."

I find it hilarious that people in the US believe their vote counts for anything. It doesn't. The nominee 'elections' are irrelevant since each party has every legal right to ignore the popular vote and put whoever they want into the ballot. Case in point: delegates are not required to give their support to the candidate that 'won' their home state...ergo, your vote then is worth absolutely nothing.

When it comes to the actual presidential elections...another farce. You are asked to vote for either of two people that the population had no say in putting on the ballot and in the end, the 'winner' is not chosen by the popular vote but by the electoral college...

Electoral College:

"The voters of each state, and the District of Columbia, vote for electors to be the authorized constitutional participants in a presidential election. In early U.S. history, some state laws delegated the choice of electors to the state legislature. Electors are free to vote for anyone eligible to be President, but in practice pledge to vote for specific candidates and voters cast ballots for favored presidential and vice presidential candidates by voting for correspondingly pledged electors."

So once again, your vote is worth ZILCH because the elites in power can and always have chosen between themselves who will be the next sockpuppet to sit in the white house.

This is why Ron Paul will never be president even if he is written in by 99% of the population.

So tell me... Have you moved to Galt's Gulch yet?

I believe it is. In the UK, we have something called 'voting for RON' or Re-open Nominations. Anarchists tend to do it (if they vote at all), and I tend to think anarchists = pointless.

I also strongly believe in ethical necessity of avoiding the lesser of two evils. I hate the Tory party that much.

Is Labour really much better these days? And the Lib-Dems seem to have sacrificed most of their principles when they joined the coalition.

I don't know if we have write-in votes in Canada or not. But our elections function differently here--we don't directly elect our prime minister, just our member of parliament (equivalent to a member of the House of Representatives) and it is pretty easy for anyone running for MP to get their name put on the ballot. We still do have independents and minor parties, of course. As I support the Green Party (a minor party in Canada, but more significant than their US counterpart) I do face similar issues to someone contemplating a write-in vote. Basically, if I feel that I know who will win in my riding then I'd vote Green, as I'd like to. If I was confident that a progressive candidate would win (the centrist Liberal Party of the centre-left New Democratic Party) then I'd vote Green. If, however, a Conservative might win then I'd probably vote for whoever has the best chance of defeating him or her.

If I was in the USA then I'd consider how my state was likely to vote and use similar criteria to decide whether to vote according to conscience or vote Democrat. However, I really think that the Democrats are now an impediment to progressive changes (by which I mean socially liberal, fiscally left), so I might go for a write-in vote regardless.

No, but I'm sensible enough to understand that we have a 2 and a half party system. It is absolutely imperative to keep the Conservatives out of power.

What you did was throw away your vote.

ruveyn

According to Wikipedia: "By September 18, 2008, Nader and Gonzalez were on the ballot in 45 states with write-in status in four of the five remaining states. Oklahoma does not allow write-in candidates"


So IMO if Nader at least had Write In status for Pennsylvania then your vote counted.



I also decided to Vote Nader/Gonzalez in 2008 I didn't trust either Obama or McCain.

The only throw away votes there are is when you vote for someone you're not serious about, and votes that don't get used.

ruveyn -- I'm quite surprised at your response. Are you implying that a write vote should not be counted or even be acknowledged. The gist of your respones is that only names on the ballot should receive votes. Are you really that much of a conformist ?

I would've voted for "None of the Above" (which I actually did in 2008 after Hillary lost in the Democratic primaries, if you can believe that) instead of Ralph Nader, but that's just me.

To me, a "NOTA" vote signifies that you want a new election to be held with different candidates and do not consent to the results of a general election if one of the two candidates wins. By writing in someone else, you're agreeing to abide by the results regardless of who wins.

But this is just strictly my opinion.

Yes, they are.

In many states, you have to register as a write-in in order to even receive a count of your meaningless symbolic write-in votes.

If you live in Florida and your black they are