Posted on 11/11/2010 6:47:46 AM PST by SeattleBruce
“She had her chance in the primary and lost.”
Not only that - she promised to respect the results of the primary and ‘return home.’ She lied. So she’s starting out her strange bid for ‘re-election’ by lying to her constituents. I dunno, typical for a ‘politician’ - but is that really what AK wants? We’ll find out soon enough.
You know, for voters who re-elect clowns in their districts (many come to mind but think PelosLIE, Barney boy and Rangel as a few examples) - I wonder if it isn’t battered spouse syndrome - they’ve been beaten up and lied to for so long, it’s just got to be ‘love’ - right?
AK, if you elect a bald faced liar - you get what you deserve - even if she did vote against porkulus and crap and tax.
“Miller needs to disqualify 12 percent of the write-in ballots to win. His team is challenging only about 10 percent of the write-in ballots. If this trend continues Miller will lose, even if all his challenges are accepted as valid.”
Even though they haven’t counted all the absentees (which initial counting gained Miller 2,000 votes) and the military ballots due date isn’t til next Wed.??
“Next thing you know they’ll actually be counting that one vote for Jesus Christ as an ‘intended’ vote for Murkowski.”
I think only ‘the messiah’ would have the audacity to claim that one...grins.
“So really they could have even said....it`s not a big deal doing a write in vote, even if you just come close to the spelling, will be just fine.”
If I’d written an X in the write-in line and signed with an ‘X’ should that count for murky?
“She should not have been allowed to run again after being defeated, especially after saying she would not!”
Come on, she’s only a professional politician - don’t be so hard on her!/massive sarc
On another note, for those on this board arguing for “voter intent”, what about Murk’s intent to ‘respect the primary results and return home?’ Should that matter?
She’s really the candidate of the Dem’s in Alaska and the squish Republicans.
“Why can’t they accept just the Lisa part???”
I voted for Mona Lisa - please count my vote!!
Not going to play your game.
Which other letter would an undotted i be?
“On one hand, Miller doesn’t deserve to win when he can only garner a little over 34% in what is essentially a three-way race.”
Actually he’s at 35.46% and rising (due to the absentee counts)
http://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/10GENR/data/results.htm
The Law is the LAW..
Alaska has 2 laws that it appears someone wants to ignore:
1) The name must be spelled exactly correct to be counted
and
2) A write in for an already named candidate on the ballot must be counted.
They are violating the law if they do not follow these.
If MerCOWski loses just 5% of those ‘write in’ votes, then there is basically a ‘tie’.
If she loses 6%, Miller wins.
Isn’t that what a write-in means? If you can’t write it in, it doesn’t count.
If you want your vote to count, make sure you spell it right!
“Of course, legal anarchists will probably have their way with this election. It seems the thing to do. If someone doesn’t like a process, simply take it to a sympathetic judge to have it overturned. In the short term, Lisa will have her win. So what if she has to rape the civil society in the process, eh?”
And the rule of law, the abuses of the US Constitution on down, suffers another blow, while we stand by and allow it to happen under, as you say, ‘the thing to do.’
Out country will not survive this. Eventually America as we knew her, will bleed to death. Death by a thousand cuts against the rule of law, against the social contract, against the US Constitution.
We must fight against this and all other legal insanities that assault our once great nation.
We should pay attention not to who “wins” if we toss out ballots this year but to what precedent we set with the decisions on how to count ballots. As in Florida in 2000, the main point, perhaps the only point, is whether the ballot counts as votes for a specific candidate under the laws as written and in effect on the day of the election. If we had a “Lisa Murkowsky” running against “Lisa Murkowski”, we wouldn’t want both sets of ballots counted as votes for the same person, either way. Only ballots with the name spelled exactly as on the registration should be counted for Lisa Murkowski. That’s not about disenfranchising anyone. It’s about the rule of law.
http://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/10GENR/data/results.htm
Miller is down RIGHT NOW, as of the results from yesterday by 10,799 votes (he had trailed by 13,000 or so initially). And the military ballots due date is NEXT WED.
This race is not over.
In script, it could look like an "e." I think the problem arises when a mandate comes down from the state that says "the write-in candidate's name must be spelled correctly" but then doesn't provide a scientific way to do it. I could go along with using those little boxes--one letter to a box--and each letter has to be upper case. Then, have the ballot be read by an optical scanner, completely objectively. All ballots that come out with the name "Lisa Murkowski" get tabulated for her. If the scanner reads "Lisa Murkowske" then that goes into a different pile, and does not get added to the first group.
I would hope every such write-in could be digitized and placed on the internet with the official determination made upon it.
You just know that some voters were screwing around and writing votes like...Leesa Mercowsky on purpose.
Miller needs to round up some of these voters who can testify that their INTENT was not a vote for Lisa Murkowski but for Leesa Mercowsky.
Where’s their equal protection? They know who they voted for. They voted for Leesa Mercowsky they don’t want their vote going to Lisa Murkowski. She’s trying to steal their votes.
That ballot is NO GOOD ~ after all, the guy named "wiki" might well have written in his own name.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.