[SolidSupplySide]

The voters showed intent by writing the candidate's name on the ballot. However, the law requires a corresponding oval to be darkened. This is a tough way for Ms. Frye to lose, but the precendent was set in 1982.

It makes me recall a Maine election for state legislature. Many votes for teh GOP candidate were made in red ink. The law does not allow that. The red ink votes were not allowed.

[clintonh8r]

Finally, a judge who upholds the rule of law. The intent of the voters means nothing if it doesn't comply with the law.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

So if FL where they count hanging/dimpled/pregnant chads that is somehow more voter-intent that having the candidates NAME WRITTEN ON THE BALLOT?

Only here in my socialist world of CA.

[AntiGuv]

They should count the patently obvious votes.

[konaice]

"He declined to issue an order requiring registrar Sally McPherson to count the ballots. He said it was unlikely the league would prevail if the case went to trial.

Attorneys for the league said they will review the ruling in the next couple of days before deciding whether to appeal. "

---
Time to get rid of the League if they are going to start contesting elections in the Courts. Their impartiality has long since evaporated.

[konaice]

Quote: "It makes me recall a Maine election for state legislature. Many votes for teh GOP candidate were made in red ink. The law does not allow that. The red ink votes were not allowed."

---
So what were the red pens doing in the voting booths?

[FreedomCalls]

I read the whole article and no mention of who belongs to which party. Do you know?

[Moral Hazard]

"The voters showed intent by writing the candidate's name on the ballot. However, the law requires a corresponding oval to be darkened. This is a tough way for Ms. Frye to lose, but the precedent was set in 1982. "

Her candidacy shouldn't have been allowed in the first place. What's the point of holding a runoff election that allows write-ins?

[tx_eggman]

Today, those of us who stand for the proposition that all votes cast should be counted suffered a setback

He cited a 1982 case from San Bernardino as the key "controlling authority" in the dispute. In that case an appellate court ruled it is not enough to discern the will of a voter, but that intent must be "expressed in the manner proscribed by law."

As hard as it is, only legal votes shuold be counted. This was a good call.

Getman told Helgesen: "The issue is whether a little bubble in the ballot should be allowed to disenfranchise thousands of voters people who don't pay attention."

[TheBigB]

"The issue is whether a little bubble in the ballot should be allowed to disenfranchise thousands of voters."

I deem these voters, "bubbleheads."

[TommyDale]

"The issue is whether a little bubble in the ballot should be allowed to disenfranchise thousands of voters."

No, the issue is whether people cast legitimate ballots, and if they don't, they have DISENFRANCHISED THEMSELVES! Why don't people want to take responsibility for their own actions?

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

The voters showed intent by writing the candidate's name on the ballot. However, the law requires a corresponding oval to be darkened.

Such voters showed a potential intent by writing the candidate's name on the ballot. Those who darkened the corresponding oval showed intent. Only the latter cast their votes for the candidate in question.

[OldFriend]

Not surprised that the League of Women Voters thought the rules ought not count.

They are a biased organization.

[WuzaDem]

I saw this on the news last night, and not only does state law require that the "bubble" be filled in, but the city charter does not allow write-in candidates in a general election.

This was a ridiculous and frivoulous lawsuit that never should have gotten to court.

[NovemberCharlie]

The decision by retired Judge Eric Helgesen was a crucial victory...

Why on earth is a retired judge deciding this issue?