Posted on 10/30/2009 3:15:49 PM PDT by freespirited
New Jersey's independent, gubernatorial candidate, Chris Dagget, is on a roll. ... But Daggett faces a ballot problem. Not ballot access itself ... he's on the ballot ... It's ballot design.
The ballot features the Democratic and Republican candidates first -- the order depends on a coin toss -- and the independent candidates, second. Pointing to political science literature on ballot order, Daggett claims that the placement of independent candidates below the major party candidates is plainly unconstitutional. The science isn't as clear cut: ballot order does, in certain low-information races, seem to influence voter decisions, but it competes with numerous other factors for a voter's attention. One is whether the candidate has been effective, or not. Ballot order effects are more prevalent when the "top" candidates listed have run good campaigns than when first candidates stink up the joint. Daggett has a point in claiming that ballot order effects hurt independent candidates more than major party candidates. But partisan labels on ballots also influence whether ballot order will be salient. So does the design of the ballot, regardless of order. So does the number of other candidates who are running -- a total of 12, in this election.
The New Jersey Supreme Court is probably going to stay out of this dispute. The Court can find social science to back up whatever result it wants to achieve. If it does intervene, it'll be to Daggett's perhaps unfair advantage -- his campaign is premised on the argument that the two party system is responsible for the failure to mend the state's corrupt ways. The current ballot order law goes back to 1948. Since well before then -- back to 1911, according to ballot access expert Richard Winger, no independent candidate for governor has gotten more than 10% of the vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at politics.theatlantic.com ...
On my sample ballot Daggett is listed on Line K!
At least he is ahead of “Middle Class Empowerment” ....
AMF Dude....
Just go away Daggett, you friggin’ whiner. You’re just going to get Captain Corruption Corzine another term. And I have NO doubt you’re working for Corzine as a spoiler to divide the anti-Corzine vote. We know what you’re up to-—putz.
It’s interesting that left wingnut Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic should be concerned about whether the ballot is fair to Daggett.
That certainly tends to confirm the widespread suspicion that Daggett is being paid off by Corzine to undermine his Republican challenger.
To all of those who do not believe Daggot is being paid by Corzine, I have a nice bridge in New York I will sell very cheap.
To all of those who do not believe Daggot is being paid by Corzine, I have a nice bridge in New York I will sell very cheap.
Apologize for the dbl post. :-)
Yes, left wing nut Ambinder only concern is if Corzine wins.
Why? In Texas all general election ballots state-wide have the parties for all races listed in the order that the most recent gubernatorial race results. It was really funny when Republicans won the Texas governorship in 1978, because the DemocRATS had to "reeducate" their voters not to pull the first straight party lever in the voting machines for the 1980 presidential electon.
I saw Daggett’s name on the far end of the ballot and I thought that was going to cost him votes. That’s life in corrupto-state.
This is just pre-emptive cover for Obama in the event that Corzine loses. Daggett is losing poll numbers daily, as the Republican gains. So the Democrats run this crap up the pole so they have a built-in excuse for the Obama-endorsed criminal in Jersey losing.
NJ ping
LOL, I got my ballot in the mail today and couldn’t even find Daggett while skimming, I finally had to read each name before I found him in the 6th column.
That is different. NYS is like that, and in 1990, the Conservative Party candidate (Herb London) nearly beat the late liberal Republican Pierre Rinfret. If he had, the Conservative Party would have been listed second...and Republicans, third.*
But in NJ, it's rigged so the Republicrats automatically get the top two slots. It's "random order" but "some are more equal than others." It's ridiculous government favoritism.
I hate when the State formalizes the "major party" system and its unfair hampering of other parties.
*The narcissistic Right to Life Party ran their own candidate instead of supporting the very pro-life Herb London. With even 1/4 of the Right to Life vote, Herb London would have beaten Pierre Rinfret.
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.