Posted on 11/11/2010 6:47:46 AM PST by SeattleBruce
Reporting from Juneau, Alaska — The tedious scrutinizing of the more than 92,500 write-in ballots cast in the U.S. Senate race in Alaska got underway in a chilly warehouse Wednesday, with observers for Republican Joe Miller's campaign determined to challenge any variation in the spelling of rival Lisa Murkowski's name.
And judging from the multiple derivations voters attempted — Lisa Muroski, LSI Murkswke, Lisa Mvrowski, Lesa Merkesken, Lisa M., along with at least one ballot cast for Jesus Christ — there will be no shortage of opportunities for argument.
"We expect to have a recount. We expect it may go to court," Lt. Gov. Craig Campbell told reporters. "I believe the counters are doing a legitimate job of trying to determine the intent … and if it's then challenged in court, the court may be the final arbiter."
--snip--
"The law is pretty clear that it has to be filled in just as it is on the declaration of candidacy," said Randy DeSoto, Miller's spokesman. "Our concern is the Legislature, when they made the law, wanted to get away from all this confusion by making it very clear."
State officials have said they are relying on at least two court decisions that require them to determine what a voter's intent was. If it's apparent that a voter intended to vote for Murkowski, even if there is a minor misspelling, Division of Elections chief Gail Fenumiai said she was counting it as a valid vote.
"If I can't make a phonetic understanding of the name, I say no," she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.latimes.com ...
“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.”
http://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/10GENR/data/resultsWI.htm
Almost 10% of the 89% counted for murk, are being challenged. Miller is still closing the gap (down now by approx. 10,800 down from 13,000 the other day) with military ballots still to be counted.
This AINT over.
Would “Veruca Salt” count as a vote for Princess Murki? Wouldn’t the “intent” be clear?
Yes, I am if you can't spell the name, then you cant play the game.
Oops, my bad - those additional 1600 ballots that are challenged actually bring murk’s total to 97.7% counted of the absentees. Still - since Miller gained in the initial absentee counting and is down by less than 5% to ‘write-in’ - even if Miller lost all ‘near spelling’ challenges (unreal!), he’s still off by about 2% on about 180,000 votes or 3,600 votes - so he’s need to outpace murk by that many in the remaining absentees and military votes.
Now what if he wins some part of those 8.48% of ‘challenged but counted’ - clearly his chances increase.
Again - this AINT over.
LOL
“The TPCaucus needs to grow further(there/here) and impact the primarys..”
Yes and Joe Miller is of course proof of the TPCaucus impact on the primaries.
“Technically, that’s not “spelled correctly.” Look, I’m not willing to get into hanging chad territory, but, in many cases, it’s impossible to read handwriting without having to make some sort of subjective decision.”
Truth - my point is, let existing AK election law prevail - not our opinions on what it should be. If they find their election law is lacking because lying Lisa jumped back into the election with a robust write-in campaign - then they should advocate for it to be clarified for future (as someone else suggested above.)
If the time is really 8:00:01 then legally the poll is closed and they can't vote. Having said that, there are all sorts of little "look the other way" personal social courtesies that individuals extend each other that technically violate rules and laws.
In my little town, the poll closes at 8. Just after 8, the door is closed. If there is a last little cluster of folks coming in as the door is being closed they are admitted as a courtesy and then the the door is barred. And yes, someone stands there. Everyone know it's "technically" not right, but nobody has rolled out the cops on that point yet and I doubt they ever will.
The counting of tens of thousands of write in votes isn't a matter of courtesy. The law (as I understand it) says the name has to be spelled correctly. Is an "i" without a dot and "i"? I'm not a lawyer but I say it is. If a judge ruled differently, then ok. Is a "y" an "i"? No.
It is a write in vote. The voter has the freedom to vote for whomever they write in, whether that person is eligible or not. So, the person voted for Lisa Murkowsky. It is disenfranchising the voter to attribute the vote to anyone other than Lisa Murkowsky. If the voter erred in indicating who they were voting for, that is voter error, not disenfranchisement. That is the nature of the write in vote and no standard less than that should be allowed. It places the counter in the position of determining the how to count the vote. Are we going to use Stalin's standard of, "it doesn't matter who votes, it only matters who counts the votes"?
Meantime, lying Lisa needs to deal with the law, just like all the rest of us! (or don’t you princess LIE-sa?)
“It is attonishing that the elections office would ignore a clearly stated law on the basis of some dubious court cases. It should be the opposite. The law stands unless a court has intervened. No court has intervened. If a court declares the law unconstitutional or issues an injunction, the elections office should comply. Otherwise, it should follow the existing law.”
Astonishing is right. Astounding. Sickening.
“Why even have laws if you can ignore them and make up your own rules? FORCE them to follow the law even if it has to be taken to the Supreme Court.”
Yes!
That's what makes me so mad about this. The spoiled little brat had her chance and she LOST! What a bunch of trouble she has caused since then.
How about this: You must pay tour taxes unless you are a little short of cash.
You cannot speed on the highway unless you are in a hurry.
Just add a clause to every law so it will be more fair.
Wrong.
AK law says “spelled correctly”, caps does not make a mis-spell. Your backward S bs is only in cartoons.
Obvoiusly some truths are more important than others.
“If the voter erred in indicating who they were voting for, that is voter error, not disenfranchisement.”
Well stated. Simple. According to the law.
(If they want to change that, let them, for future state, as someone above suggested that someone could be off by one, or two letters, so long as it doesn’t present a dispute with someone else on the certified list.)
>>> She lied. So she’s starting out her strange bid for ‘re-election’ by lying to her constituents.
If those same constituents release her from that pledge, as they appear to have done by giving her their vote, whats it to you ?
Naw.
It will naturally go into the "Obama" column.
I'm pretty sure it was 7 to 2.
“Disenfranchisement” is when someone is not allowed to vote.
Requiring someone to cast a legal vote in order for it to be counted is called “the law”.
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.