Posted on 11/11/2010 3:34:25 PM PST by mdittmar
Joe Miller, the Tea Party-backed Republican nominee for Alaska Senate, may be on the cusp of losing the Senate race to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who ran as a write-in candidate after losing the GOP primary to Miller.
There were more write-in votes than there were votes for Miller, and the vast majority of those ballots seem to have been cast for Murkowski. Miller chosen to address this by challenging votes that appear to have been for Murkowski even when there is only the smallest of justifications for doing so.
Consider: According to the Associated Press, an observer for Miller today challenged a vote that seemed to be for Murkowski because even though her name was spelled and printed correctly, the "L" in Lisa was written in cursive. (Or just have a look at the challenged ballot pictured above.)
Other challenges have been for sloppy handwriting or tiny misspellings - "Lisa Merkowski," for example. While it would seem to be obvious that a write-in for "Lisa Merkowski" is a vote for Murkowski, Miller doesn't want it counted.
Alaska officials have said they will take into account voter intent when considering the ballots - which presumably means that the "Merkowski" vote would go to Murkowski. But Miller's legal team argues that state law does not allow such an interpretation: If the name on a write-in ballot does not exactly match the name of the candidate, they say, it doesn't count.
The legal question will be settled next week, when Miller's legal challenge to the state's position will be heard in court. (Miller already filed suit to stop the count altogether, but a judge turned him down.) If Miller's camp can successfully challenge enough ballots to overcome Murkowski's apparent lead - and the courts decide that their interpretation of the law is correct - he will become a senator.
The issue isn't just a legal one, however. Should Miller triumph by disqualifying a large number of ballots despite clear voter intent, he will have essentially have "won" an election in which he was not the candidate for whom Alaskans tried to cast the most votes.
Alaska officials say they want to count votes for Murkowski that are less than perfect because it means not disenfranchising Alaskans simply for sloppiness or spelling errors. For Miller, however, what the voters meant appears to be less of a concern than finding a way to Washington.
Hell no. Pubbies need to learn to fight to the limits of the law. Not exceed, but to the limits. These elections are too important for such delicate feelings to be exhibited. We are at war, not at a bake sale.
Why would he possibly concede? The Military votes have not even all arrived to be counted yet. Contrary to popular belief, Lisa the Shrew has NOT won this yet.
That's unquestionably correct. I think that trying to somehow deduce "voter intent" just leads down a very slippery slope (and may likely be unconstitutional).
Is CBS trying to influence the outcome of an election?
“as it appears”. Not “spelled similarly”. Not “voter intent”. It says “as it appears”.
Since you’re fond of repitition,
AS IT APPEARS
Overseas and military ballots aren't even due back until November 17. There are still a lot of ballots to count.
Let's wait to see whom the military voted for before charging anyone with disenfranchisement.
-PJ
You think that if my name is Johnson, and a write in ballot contains the name “Johnston” instead, this satisfies the requirement that MY last name appear on the ballot?
I don’t think so, unless you can tell me that all similar last names are interchamgeable. As for me, I know I correct people on how to pronounce or spell my name all the time.
That would be out of concern they will not write down my actual name, which can be important.
“(9) Write-in votes are not invalidated by writing in the name of a candidate whose name is printed on the ballot unless the election board determines, on the basis of other evidence, that the ballot was so marked for the purpose of identifying the ballot.”
Interesting. I may be in error here, but I thought it was ruled that write-ins for Miller weren’t going to be counted?
####
As for Miller’s challenge... I have to admit a couple of these complaints seem awfully shaky. A write-in with a properly spelled name, but starting a cursive rather than a printed “L”, ought to count whether I like the candidate or not. I want Miller to win over the Powercrat Murkowski, but I don’t want to see anyone’s ballot rejected without good reason, no matter who they supported.
Of course, there is no way of knowing how representative the examples CBS chose to use really are. There could be a thousands of legitimately questionable ballots in the mix, and “voter intent” is an incredibly subjective thing to base a decision on which to judge their validity.
We’ll see how it goes.
Do we know how close is right now and have they stated how many military ballots are coming in?
I always love their selective focus.
Ah, no one expects Lisa to listen to her daddy- that crazy kid!
Seriously, every state wrote laws like this in 2003 and now they’re all up in the air. Isn’t it funny how laws written to solve specific problems so often turn out to fall short?
Yes, it does mention spelling.
Do they think Joe Miller will get a vote for “Joe Mueller” because, oh they must have meant Joe Miller? Of course not.
IF she had been on the regular ballot this requirement would not apply to her. But write in ballots by their very nature are quite different.
as it appears ...’or’
“Miller chose to address this by challenging votes that appear to have been for Murkowski even when there is only the smallest of justifications for doing so.”
Miller has chosen to address the existing election law, while cBS has chosen to address the liberal idiotic fantasies of their own minds.
murk knew the murky waters she was heading into with a write-in campaign, and she chose to go there anyhow, despite promising to respect the results of the Republican primary and ‘go home.’ She’s a LIAR, and cBS with her, as they make stories up out of thin air.
Hey cBS - morons, yeah you - how have you “chosen to address” your utter lack of credibility?
Yes, I have utter contempt for you cBS, just like you clearly show for our legitimate Republican candidate for AK Senate - Joe Miller - in your weak kneed article.
Ouch! I hear your elections are just an excuse to subsidize the letter carrier unions!
I don’t know why Virginia elections are well run, but even close ones are rarely even challenged.
To me, this entire concept of having an available list of registered “write-in” candidates is the problem. With this procedure in place, why would someone with name recognition even bother running in a primary?
At least in the case of Joe Lieberman, he did identify himself on the ballot as an Independent.
“Hell no. Pubbies need to learn to fight to the limits of the law. “
I agree. It’s time to quit giving up so easily. If the tables were turned the libs would be using every legal (and illegal) trick to win.
We win.
They lose.
Period.
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.