“Simply a spelling error” is NOT a minor thing when dealing with write in ballots.
I recognize these voters PROBABLY meant to vote for the senator, but as a legal principle I can see requiring exact spelling on a write in.
How else can you possibly “know” who someone really planned to vote for on a write in??? There is no other way.
I’d like to dis-something at cBS.
If I write in “John Smythe” then John Smith cannot have that vote. That should be obvious.
Oh for cripes sake. Democrats steal elections by the boatload and Miller insists ballot counters abide by state law and he’s violating the will and intent of the voters? Typical MSM BS.
A letter Frank Murkowski wrote to the Legislature:
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_jrn_page.asp?session=23&bill=HB266&jrn=0965&hse=H
“...Section 18 of the bill would amend AS 15.15.360(a) on the rules for
counting ballots, to provide a uniform definition of what constitutes a
vote as required by sec. 302(a)(6) of the HAVA...
Sincerely,
/s/
Frank H. Murkowski
Governor”
Even her daddy, years ago, knew he didn’t want her winning this election!
HAVA refers to the Help America Vote Act:
“302 (a)(6) Uniform definition of what constitutes a vote.—Each
State shall adopt uniform and nondiscriminatory standards that
define what constitutes a vote and what will be
counted as a vote for each category of voting system used in the
State.”
Even nore irony- the HAVA was written to prevent another Florida fiasco, like this!
They’re still on the air???
The same can be said about that RINO Mutturdski (misspelling deliberate). Didn't she lose the primary and, instead of refusing to accept that Alaskans primary voters didn't want her, she pulled a Charlie Crist as though that Senate seat is hers by entitlement?
How about a constitutional convention where the Constitution is amendment to limit the terms of those serving in the House and the Senate and to BAN family members from running for those seat? This entitlement mentality is going to be the death of us.
Alaska Statutes - Section 15.15.360.: Rules for counting ballots.
(a) The election board shall count ballots according to the following rules:
(1) A voter may mark a ballot only by filling in, making “X” marks, diagonal, horizontal, or vertical marks, solid marks, stars, circles, asterisks, checks, or plus signs that are clearly spaced in the oval opposite the name of the candidate, proposition, or question that the voter desires to designate.
(2) A failure to properly mark a ballot as to one or more candidates does not itself invalidate the entire ballot.
(3) If a voter marks fewer names than there are persons to be elected to the office, a vote shall be counted for each candidate properly marked.
(4) If a voter marks more names than there are persons to be elected to the office, the votes for candidates for that office may not be counted.
(5) The mark specified in (1) of this subsection shall be counted only if it is substantially inside the oval provided, or touching the oval so as to indicate clearly that the voter intended the particular oval to be designated.
(6) Improper marks on the ballot may not be counted and do not invalidate marks for candidates properly made.
(7) An erasure or correction invalidates only that section of the ballot in which it appears.
(8) A vote marked for the candidate for President or Vice-President of the United States is considered and counted as a vote for the election of the presidential electors.
(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.
(10) In order to vote for a write-in candidate, the voter must write in the candidate’s name in the space provided and fill in the oval opposite the candidate’s name in accordance with (1) of this subsection.
(11) A vote for a write-in candidate, other than a write-in vote for governor and lieutenant governor, shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.
(12) If the write-in vote is for governor and lieutenant governor, the vote shall be counted if the oval is filled in and the names, as they appear on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidates for governor and lieutenant governor or the last names of the candidates for governor and lieutenant governor, or the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate for governor or the last name of the candidate for governor is written in the space provided.
(b) The rules set out in this section are mandatory and there are no exceptions to them. A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules.
Subsection 11....Does it really mention spelling?
What Miller issaying is there is a law. If we ignore this one, which others will we also ignore?
The law states that the name on the ballot must match the name on the application.
From HERE paragraphs six and seven seem pretty clear to everyone but the Democrats and Eskimos:
“Alaskan statute 15.15.360. states a vote ‘shall be counted if the oval is filled in for that candidate and if the name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy, of the candidate or the last name of the candidate is written in the space provided.’
The statute continues with “there are no exceptions” to this statute; ‘A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules.’ “
14 posted on Thursday, November 11, 2010 11:03:47 AM by Oatka
If he doesn’t have the votes, he doesn’t have the votes. It seems like he probably ought to concede rather than try to win this way.
The law is the law, but I’m sure the whiny, dishonest loser will figure a way to weasel her way in.
What is a CBS? And why should we care what it thinks?
Is CBS trying to influence the outcome of an election?
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
“(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.
“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.
No, Joe Miller is not disenfranchising anybody. The voters who did not bother to learn to spell the name correctly did it themselves. We cannot change the law during the election to benefit one person. If someone writes Cruella DeVille, are we to assume they forgot her name but meant to vote for Murkowski?