In the 2000 FL recount, both sides agreed that overvotes (where more than one candidate was selected) would not be counted as valid votes. (In the media recounts, the only way they could get Gore to win was to count “redundant overvotes,” where idiots punched out Gore and then punched out “write-in” and wrote in “Gore” or “Lieberman.”) The most common overvote was voting for both Bush and Gore (yes, some people are that stupid), and another common one was Gore and Buchanan (in the butterfly ballot where Gore’s name was across from Buchanan’s).
Well, another common overvote was Gore and Libertarian candidate Harry Browne, and no one could figure out why (since Gore’s and Browne’s names were nowhere near each other). Then it hit someone: the political parties were listed in uppercase under each candidate’s name, and when some voters read LIBERTARIAN they thought that by voting there and for Gire they’d be voting for Gore *and Lieberman*. Cosas veredes, Sancho.
Am I correct in ascertaining the basic meaning of that as "whaddya gonna do?"
In this instance the ballot itself serves as a minimal intelligence test preventing the dimmest bulbs from having their vote count by virtue of them being unable to figure out how to cast it validly as could the average child. But it's not enough in my opinion, those people's votes for any other office where they only picked 1 democratic candidate would count.
There should be a some kind of test though I suppose that violates the constitution.