After listening to Levin’s show, it appears that the write in votes will be considered by intent which would favor murky. According to Levin, appears that the AK statute does not consider intent as a deciding factor for counting the vote but the AG seems to be wavering citing the need to prevent “disenfranchisement”.
The statute states that the voter must fill in the oval and spell the name correctly. Now if the name is spelled closely to Murkowski for example, it seems that the AG will count that vote for Murkowski. However, if the oval is not filled out, that the vote will not count. This is inconsistent if you are basing your opinion on voter consent. By that standard, the votes with Murkowski’s name and a blank oval should count too. With that standard gone, the law becomes entirely subjective which defeats the whole purpose.
The AG and the courts should follow the law as written and stop imputing their notions of “fairness” on the law because these notions are too subjective and ultimately, they create opportunities for mischief.
I’d rather enforce a bad law (and this is not a bad law) than have the law rendered subjunctive and meaningless.
Joining you in prayer to keep that unholy beech out of the senate.
So in other words... if Joe has the majority of the absentee ballots.... assuming there are few if any write in, absentee ballots... game over Lisa.
Interesting.
I hope so. That said (forgive the negativism) I am outright horrified at the number of blitheringly stupid Alaskans who voted for that sore loser Murkowski. If their ideological positions were reversed I would still say that...losing the primary fair and square means your race is over, unless you’re an absolute tool.
Bttt