Apathy, now ignorance
There's this new conventional wisdom that says a lot of people were/are turned off by liberal intellectual elitism, a factor that may or may not have hurt Democrats and advocates of socially liberal policies this election. I can't really comment on that, I don't know if anyone can, it's just kind of a feeling some people have--the winds of down-to-earth red change. The kind of thing that's unquantifiable.

The stupidity comes in precisely here: write-ins. Writing in a candidate in general is pretty stupid, because if the candidate had not the support nor the organizational capacity to get on the ballot in the first place, I mean, what does that say about the person? His or her chances are already nil, but what does it say about the person? Nothing good.
If, however, you feel you must truly vote your conscience, as symbolic and mute as that vote may be, go make yourself feel better.
But first, make sure the person you're voting for is eligible. This recount, which has now begun scrutinizing write-in ballots, has found that over 550 people in King County alone wrote in names of Democrats other than Christine Gregoire--recall: vote differential -42. Even that is fine. You're a Democrat, but you don't like Gregoire, that too is absolutely reasonable, a little futile for a pragmatist like myself, but I understand.
But this eligibility thing, it's troublesome. You see, over 500 of those 550+ people (King County alone mind you) chose Ron Sims as their write-in of choice. Ron Sims who had already been beaten by Gregoire in the primary. Ron Sims, who, according to Washington State law, is now, by virtue of losing the primary, unable to run even as a write-in.
That means you Sims lovers who felt a wave of real liberalism on the horizon and despite your candidate's failure still felt compelled to skribble down your symbolic dissent: your vote got thrown the fuck away. Morons.
Negative 42 plus 500 equals positive 458. Game Gregoire--game Democrats--if only it were that simple.
This is much worse than voting for Nader because it proves that, while Democrats may be elitist assholes, there are also a good chunk of them who are both arrogant and stupid. And now we're one step closer to the first Republican governor in 24 years.
Further proof that symbolism is fine for books, but is bullshit in real life.
The Washington Democrats now have three days to ask for a new recount, which, since the new recount fell under the 150 vote differential, might end up being done one vote at a time, optical scanning machines replaced by thousands of bespectacled seniors, bussed from their managed care facilities, battling their gout and glaucoma to do the work of the real patriots.
5 Comments:
But it may be that people making symbolic votes, particularly for an unqualified candidate, had already opted to NOT vote for either real candidate anyway. I'm not banking on huge numbers in this regard – obviously enough goofs threw away real votes in this case - but it's something. Witness votes for Mickey Mouse and Hot Abercrombie Chick.
My "write-in" sitcom down here in San Diego's Crazy Mayor's Race is similar to yours at least in stupidity. Write-in Donna Frye very nearly won, no symbolism about it.
Would have won but for the stupidity: out of 450,000 votes she lost by 2400. Registrar estimates are that possibly 4,000 to 5,000 votes for her were rejected because those who wrote in her name, did not fill in the bubble next to the line. Brilliant.
And yes, she appealed, but the state Supreme Court, which has been busy with this one, reminded everyone that state law explicity requires that the bubble be filled in on a write-in.
What's funny, stupid funny, is that all those people remembered her NAME just fine yet inexplicably ignored her slogan. Seriously, this is her slogan:
"Make your vote count - FILL IN THE BUBBLE."
Her ENTIRE campaign focused on this simple act, including press conferences showing everyone, on a huge mocked up ballot - I kid you not - how to fill in a bubble. It was as if her name was Donna Frye-Fill-In-The-Bubble.
And it's how she lost. Keystone - freaking - cops.
don
donsense
Jesus. That's ten different flavors of stupid. Symbolism and stands are fine and dandy, but pick your fucking battles people.
Here's the thing, voting for a write-in (let's assume, for the moment, that the person is eligible to run and you are not a fucking retard. It's a stretch, I know, but ...) is only symbolic for yourself. The only way that anyone else knows about it if you tell them. And, God willing, that person will mercilessly beat you with a length of Hot Wheels track for monkeying with our electoral system. If you want people to know Sims was a better candidate, if you want people to know that his platform was important, write a goddam letter to the editor. Go wear a sandwich board that says, "Sims Rulz!" and stand on an overpass. Call in to your local radio show and say, "Go Sims! Baba booey. Baba booey." But, don't write that person in as a candidate because you can only hurt a candidate who is the next best thing for you. Plus, if the race is close, like this one, there's going to be an angry mob coming for you. There's lots of us, and we all spent the weekend at yard sales looking for old Hot Wheels sets.
--Mike Sheffler
... turning to the 3-D map, we see an unmistakable cone of ignorance
Write-in candidates SOMETIMES have a chance; in the hotly-contested San Diego mayoral race, a write-in candidate nearly won, and in fact MIGHT win if they re-do the election to try to get a candidate to have a majority as required by our City Charter:
http://www.kfmb.com/stories/story.785.html
Also, if you look here:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/26/thurmond.obit/
you'll discover the following about Strom Thurmond: "he won his first Senate race, in 1954, as a write-in candidate -- the only U.S. senator ever elected that way."
Just FYI. :-)
Funny you should mention the grand old segregationist, I found that exact obit somewhere the other day--can't remember how exactly.
And yeah I know that write-ins often serve a purpose, the san diego mayor's race is perfect for that argument (and Don's commentary about it at his blog is great).
That's assuming that you know the rules of the game. I'm betting that AT LEAST 42 of the 500 people that wrote in Sims would have bit the bullet and gone for Gregoire if they'd known that their vote wouldn't merely be statistically insignificant, but that it would not count at all.
You know what they say about devils and details, and the fine print killed Gregoire the way the scantron bubble may eventually kill that nice write in candidate from North Tijuana.
You would think that people would prefer at least a person of their same party to win of a Republican. So if the votes were supposed to be some sort of symbolic protest they really dropped the ball on this one. Democrats lose due to the stupidity of a small handful of people.
If I lived in Washington someone would be getting slapped for this.
Also in reference to the first comment, the fact that the person ran a campaign that specifically mentioned filling in the bubble and the people didn't is almost hilarious if it wasn't so amazingly dumb. Though honestly the candidate shouldn't have lost because the bubbles weren't filled out, that seems kind of ridiculous to me.
Post a Comment
<< Home