Whom should I write in?
-
@PleegWat said in Whom should I write in?:
Well, I'll grant I'm not sure which metrics invalid or blank votes count toward over there. Or even over here. But it may not count as an issued voote anyway.
Don't mind me, I'm just trolling.
-
@PleegWat said in Whom should I write in?:
it may not count as an issued voote anyway.
A write-in vote counts as a valid vote if the person whose name is written in is qualified to hold the office — legally qualified, that is (of legal age, citizen, resident of the district, etc.); there's no requirement for any candidate, write-in or official, to be actually qualified for the job, as is amply demonstrated by the current Presidential race. The chances of a write-in candidate winning are tiny, of course, except in rare circumstances where the official candidate has died, been imprisoned, or such prior to the election, and there has been an organized campaign for a replacement, and sometimes not even then.
-
How do they line up write-in votes with the actual person, since there are duplicates of most people's names and you typically don't vote by a unique qualifier?
-
@mott555 said in Whom should I write in?:
you typically don't vote by a unique qualifier
Get a petition going to get everyone voting by unique ID! $UUID for me! Go, go $UUID!
-
@dkf said in Whom should I write in?:
@mott555 said in Whom should I write in?:
you typically don't vote by a unique qualifier
Get a petition going to get everyone voting by unique ID! $UUID for me! Go, go $UUID!
Oh yeah, well I'm going under $UUlD...
-
@boomzilla said in Whom should I write in?:
@ben_lubar said in Whom should I write in?:
The
rightleft wing people don't like the first amendment and the left wing people don't like the second oneBetter, but still not quite right. The left loves the Establishment Clause, so much so that they (at least some of them) would be delighted if they could extend it beyond its original intent (no official, state-sponsored religion, such as the Church of England in England or the Roman Catholic Church in many European countries) to mean "Nobody who works for the government in any capacity may acknowledge the mere existence of religion in the course of their job (except to ridicule it, which is always allowed)," but they try to pretend the Free Exercise Clause doesn't exist.
OTOH, there may be a few right-wingers who would like to do away with the Establishment Clause, but most are happy to keep it (with its original intent), if for no other reason than that their own version of Truth would probably not be the official version.
The left seems to be more blatant on wanting to stifle speech and press they disagree with than the right, but there's plenty of that from both sides.
-
Vote for a perfect drawing of the back of the voting ballot.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Whom should I write in?:
The left seems to be more blatant on wanting to stifle speech and press they disagree with than the right, but there's plenty of that from both sides.
Fascinating how that varies between countries. I guess it depends on which exact part of the political spectrum is usually in power (and so able to reach… cosy agreements… with the people who control who is on the press' editorial boards).
-
@dkf I think there's a matter of politics not being one-dimensional, and exactly how the one-dimensional left/right axis runs through the N-dimensional political thoughtspace varies per country?
Rereads the above sentence. Shudders.
-
@dkf said in Whom should I write in?:
@HardwareGeek said in Whom should I write in?:
The left seems to be more blatant on wanting to stifle speech and press they disagree with than the right, but there's plenty of that from both sides.
Fascinating how that varies between countries. I guess it depends on which exact part of the political spectrum is usually in power (and so able to reach… cosy agreements… with the people who control who is on the press' editorial boards).
Oh, there have been so much of that from the left on a federal scale.
The first set of net neutrality laws contained earmarks for regulating internet speech, particularly political speech.
There was an attempt to regulate political radio to make sure "both sides" are represented in every segment. This was proposed about the time that the left tried to get on the radio and failed miserably, because the radio was a conservative fortress.
Several attempts to drive up support for hate-speech laws, which basically amounted to, if it wasn't a popular political thought, jail-time.
Whereas, when the left complain about free-speech, it amounts to complaining about laws that stop picketers.
You know, the guys that line up and block other people from going to work. as to how that's speech.
-
@xaade said in Whom should I write in?:
This was proposed about the time that the left tried to get on the radio and failed miserably, because the radio was a conservative fortress.
To clarify, there have been plenty Of left wing radio shows, they just couldn't draw a big enough audience to stay on the air. Which isn't too surprising when you consider how they tend to dominate other media.
-
@xaade said in Whom should I write in?:
the left tried to get on the radio and failed miserably, because the radio was a conservative fortress.
Because only s still listen to radio?
-
@HardwareGeek said in Whom should I write in?:
@xaade said in Whom should I write in?:
the left tried to get on the radio and failed miserably, because the radio was a conservative fortress.
Because only s still listen to radio?
I'll have you know that the best source of unbiased news and in-depth analysis about the US election I've found is a podcast from Swedish Radio (a public service company).
-
@Mikael_Svahnberg said in Whom should I write in?:
the best source of unbiased news and in-depth analysis about the US election I've found is a podcast from Swedish Radio (a public service company)
and the best source of biased news and in-depth analysis about the US generally and the election in particular is Late Night Live from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, another public broadcaster.
-
@Karla said in Whom should I write in?:
Yourself? I did that the last presidential election.
Yes. But I think he should use his WTDWTF username.
"@boomzilla for Congress against the liberal Commie"
-
@xaade said in Whom should I write in?:
@Karla said in Whom should I write in?:
@error said in Whom should I write in?:
@xaade said in Whom should I write in?:
@Karla If you ran... I'd have to seriously consider voting for you.
Well, she's more qualified than either of current two candidates.
Thank you!
I cannot bulllshit enough to actually run. The problem is that there are too many leftists and rightists who would hate me.
Did you read the article?
Obviously they aren't qualified to vote if they disagree with you.
I think your sarcasm detector is broken.
-
Go simple on the joke. Write in a vote for "Stu Pidaso".
-
@flabdablet thanks. Looks like there's plenty of interesting stuff there.
-
@Mikael_Svahnberg No, none of that could possibly be the slightest bit interesting because the host used to be an actual (shudder) Communist. Only right-wing radio is allowed to draw an audience. Did you not get that memo?
-
@flabdablet said in Whom should I write in?:
@Mikael_Svahnberg No, none of that could possibly be the slightest bit interesting because the host used to be an actual (shudder) Communist. Only right-wing radio is allowed to draw an audience. Did you not get that memo?
I'm in Sweden. Our right-wing party would be classified as communists in the US.
-
@Mikael_Svahnberg said in Whom should I write in?:
@flabdablet said in Whom should I write in?:
@Mikael_Svahnberg No, none of that could possibly be the slightest bit interesting because the host used to be an actual (shudder) Communist. Only right-wing radio is allowed to draw an audience. Did you not get that memo?
I'm in Sweden. Our right-wing party would be classified as communists in the US.
Only because people don't know what communism is.
-
@Mikael_Svahnberg said in Whom should I write in?:
I'm in Sweden. Our right-wing party would be classified as communists in the US.
Tsk tsk tsk. You should be ashamed of yourself.
-
@boomzilla said in Whom should I write in?:
Let's put the TDWTF trolling brain to work for something that won't actually mean something but might amuse someone who could not even conceive of TDWTF!
Are you still waiting for your perfect candidate?
Don't want somebody else to screw things up before you can vote that person into office?
Vote for the only candidate who would dare leave things the way they are until someone more qualified for the job comes around
Vote @Placeholder 2016
As your congressman, I promise to not let your constituency slide further into the hands of the other guys. My Prevent Bad Change By Preventing All Change policies will keep your lands safe until you can finally locate the candidate of your dreams and convince them they have what it takes to run for office. Sleep soundly at night knowing that, hey, at the very least things won't be getting any worse.
Vote for sanity. Vote for a more qualified candidate for tomorrow. Vote for @Placeholder.
-
So, there was a guy there pimping a write in alternative, so I wrote him in.
However, for town council I only voted for 2 (it's pick 6 or something) so I wrote in Sweet Meteor of Death for that office.
-
@boomzilla said in Whom should I write in?:
I wrote in Sweet Meteor of Death for that office
The Onion: prescient again!
-
@Placeholder said in Whom should I write in?:
Vote for the only candidate who would dare leave things the way they are until someone more qualified for the job comes around
Vote for sanity. Vote for a more qualified candidate for tomorrow. Vote for @Placeholder.
#placeholder2016
Make America wait again!
-
-
@antiquarian said in Whom should I write in?:
Make America wait again!
A like is not enough, so have a laughter emoji.