When you use a write in when voting?

lostngone

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 11, 2003
1,340
2,830
Anchorage
I don’t do this often but I done it 5 or 6 times in my life time for different reasons.

When voting and you don’t like either candidate who do you normally use as write in candidate? I am a Donald Duck person myself but I was talking to few people the other day and someone said they write in their own name and another said Mickey Mouse.

What/who have you written in when voting?
 

Peace

macrumors Core
Apr 1, 2005
19,466
3,831
Space--The ONLY Frontier
You know what grinds my gears ? "non-partisan" Judges. They NEVER have a political affiliation. Even though they are supposed to just use the rule of law they are regularly making decisions based on political views.

So when I do my vote which is write-in only here in Oregon I always type Democrat in the "other" one.

Been doing that for at least 20 years.
 

Sydde

macrumors 68020
Aug 17, 2009
2,104
2,162
IOKWARDI
… when I do my vote which is write-in only here in Oregon …
I think you mean mail-in only? I mean, write-in-only would be a fascinating experiment, but it would be quite the challenge for the system.
 

Herdfan

macrumors 6502
Apr 11, 2011
267
3,842
I think NONE should be a valid option. If NONE gets over 50%, then you have a new election with NONE of the candidates allowed to run again this cycle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LizKat and hulugu

LizKat

macrumors 603
Aug 5, 2004
5,320
29,807
Catskill Mountains
The only time I'm likely to cast a write-in vote is if someone really organizes a third party write-in campaign, as alternative to a major party's candidate, and that person actually appeals to me more than the party's nominee. So I was tempted to write in Evan McMullin in 2016. He had in fact registered in NY as a write-in and in our state that means his vote totals would be published, not just totted up as part of "Other". On the way to the polls, however, I decided it mattered more to me to boost the popular vote count for the Dem candidate than to register a "protest" (since I had originally voted for Sanders) as a write-in vote.

Hah, at the time I cast that vote for Clinton, I thought she was going to win anyway, which was why I was half-annoyed at myself over not going ahead and casting a protest write-in for McMullin.

As things turned out though, I was happier that I had voted for the Democrat rather than enjoy that brief "F U" moment with a write-in vote. Total popular vote means nothing in USA presidential elections in terms of who wins, but it can definitely signify something in terms of perceived mandate (or lack of it) for a party.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hulugu

LizKat

macrumors 603
Aug 5, 2004
5,320
29,807
Catskill Mountains
I seem to recall writing in my vote for President in the '84 election. I just wrote “NO”.
You were way ahead of me. I voted the equivalent of a straight Dem ticket that year without any particular enthusiasm or hope either really, and then went home and sat on the bed all night watching TV and moaning "NO..." as the returns rolled in for Reagan.

1984, I kept thinking... of course it's 1984, what the heck else could it be.

Man. And some years are worse than others even if they're not 1984.

I'm already liking @Herdfan's idea, and for 2020 when I think about it. I see some of the proposed lists on the Dem side and feel out of step with my party as never before, in that some of those names I would never have dreamed could be on there after the debacle with Clinton as the candidate. But I know people who think that about the other third to half of some of those lists too, so at any rate it sounds like we'll have a noisy season. Oh well, big tent parties are always noisy.

Still, and apropos of @Herdfan's suggestion, starting to think we should have a two part primary for the Dems in 2020. One to get that NONE candidate elevated... :D, and then a slate of candidates that ordinary people are more interested in seeing compete for the nomination.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,367
UK
I think you mean mail-in only? I mean, write-in-only would be a fascinating experiment, but it would be quite the challenge for the system.
They can’t even count them right when they have the current system. Write in only would be a disaster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hulugu

Sydde

macrumors 68020
Aug 17, 2009
2,104
2,162
IOKWARDI
They can’t even count them right when they have the current system. Write in only would be a disaster.
We have electronic voting machines that are specifically designed to count votes wrong. Some voters have reported machines that switch their votes or prevent them from picking a certain person (they select a candidate repeatedly and the other one keeps getting highlighted). And one can easily find reports on how simple it can be to hack a ballot counter. If we had to write all the names in ourselves (forcing voters to think about their choices and requiring OCR + hand-counting), I am not convinced that the results would be more of a disaster than what we have now.
 

ucfgrad93

macrumors P6
Aug 17, 2007
17,533
8,156
Colorado
I've never voted with a write in. And after working in my county's election office this year as a temporary election judge, I'm won't ever vote with a write in.

I worked in the counting room where the actual ballots were counted and tabulated. When they got to our room, they were scanned. These scans counted the votes for the individual races. However, when there was an over vote (more than one choice picked for a race) or a write in, the scan of the ballot was sent to adjudication. There a Republican and Democrat election judge would attempt to determine the will of the voter. Most of the times, from the few I saw, it was easy to determine. The person voting would cross out the incorrect vote or they would write something like, "This is the one I want" next to their choice. Sometimes they couldn't determine, and it was left as an over vote, and the vote wasn't counted for that particular race/amendment/etc.

I did see a couple of ballots that had write in votes for the governor's race here in Colorado. And according to the counting supervisor, there are requirements to be a valid write in candidate. And if a name is written in that hasn't met the requirements, the vote for that person isn't counted.
 

lostngone

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 11, 2003
1,340
2,830
Anchorage
We have electronic voting machines that are specifically designed to count votes wrong. Some voters have reported machines that switch their votes or prevent them from picking a certain person (they select a candidate repeatedly and the other one keeps getting highlighted). And one can easily find reports on how simple it can be to hack a ballot counter. If we had to write all the names in ourselves (forcing voters to think about their choices and requiring OCR + hand-counting), I am not convinced that the results would be more of a disaster than what we have now.
What about those who can't write or can't write in English? To do what you are saying would mean it would take months to count results in some areas and if you think the current electronic counting systems have flaws and then you go on to say we should even think about the use of printed/written text OCR in the process of tallying ballots, I don't even know how to counter that logic.... o_O
 

ucfgrad93

macrumors P6
Aug 17, 2007
17,533
8,156
Colorado
We have electronic voting machines that are specifically designed to count votes wrong. Some voters have reported machines that switch their votes or prevent them from picking a certain person (they select a candidate repeatedly and the other one keeps getting highlighted). And one can easily find reports on how simple it can be to hack a ballot counter. If we had to write all the names in ourselves (forcing voters to think about their choices and requiring OCR + hand-counting), I am not convinced that the results would be more of a disaster than what we have now.
Yeah, no way would that work. Most people's handwriting just sucks too much to make this a viable method of voting.
[doublepost=1542651354][/doublepost]This just in...

count.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rhonindk and hulugu

Herdfan

macrumors 6502
Apr 11, 2011
267
3,842
We have electronic voting machines that are specifically designed to count votes wrong.
I really liked the ones our county got for this election. We had used punch cards before.

On these new machine, you are given a blank card and you insert it in the machine. You go through the selections and when you are finished, the machine prints your votes on the card. You can look at it to make sure your votes are correct.

Then the card is put into a sleeve and placed in a locked ballot box. So when the county canvases, they can compare the machine totals to what is printed on the cards. They better match.
 

bradl

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2008
4,006
11,823
Best. President. Ever.
Ahh yes.. the "best president ever" who invaded a sovereign nation.

The "best president ever" who traded weapons for prisoners.

The "best president ever" who then had his staffer divert funds from that sale of weapons to free prisoners to fund a group of rebels to overthrow yet another sovereign government.

the "best president ever" who was responsible for the crippling of our air traffic control system.

the "best president ever" who sold weapons to a group of fighters responsible for the biggest attack on our soil, EVER.

the "best president ever" who is responsible for the EO that allows the NSA to collect and store all unencrypted info that flows though the internet.

Yeah... best president ever. :rolleyes:

BL.