Before you write-in Paul, check your local state rules

Again, I am not arguing FOR or AGAINST writing in Ron Paul. Everyone should vote the way they want and whatever makes them happy.

There are some people, however, who want their votes counted and reflect the fact that they are disgusted with the choices. In Illinois where I live, for example, write-in votes are NOT COUNTED unless the candidate has filed an intent to run as a write-in. They don't get counted as "undervotes", they don't get counted as "other", it is simply as if you didn't vote at all. Writing in Ron Paul would make me feel great personally, but in Illinois it would be absolutely meaningless.

I understand the arguments that in Illinois it's meaningless anyway -- Obama will win the state no matter what. But I WANT MY VOTE COUNTED and I want it to reflect the fact I despise both choices. For those who are like-minded, I am just spelling out the rules and advising them to look up their own state & regional election rules.

In my case, I haven't decided yet whether to leave the POTUS vote blank and have it count as an "undervote" or vote 3rd party.


I am not arguing FOR or AGAINST any course of action -- I am simply trying to make sure everyone is INFORMED before they make their decision.
From the map above, it looks like Illinois is a sore loser state and Ron Paul can't even register as a write in.
 
From the map above, it looks like Illinois is a sore loser state and Ron Paul can't even register as a write in.

Ya, looks like mine is the same. Pretty much dictates who I'm going to vote for, I never thought I would be voting for Gary Johnson! It's a strange world...............
 

Dammit, that map shows my state in the sore loser law category. I just looked earlier today and read that Wa state accepted write-in votes. Not that is really matters I guess, but does a write-in vote for Dr. Paul in Wa state actually get counted or not at this point? Can someone tell me with certainty that this map is accurate?

So why all the ads that tell us "your vote counts! Just do it!". Is it just to appease the masses and make us think that they we have a say in anything? It is becoming more obvious to me that we do not have a say in anything even when we do get involved with the process. Sorry for the ramblings of an old man who has had a few too many beers tonight. I feel pretty low at this point that I have nothing better to do. I have no girlfriends left after my quest to "do my duty for the country" this past year. Dammit Ron Paul! You ruined my sex life! Maybe I did that to myself I guess. Hope it made some kind of difference for the better, but I doubt it.
 
they count that you vote and they count that you aren't part of the total voting for a named candidate. It just depends on if people think voting for none of the above (the result of a write in that isn't counted) or voting for GJ or someone else better suits them.
 
Dammit, that map shows my state in the sore loser law category. I just looked earlier today and read that Wa state accepted write-in votes. Not that is really matters I guess, but does a write-in vote for Dr. Paul in Wa state actually get counted or not at this point? Can someone tell me with certainty that this map is accurate?

So why all the ads that tell us "your vote counts! Just do it!". Is it just to appease the masses and make us think that they we have a say in anything? It is becoming more obvious to me that we do not have a say in anything even when we do get involved with the process. Sorry for the ramblings of an old man who has had a few too many beers tonight. I feel pretty low at this point that I have nothing better to do. I have no girlfriends left after my quest to "do my duty for the country" this past year. Dammit Ron Paul! You ruined my sex life! Maybe I did that to myself I guess. Hope it made some kind of difference for the better, but I doubt it.

I thought sore loser laws don't generally apply to presidential races: http://t.co/dprTdMPF
 
they count that you vote and they count that you aren't part of the total voting for a named candidate. It just depends on if people think voting for none of the above (the result of a write in that isn't counted) or voting for GJ or someone else better suits them.

Does writing in RP in a sore loser law State invalidate the rest of your ballot? There are a few (very few) votes in my state that matter to me.
 
Does writing in RP in a sore loser law State invalidate the rest of your ballot? There are a few (very few) votes in my state that matter to me.

according to the ballot access article from 2007 that I posted only a few states consider their sore loser laws to apply to presidential elections

Only four states maintain that their “sore loser” laws apply to president: South Dakota, Mississippi, Ohio and Texas. After LaRouche won in court against Ohio in 1992, Ohio amended its “sore loser” law in 1993 to specifically apply to presidential candidates. No precedents have been set in Mississippi or South Dakota. In Texas, unfortunately, in 1996 the Constitution Party filed a lawsuit against Texas to get a ruling that the “sore loser” law doesn’t apply to president. The federal judge who got the case, James Nowlin, refused to enjoin Texas’ interpretation that the “sore loser” law does apply to president. The denial of injunctive relief is reported as US Taxpayers Party v Garza, 924 F Supp 71 (1996).

However, the opinion does not discuss the fact that the true candidates in November are running for presidential elector, not president. A presidential candidate’s name is not listed on the November ballot in his or her role as a candidate. Instead, the name is an identifier for specific slates of candidates for presidential elector.

Since Congress has repeatedly recognized that presidential electors may vote for anyone who holds the constitutional qualifications to be president (by always counting the votes for so-called “faithless electors”, except in 1872 when some electors voted for Horace Greeley even though he was deceased), it seems plain that no state can tell a slate of presidential electors that they cannot label themselves with the name of anyone they intend to vote for. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court said in Anderson v Celebrezze that a single state has a lesser state interest in blocking a presidential candidate from its ballot than from blocking candidates for other office. Since the overwhelming majority of states permit “sore loser” presidential candidates, it is likely that a court in the future would not uphold Texas’ interpretation.
 
Dammit, that map shows my state in the sore loser law category. I just looked earlier today and read that Wa state accepted write-in votes. Not that is really matters I guess, but does a write-in vote for Dr. Paul in Wa state actually get counted or not at this point? Can someone tell me with certainty that this map is accurate?

So why all the ads that tell us "your vote counts! Just do it!". Is it just to appease the masses and make us think that they we have a say in anything? It is becoming more obvious to me that we do not have a say in anything even when we do get involved with the process. Sorry for the ramblings of an old man who has had a few too many beers tonight. I feel pretty low at this point that I have nothing better to do. I have no girlfriends left after my quest to "do my duty for the country" this past year. Dammit Ron Paul! You ruined my sex life! Maybe I did that to myself I guess. Hope it made some kind of difference for the better, but I doubt it.

After reading the link in sailingaway's post, it looks like we can write in Ron Paul in WA. :)
 
Back
Top