That right there is the whole point.
1 Like
Typically you can say the Dem candidate won the election.
Do they say the Dem, party b, party c candidate won the election?
It’s a bunch of bull ■■■■ if you ask me.
Usually, in the media they go with whichever the largest party that ran the candidate, for the sake of simplicity - and so they don’t have to explain fusion voting every time they want to take a story national.
I don’t think I understand why you have such an issue with it.
1 Like
It’s gaming the system for the lazy voter. You know the one too lazy to look down party to see if the person they want to vote for is on the ballot. You know the one too lazy to look into the candidate to see if the person matches their ideals.
I mean if a person was on the ballot one time, and beat cadidate b in the solo match up, but then candidate b had the other votes added in and won – I’d be pissed as hell.
That doesn’t make any sense.
The top two rows on the ballot are the Democratic and Republican parties. Any “lazy voters” are gonna stop right there - when people take the time to vote for their candidate under the “Conservative” party line instead of the Republican party line, they’re putting in extra effort to ensure that the candidate understands that they are seeking to shift him to the right.
Elections aren’t “solo matches”.
It sure isn’t supposed to be where you have your name on the ballot more than one time.
This is just another reason for me to keep promoting that no party affiliation appear next to a candidates name on a ballot.
Still not following you…
Unless it only shows the party name and NOT the candidate name I’m good. But if candidate B appears on three lines under say us house district 7 . . . and candiadates A, C, d, e, f only appear once . . .
But why does it matter how many times a candidate’s name appears?
Each person only gets to vote for one.
But candidates that appear more than once can attract more voters than the names that appear only once.
Shouldn’t be able to move votes from one party to another in my opionon. And that’s just what they are doing.
Why would that attract more voters?
The lazy voters will stop going down the ballot on the first or second lines.
Voters don’t vote for a party, they vote for a candidate. The vote doesn’t belong to the party.
1 Like
Bull. If they see candidate A - Democrat and they know there is another candidate in another party WPA (or whatever) . . . and the WPA aligns more with their throught . . . if they havn’t researched who the WPA candidate is are they going to stop there and mark candidate A - democrat?
THAT"S what I mean by more voters.
Or the straight party voter that knows Dem’s align and puch vote all dem. They wouldn’t pick up votes for the WPA party. And the person who see’s and punches vote all WPA wouldn’t pick up the votes for the Dem party.
Unless they don’t have straight party voting. Becuase if they straight party vote they by god are giving their vote to the party and not the candidate.
I still don’t think I understand. Maybe it’ll help if I show you what a New York ballot looks like.
Straight party voters are straight party voters - whether there are two parties on the ballot, or 10.
I still don’t see the issue.
I mean, you can go down the row for party and check all the boxes, if you want. But there’s no box to check that automatically votes down party lines for you.
1 Like
So whter is the straight party vote or is it not allowed?
And that shows exactally what I’m talking about.
Will owena x 2 on the ballot for congress. Doheny on three times Hassig one time.
Will under two different political partys, doheny with three parties and hassig one.
State senator has the same person on the ballot three times and no one else.
I don’t know what you mean by “straight party vote”.
If you’re asking me if someone can vote for the Democrat in every race, then yes - of course it is allowed. How exactly can you stop it?
If you’re asking if there’s a check box on the ballot that would automatically cast your vote for every Democrat, then no.
Yes. I know all this - I’m saying I dont understand how it, say, gives Matt Doheny an advantage over Bill Owens just because Doheny appears 3 times to Owens’ 2.
Yes. Apparently she ran unopposed.
Maybe they don’t have it in new york. Utah just eliminated it this last legislative session. First section of the ballot has an area called straight party. You check mark the party. Down ballot is you check someone other than the party, it doesn’t count for that person, the straight party over rides it. You don’t have to check anything in that area and can go down ballot and chose candidates from different parties.
If they only had one box and a notation that they were also party x and party y candidate I’d be good with it. But I seriously don’t like a person’s name on the ballot more than once.
Again, a new reason for me promote the removal of party afficialtion next to a person’s name. Doing that, if it just had names under US house district x, on your ballot it would only have three names.
Ok, now I see what you’re saying. No, New York does not have that.
I still don’t see why it matters how many times a candidate’s name appears.
And you probably won’t no matter how many times I explain it. Time to move on.
