See this story in the Reno Gazette-Journal, about the pending lawsuit to remove Nevada’s “None of the above” from the ballot for statewide office. The case has a hearing in U.S. District Court in Reno on August 22.
See this story in the Reno Gazette-Journal, about the pending lawsuit to remove Nevada’s “None of the above” from the ballot for statewide office. The case has a hearing in U.S. District Court in Reno on August 22.
I really think that on all ballots, you should have a None of the Above, All of the Above and Some of the Above options.
I also think that there should be a lottery to determine the order of the candidates in each county.
1 – Can’t have “All of the above” in an IRV system. It will throw the tabulation computers into an infinite loop.
But what about “One of the above and two of the below?”
And fortune cookies.
I have never understood the intentions behind why Nevada has had the “NOTA” option on the ballot. Could someone please explain it for me? Thanks. 🙂
Seems self explanatory to me but I’ll try.
It’s a way for voters to say that they do not approve of the candidates without having to go through all the trouble of finding someone they do approve of and going through ballot access hurdles, which for many people who don’t approve of the candidates that do run is not possible.
Someone might also express that view by not voting, but that sends a less clear signal. Not voting could also mean too lazy, too busy, too uninformed, don’t care, any of the above are OK, opposed to the whole electoral system, etc. None of the above is a relatively more clear statement.
Now for a better question, why is it that there are still so many states that don’t have NOTA as an option?
“Someone might also express that view by not voting, but that sends a less clear signal. Not voting could also mean too lazy, too busy, too uninformed, don’t care, any of the above are OK, opposed to the whole electoral system, etc. None of the above is a relatively more clear statement.”
Well, you can cast a spoiled ballot as is traditionally done by dissidents in some European countries. Writing obscenities on the ballot also might be a nice touch.
“Now for a better question, why is it that there are still so many states that don’t have NOTA as an option?”
Why bother with such ineffective nonsense? Better to just ignore the whole sorry spectacle. Fred Reed says,
“The United States of course is not a democracy but a wonderfully crafted pretense. We have separated the results of elections from the formulation of policy. It is a neat trick: Voting distracts the rabble without disturbing the government. You cannot possibly — can you? — believe that your vote will change anything of importance? That it will end the flood of semi-literate Mexican proletarians who join our own? Divert the schools from their ghettoish apotheosis of the mentally lame and halt? Cause governmental behavior to rely on merit instead of race, creed, color, sex, and national origin? No. These things are determined remotely by lobbies, by criminals, and by forces that have no name. If you are lucky, you may be able to change parking regulations.”