Connecticut Working Families Party Just Barely Retains Third Line on Ballot

Posted on by November 7, 2014
1

Connecticut, like New York, uses party column ballots, and determines the order of parties on the ballot by their gubernatorial vote. At the November 4, 2014 election, the vote for Governor of Connecticut was: Democratic 528,669 (48.64%); Republican 500,329 (46.03%); Working Families 23,684 (2.18%); Independent Party 22,878 (2.10%); independent candidate Joe Visconti 11,337 (1.04%).

The Working Families Party has enjoyed the third line on Connecticut ballots for the last four years, but the Independent Party this week almost displaced it to the fourth line.

The Republican Party has had the top line for the past four years, but as a result of this week’s election, it slips to the second line.

In the 2010 election, the Working Families Party got 2.30%. Both in 2010 and 2014, it cross-endorsed the Democratic nominee, Dannel Malloy. In 2010 the Independent Party had run its own nominee, Thomas E. Marsh, who had received 1.54%. In 2014 the Independent Party cross-endorsed the Republican nominee.

Minor Party and Independent Vote for Office at Top of Ticket in 2014 was Lower than in Recent Past Midterm Elections

Posted on by November 7, 2014
6

Based on preliminary election returns, it appears the percentage of the vote in the November 2014 election for independent and minor party candidates, for the office at the top of the ballot, was 4.4%.

By contrast, in 2010 it was 5.4%; in 2006 it was 5.0%; in 2002, it was 5.3%; in 1998, it was 4.9%; in 1994, it was 4.5%; in 1990, it was 4.6%; in 1986 it was 3.6%. But in 1982, it was only 1.8%, and in 1978 and 1974 it was only 2.4%.

The chief reason the 2014 “other” vote for the office at the top of the ballot was lower than in recent past midterm elections is that California and Washington did not let voters cast an “other” vote in November 2014. California and Washington together comprise one-eighth of the nation.

In November 2010, California voters cast 539,645 votes for “other” candidates for Governor, but in November 2014, there were zero such votes, due to California’s having switched to the top-two system starting in 2011. Naturally, with such a drastic change in California, the national percentage for “other” was significantly lowered.

A note on methodology: These calculations exclude scattering write-in votes, and exclude votes for “None of these candidates” in Nevada. These calculations include votes cast on minor party lines for the top office to be “other” votes, even if the particular minor party cross-endorsed a major party nominee.

Top office on the ballot means Governor, for states that elect Governors in midterm years. For those that don’t, it means U.S. Senate. For the handful of states each year in which neither Governor nor U.S. Senate is up, it means the office actually at the top of the ballot.

Useful Compilation “An Overview of 2014 Libertarian Gubernatorial Candidate Results” by Matthew Reece

Posted on by November 7, 2014
2

Matthew Reece has published this useful article, “An Overview of 2014 Libertarian Gubernatorial Candidate Results.” Although the article was published the day after the election, so that the vote totals are already somewhat out-of-date, the article is very useful because it contains the poll results for almost all of the Libertarian gubernatorial candidates. Thus, it is possible for the reader to compare the poll results with the actual election returns.

There is a consistent pattern that the actual election returns, in all cases, are below what the polls had predicted.

Reece appears to have erroneously omitted a paragraph for Wyoming.

Pennsylvania Files Briefs in Both Ballot Access Cases

Posted on by November 7, 2014
3

Recently, Pennsylvania state officials filed briefs in each of the two pending ballot access cases. Here is the brief in Constitution Party of Pennsylvania v Aichele, a case over the Pennsylvania system of putting petitioning groups at risk of paying court costs of up to $110,000 if they submit a petition that lacks enough signatures.

Here is the brief in Green Party of Pennsylvania v Aichele, which challenges many other ballot access laws, including the ban on out-of-state circulators. Both cases are in U.S. District Court in the eastern district. Each case has a separate judge.