It’s so quaint, the “none of these candidates” option on the Nevada ballot. It’s so Nevadan, the ability to show all the people in the race they are unfit. It’s so….dumb.
And yet it lives on, especially after today's Ninth Circuit ruling that upholds Nevadans’ ability to throw away our most sacred right as Americans, to show the rest of the country we know how to waste our franchise rather than making a choice. Hallelujah!
"The district court's ruling is a triumph for the voters of Nevada," Secretary of State Ross Miller said in a news release. "Voters who want to express their dissatisfaction with the federal and statewide candidates on the ballot should have the option and freedom to do it."
Oh, please.
It’s an asinine anachronism, one that only encourages the mindless vitriol and serial checking-out by too many in the electorate. Yes, let’s make it easier for people not to have to make a choice among candidates, one of whom WILL be elected.
If the colloquially named None of the Above actually had teeth – if it finishes first, then a special election is triggered, perhaps – there might be a rationale for it. But it is toothless and, thus, worthless.
The lawsuit was filed a year ago to erase None of the Above is that it was filed by delusional Republicans who believed Mitt Romney had a chance to win Nevada and they needed to prevent those not thrilled with him from having a place to discard their vote. Forget that there were plenty of third-party options happy to accept a protest ballot. Suddenly, longtime Republicans such as ex-Clark County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury had epiphanies that somehow the option disenfranchised voters. It was complete nonsense with a pathetically obvious political motivation.
The irony, though, is that Republicans may have needed None of the Above to save Sen. Dean Heller, who won his race by only 12,000 votes over Rep. Shelley Berkley. In that contest, None of the Above took 45,000 votes. Maybe a third-party candidate, who received 49,000 votes (most of them surely protests against both contenders) would have taken all of those None of the Above ballots if it wasn’t available. But I doubt it. If the GOP had won the suit, Romney still would have lost decisively and Heller might be out of a job.
So how should Nevadans feel now that our special ballot choice has been preserved?
It’s so quaint, the “none of these candidates” option on the Nevada ballot. It’s so Nevadan, the ability to show all the people in the race they are unfit. It’s so….dumb.
And yet it lives on, especially after today's Ninth Circuit ruling that upholds Nevadans’ ability to throw away our most sacred right as Americans, to show the rest of the country we know how to waste our franchise rather than making a choice. Hallelujah!
"The district court's ruling is a triumph for the voters of Nevada," Secretary of State Ross Miller said in a news release. "Voters who want to express their dissatisfaction with the federal and statewide candidates on the ballot should have the option and freedom to do it."
Oh, please.
It’s an asinine anachronism, one that only encourages the mindless vitriol and serial checking-out by too many in the electorate. Yes, let’s make it easier for people not to have to make a choice among candidates, one of whom WILL be elected.
If the colloquially named None of the Above actually had teeth – if it finishes first, then a special election is triggered, perhaps – there might be a rationale for it. But it is toothless and, thus, worthless.
The lawsuit was filed a year ago to erase None of the Above is that it was filed by delusional Republicans who believed Mitt Romney had a chance to win Nevada and they needed to prevent those not thrilled with him from having a place to discard their vote. Forget that there were plenty of third-party options happy to accept a protest ballot. Suddenly, longtime Republicans such as ex-Clark County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury had epiphanies that somehow the option disenfranchised voters. It was complete nonsense with a pathetically obvious political motivation.
The irony, though, is that Republicans may have needed None of the Above to save Sen. Dean Heller, who won his race by only 12,000 votes over Rep. Shelley Berkley. In that contest, None of the Above took 45,000 votes. Maybe a third-party candidate, who received 49,000 votes (most of them surely protests against both contenders) would have taken all of those None of the Above ballots if it wasn’t available. But I doubt it. If the GOP had won the suit, Romney still would have lost decisively and Heller might be out of a job.
So how should Nevadans feel now that our special ballot choice has been preserved?
The answer: None of the Above.
Comments: