It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Google searches for 'write-in' are off the charts

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 07:48 PM

originally posted by: WilburnRoach

originally posted by: blood0fheroes
No need to write in - Gary Johnson is on the ballot in each and every state, I believe.

He is my favorite idiot to vote for

This is one of the best things I've read..he is, unfortunately, a huge idiot.

posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 08:24 PM
What's the appeal of Pence?


posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 11:48 PM
Re: the OP's questions about the actual validity of write-in votes, all I could find was this:

The answer to that varies by the state in which the voter resides. Seven states—Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Dakota—do not allow write-ins at all. So would-be writers in who live in those places are out of luck. On the other side of the spectrum are eight states—Alabama, Delaware, Iowa, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont, and Wyoming—that will allow voters to write-in any name their heart desires. In those locales, Mickey Mouse, Ringo Starr, Darth Vader, Pat Paulsen, and Vermin Supreme (with his platform of zombie apocalypse awareness, time travel research, and a free pony for every American) are all fair game. In the remaining 35 states, the only acceptable write-in candidates are those who have officially registered with the state by some stated cutoff date, either by filing paperwork, paying a fee, collecting signatures, or some combination of the above.

(Note: I wholeheartedly disagree with the logic that site promulgates though of, "if you write in X, you're helping Y," since... no... I wouldn't have voted for either of them anyway. It is not a "lost" vote. But I digress.)

So it sounds like there are actually even legal limits on who we can write in, or whether we even can at all. Which is unfortunate. I had something amusing and personally meaningful planned. Ah well.

Oh, and as to any practical impact in terms of elect-ability:

Now, what about the incredibly remote possibility that a write-in candidate actually wins a state (or, in the case of Nebraska or Maine, a congressional district) and is entitled to presidential electors? Well, given the low likelihood of this possibility, it was never contemplated by the Founding Fathers, and it's never actually happened. Consequently, the Constitution is largely silent on the matter, as is existing case law. Many of the states that require write-in candidates to declare themselves (like, say, Texas) also require them to submit lists of electors. So, there would be no problem in those places, nor in the seven states where write-ins aren't allowed. But there are a couple of dozen states where, for one reason or a another, a write-in candidate is unattached to a slate of electors. It is in those states that we'd be left in a legal gray area if a write-in were to win.

edit on 10/13/2016 by AceWombat04 because: Added additional quote

posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 03:10 PM
a reply to: AceWombat04

So the answer is that we have to have enough people voting for an alternate already on the ballot.

It would be so wonderful if we could if would arrange for this to happen.

It is in those states that we'd be left in a legal gray area if a write-in were to win.

posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:04 PM
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Essentially, the write-in in question would have to be an officially registered candidate - whether on the ballot or not - because the handful of states where literally anyone can be written in wouldn't be sufficient to win... and they would have to win enough votes to gain electors in a large enough number of the states that allow write-ins at all, to affect the outcome of the actual election. So you'd have to have a coordinated write-in campaign across many, many states, and all for an individual who was also officially registered as a candidate in all of those states.

Not out of the realm of conceivable possibility... but incredibly, incredibly unlikely. Not least because the already on-ballot third party candidates would be more likely to receive those votes between them than any hypothetical write-in. But yes, it's technically possible. Apparently.

We definitely need real, viable alternatives and the only way for that to happen is for people to vote for them, of course. (Sadly in my state, none of the third party candidates on the ballot are people I feel I can in good conscience vote for either, and write-ins are not allowed here for unregistered candidates.)


edit on 10/14/2016 by AceWombat04 because: Typo

posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 07:44 PM
a reply to: WilburnRoach


posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 07:55 PM
What happens if a candidate gets less than 270 electoral votes.

What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?

If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House.

I'm not so sure a third party person pulling a significant part of the vote would accomplish much. They don't get the correct number of votes they simply can't win, but they could negate the popular vote. The House would go for their own insiders first I'd think.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in