Bipartisanship in action
So, what changed?
Support !rcv@ponder.cat if you want an alternative to the duopoly. It’s on the ballot in a lot of places coming up.
If you’re not doing that, but you are choosing to vote for a spoiler candidate, you can anticipate a whole lot more duopoly in the future.
RCV would be great, most definitely. However:
“But the defect that prevents independent presidential candidates West and De la Cruz from appearing on Georgia’s ballot does not pertain to the number of signatures acquired; it is that West’s electors and De la Cruz’s electors filed no nomination petitions at all,” Justice Sarah Warren wrote.
There’s a process for ballot access, which includes the candidate’s electors filing paperwork. They didn’t. Counting votes for these two candidates’ would be allowing ballot access to a candidate who didn’t meet the prerequisites. This court ruling appears appropriate, based on information I have at hand.
We can’t have people voting! - GOP
So two candidates failed to submit their paperwork to get onto the ballot but the state in a bizarre display of proactive incompetence put them on the ballot anyways? The mistake eventually got caught and taken to the court and of course the court rules they have to follow the process dictated by law. And now Raffensperger is saying it’s too late to change (which, ok understandable) and worse, is doubling down on his mistake by falsely claiming votes for them will be counted when the court has established they can’t be?
One step removed from “voters for Kamala Harris won’t have votes counted”
GOP finds the ends first then creates the means arounit
In fairness, West votes aren’t going to be enough to make a difference anyway.
The logical work-around is for supporters to write him in, ignoring the ballot line that won’t be counted.
But still, write ins are insignificant.
