A Case of POSSIBLE Voting Fraud

[Nation]

Uh, for the record, I have no problem with Tweed's vote. It should be counted.

Despite the fact that he edited his post, all he did was change the party name on the ballot. That's no big deal.

[Nym90]

As Secretary of Forum Affairs, I say Nation should make a decision about how these are to be counted, and then if anyone wants to challenge his ruling to the Supreme Court, they may do so. Also Demrepdan as Attorney General should have a role to play.

[JohnFKennedy]

Uh, for the record, I have no problem with Tweed's vote. It should be counted.

Despite the fact that he edited his post, all he did was change the party name on the ballot. That's no big deal.

Yes, I think we all agree now that Tweed's and Beef's should be left to stand.

[JohnFKennedy]

Regarding Bandit, I see no constitutional requirement that a voter must vote for a VP or else their ballot is nullified. His vote should count for me, but not for Al.

Interesting idea, but then, say PBrunsel received more VP votes than say Al, should Al then be eliminated?

[Nation]

If Nym wants me to make an OPINION (not a ruling) on these cases, I will. I've been around long enough that I understand how this forum works.


For the time being, since I leave for work in 5 minutes (going to take off a little early, be back in 3.5 hours or so)


*Tweed's vote should count

*Beef's vote should count

BRTD, while I am flattered , I'll leave it up the SC. I THINK it should be counted. It is clear who these people want to vote for as president.

[JohnFKennedy]

How about Bandit's vote?

[Nation]

No opinion on Bandit's vote. Simply writing in Nym for President is definitely questionable, to say the least, but I would lean toward it being counted.

[Nym90]

One could also argue that he intended to vote for me and Al, as he didn't state that his vote was a write-in. In real life, he would have pulled the Nym90/Al lever, and we wouldn't have to worry about what he wrote down. He didn't say Write-in: Nym90 which would imply an intention to vote for me only and not Al.

That's just another way to look at it, not advocating it necessarily. But one could say that if someone votes for a choice that is on the ballot for President, and doesn't specify it as a write-in, then it should count as a vote for the full ticket. Part of the problem we have here is that everyone has to write in their vote...we can't do it by a poll because then we'd have no way of preventing unregistered voters from voting...but if we had a poll instead of having to write your choice, we'd have much less controversy here. I'm not advocating that change, but perhaps we should try to accomodate people who don't write down their exact intentions, but for which they are clear.

Yet another solution would be to create a poll of the entire populace, and let them decide what to do about these 4 votes. I'd be perfectly willing to let the majority decide on this.

[Schmitz in 1972]

Just a few minutes ago Bandit modified his post. It now reads that he votes for Nym90 and Al

[Lunar]

I think Bandit should be allowed to further specify his vote as long as the polls remain open.

He forgot to list the vice president.

As was said earlier in the thread, the rules should lean in favor of more democracy over less when there they're brought into question.  I support this completely for every candidate.

EDIT:
BANDIT HAS FURTHER SPECIFIED

Nym90 - President
Al - VP

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Nym90]

Agreed Lunar. Let's not disenfranchise anyone. If the intent of the voter is clear, that is what should count more than bureaucratic adherence to the rules. Rules are good, but we must realize that they are simply a means to an end, and as long as that end is achieved, the actual process itself is not that critical.

[JohnFKennedy]

I will accept the legality of Bandit's vote as it is clear that that was his original intention.

However, I am still undecided on Better Red than Dead.

[The Dowager Mod]

Quit being silly and have fun with it.

[JohnFKennedy]

Quit being silly and have fun with it.

What is the point in the constitution if it means nothing and is not upheld?

[Jens]

Quit being silly and have fun with it.

I totally agree

[The Dowager Mod]

Quit being silly and have fun with it.

What is the point in the constitution if it means nothing and is not upheld?

if you question every little detail it kinda ruins it for some.
if they clearly meant to vote a certain way let it go.

[JohnFKennedy]

Quit being silly and have fun with it.

What is the point in the constitution if it means nothing and is not upheld?

if you question every little detail it kinda ruins it for some.
if they clearly meant to vote a certain way let it go.

Not just that, we have broken the constitution a total of 6 times I believe this weekend.

[The Dowager Mod]

Quit being silly and have fun with it.

What is the point in the constitution if it means nothing and is not upheld?

if you question every little detail it kinda ruins it for some.
if they clearly meant to vote a certain way let it go.

Not just that, we have broken the constitution a total of 6 times I believe this weekend.

ya but if it was a simple mistake it's not that big a deal.
and you can always get the court involved,that's what they are there for.

[JohnFKennedy]

Quit being silly and have fun with it.

What is the point in the constitution if it means nothing and is not upheld?

if you question every little detail it kinda ruins it for some.
if they clearly meant to vote a certain way let it go.

Not just that, we have broken the constitution a total of 6 times I believe this weekend.

ya but if it was a simple mistake it's not that big a deal.
and you can always get the court involved,that's what they are there for.

I am not just talking about the voting. For starters, the voting booth opened 12 hours early and will close 12 hours late. I don't have too much of a problem with this as the Presidential candidates all agreed to this, however the Senatorial candidates didn't. Also, Harry and Tweed were supposed to be up for re-election.

It just seems now that the Constitution holds no value at all, I guess if people are happy with that then why keep it......

[© tweed]

This is America
Count Every Vote!

-Florida 2000

[KEmperor]

Ok.  Wow.  First of all, I hope that you all realize that this won't even matter unless the election is decided by a vote or two.  If that happens, AND one of the candidates decides to sue, then the Supreme Court will make the appropriate decision based on contitutional law.

[Fritz]

As a candidate, I might challenge the votes of Beef and BRTD.

[Gustaf]

I stopped reading this thread after the first 3 pages...

But I will state my personal opinion being that all 3 mentioned votes should be valid, at least first preference-wise. We cannot alow too much fun to be taken out of this whole thing.

[Nym90]

I'm glad that we agree on this, Gustaf. There are currently 4 votes in question (Boss Tweed, Bandit73, Better Red than Dead, and Beef)...I feel that all should stand. In none of the 4 cases was a first preference vote altered. Tweed and Beef merely edited party names which they had accidentally gotten wrong, Bandit forgot to vote for VP the first time, and BRTD merely added a second choice preference (which is highly unlikely to come into play anyway).

[Beet]

I agree.