It’s really funny but we’ve said for years that the votes in our family don’t count. At first, it was because we lived in an area where everybody felt just like us on the issues. So we knew every vote outcome was going to be great whether we turn out or not. Now we live in an area where we’re in the minority and we know no matter how we vote, it’s never going to work out. 
We live in an area where the majority are of the political party we do not generally vote for - so we often feel our votes are wasted. But last year, our township library millage passed by two votes … H & I take full credit! 
On the national level that is pretty much always the case. A little less so on the state level. But not because of one letter after the names on the ballot or the other. Its because its rare when both choices don’t suck.
@Wien2NC - they didn’t do a recount of the recount. After it was all over, a Republican on the committee complained about a questionable vote that they had agreed to discard. A 3 judge panel agreed, so they counted that vote. So now the coin toss. Whoever loses the coin toss can ask for another recount where I imagine more votes might come out of the trash and be counted. This could go on for a while.
Remember the hysteria about “hanging chads”? Back then, one party didn’t want to count any votes that hadn’t been perfectly and properly processed by the scanning and punching machines. Pregnant chads, dimpled chads, and hanging chads were all discarded. Now they want to take one with crossouts on it out of the trash!
And the Republican guy agreed initially that the ballot should be tossed out! And then had a change of heart after the Democrat won by this one vote.
Parties/candidates typically take the approach with respect to recounts that they believe will result in victory for them. Though they couch their approach in terms of respecting the wishes of the voters, fairness, etc. If I remember correctly, when the media groups did the study of the ballots in Florida, in certain instances the approaches advocated by one party/candidate or the other would have resulted in the other candidate winning and the approaches fought by one party/candidate or the other would have resulted in that candidate winning.
The rules are kind of strict about this, too. You can’t have stray marks on the ballot, either. Let’s say you tested the pen off to one side, or put an x in the corner, or something. Historically in areas where there was illegal “pay to vote”, people who took a bribe to vote a specific way were told to do something specific to make their ballot identifiable (like specific stray marks). There are laws now about this – your ballot has to be clean, without extraneous marks that might identify it to someone who knew what to look for – otherwise it can be thrown out. I don’t think it normally is in the counting process, but in a recount it can be enough to get a ballot pitched. (I know this because I was trained to help with a recount of a US Senate race several years ago – the most exciting thing was that Bradley Whitford – ahem – Josh Lyman – came and gave us a pep talk!).
Of course, if you are from one side watching the recount and the vote appears to be for your candidate, you don’t point out the mark… You hope the other side isn’t paying attention (or isn’t well trained), and they miss it, and allow the ballot to go into your pile. It is each candidate’s job to have someone watching everyone recounting and raise an issue if they think the ballot is invalid. If it is really close, then some of the invalid ballots may be reviewed by a court for a final determination (state supreme court got involved in the recount I was involved with).
I saw a picture of the disputed ballot and, in my opinion, it definitely should have not counted for either candidate. The instruction said to fully fill the bubble next to the name of the preferred candidate. Two bubbles were fully filled. In addition, one of the bubbles had a diagonal line through it, which could be construed as either affirming or deleting that choice. Interestingly, in another race on the same ballot, only one bubble was marked, but there was also an “x” drawn through that bubble. It’s hard to divine a voter’s intent when they vote for two candidates and (maybe?) attempt to clarify the confusion in an unclear manner.
I’ll go out on a limb and predict a court will void this particular ballot.
I thought a court looked at it already today? I heard that because the rest of the ballot was marked for Republicans, this was taken as partial evidence of intent on the part of the voter. That should NOT be a consideration – at least not the way we were trained to handle recount ballots.
If you mess up your ballot, you can ask a poll worker for a new one. They will take the old one and destroy it on the spot or put it in a box specially marked for spoiled/bad ballots. That is what this voter clearly should have done…
Yes, three judges, all appointed by Republicans, ruled that the voter had intended to vote for the Republican candidate. This despite the clear ambiguity. And yes, I expect an appeal, if that option is available. If it goes to a coin flip, the loser of that can ask for another recount.
I saw an image of the ballot too. It was very sloppy, and the oval filled in for the choice for governor was not even fully filled in and then had an X over it. Both ovals for the delegate position were sloppy so how do you decode a stray diagonal?
Maybe there should be an ‘oval filling-in instructional session’ before entering the voting booth.
One thing is certain; this wouldn’t have counted on an SAT or ACT test.
LOL, sherpa! I was going to say that whoever filled out that ballot was not a very experienced standardized test taker.
This article has a photo of the ballot with the questionable markings:
https://pilotonline.com/news/government/politics/virginia/republican-awarded-more-vote-causing-a-tie-in-house-race/article_ecdf9e8a-1f10-5dc7-a955-9873e3f60ebe.html
Apparently it’s going to be q nqme pulled put of a canister …
A blue turquoise vase. Let’s hope the names fairly drawn.
Looks like Virginia has instructions on how to hand-count oddly marked ballots, although none of the examples exactly matches the oddly marked ballot that is the center of the dispute:
The examples are fascinating. It really comes down to whether you think the critical ballot is more similar to the first set of examples in paragraph (5) (multiple marks without clarification) or to the examples in paragraph (8) (clear indication of changed votes). I could argue it either way.