"A quirky Nevada law that Republicans feared could siphon votes from a disgruntled electorate and sway the outcome of close presidential and U.S. Senate races in the state was struck down Wednesday by a federal judge.
U.S. District Judge Robert Jones said the state’s decades-old ballot alternative of “none of the above” was unconstitutional because votes for “none” don’t count in the final tallies that determine winners."
I know, I know, it's not cool for me to be on board with this decision because it helps the Republicans, but I can't help but think that there should not be a choice on the ballot, that if it gains the majority of the votes, however unlikely that is, cannot serve in the position. Of course voters should have an alternative to the two major parties, but that's what third parties are for. In an election, you vote for your best option...hopefully you're voting for rather than against somebody. Diehard Democrat that I am, I would rather see Mitt Romney in the White House than literally not have a President. I have a feeling would-be "none" voters feel the same. No doubt this lawsuit was motivated by partisan politics. There are a lot of states in which Republicans have waged war on voting rights and I find it despicable, but if we lose this election because people couldn't vote "none" in Nevada, we've already lost it.
No comments:
Post a Comment