20% Of State Of Wa Ballots Discarded Because Envelopes Weren't Marked Republican

[Phantom]

20% OF STATE OF WA BALLOTS DISCARDED BECAUSE ENVELOPES WEREN'T MARKED REPUBLICAN (http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=118706)

[mikeycapz]

smells like LA state to me

[Ex Post Facto]

Why would anyone discard ballots? It would seem to me you would set them aside maybe, but not toss them. That effectively throws an entire election.

[nate895]

It says that on the form you get with your ballot, and this has nothing to do with the caucus. If you're stupid enough to not check a box, you don't deserve the right to vote.

[rockandrollsouls]

Real source? Can the WA gop confirm this? If so, lawsuit.

[robandsally]

Why would anyone discard ballots? It would seem to me you would set them aside maybe, but not toss them. That effectively throws an entire election.
They don't technically throw them away. At least, to do show would be a Federal crime. They are suppose to retain ballot for a few years, the exact period of time escapes me right now.

[tomveil]

These are PRIMARY ballots, not caucus ballots.

We have a mail-in primary that ends 2/19.

[life_boy]

Or Marked Democrat. They were discarded because any party affiliation was failed to be marked on the back. I'm doubtful that all of the candidates selected inside the envelopes were Republicans.

[nate895]

Real source? Can the WA gop confirm this? If so, lawsuit.

These elections are run by the state. The process is that, since you don't register your party affiliation, you swear on an affidavit that you consider yourself a Republican. These people didn't check the box required to vote in the primary, therefore they're both too stupid to vote or have participated in the other parties caucus.

[nate895]

Or Marked Democrat. They were discarded because any party affiliation was failed to be marked on the back. I'm doubtful that all of the candidates selected inside the envelopes were Republicans.

Probably not all, but probably most since the Democrat contest means jack.

[itsnobody]

WA was an OPEN CAUCUS....so it shouldn't matter either way...

[nate895]

WA was an OPEN CAUCUS....so it shouldn't matter either way...

You don't the Washington election process so you should but out.

This has absolutely nothing to do with our caucus. In our primary you have to swear (by checking a box) that you consider yourself a Republican (or Democrat), and that you won't participate in the caucuses of another party (we hold minor party ones too).

[kathy88]

Someone posted a screen shot of that result the article talked about on that local station, and I remember someone came into the thread and said that the local station said it was "an error... " I'll try to find the thread.

[kathy88]

here's that screen shot,

it's the second one down

with 40% in......


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=117270

[dawnbt]

You don't the Washington election process so you should but out.

This has absolutely nothing to do with our caucus. In our primary you have to swear (by checking a box) that you consider yourself a Republican (or Democrat), and that you won't participate in the caucuses of another party (we hold minor party ones too).

Meow!

[virgil47]

dawnbt, that was a very intellectual and helpful comment.

[jsu718]

That local station was reporting results for one single county, not the state of Washington.

[surf]

Some democrats have been told to not mark a box as a protest (about pick-a-party, i think) and some have been told to vote to influence the "super delegates."

Their votes don't mean a god damn thing. If you know anyone in Washington State - even democrats - especially democrats - call them, beg and plea, buy their vote for Ron Paul, and point out how worthless a D vote is. Most still seem to think it matters for some god-damn reason (all their delegates were allocated last Saturday).

[nate895]

Some democrats have been told to not mark a box as a protest (about pick-a-party, i think) and some have been told to vote to influence the "super delegates."

Their votes don't mean a god damn thing. If you know anyone in Washington State - even democrats - especially democrats - call them, beg and plea, buy their vote for Ron Paul, and point out how worthless a D vote is. Most still seem to think it matters for some god-damn reason (all their delegates were allocated last Saturday).

If they caucused, they will be committing perjury by voting Republican.

[Banana]

Some democrats have been told to not mark a box as a protest (about pick-a-party, i think) and some have been told to vote to influence the "super delegates."

Where do you get that idea?

That would be ironic, since Democratic party is the one who took down the original blanket primary and put up that stupid "pick-a-party" primary.


Their votes don't mean a god damn thing. If you know anyone in Washington State - even democrats - especially democrats - call them, beg and plea, buy their vote for Ron Paul, and point out how worthless a D vote is. Most still seem to think it matters for some god-damn reason (all their delegates were allocated last Saturday).

Assuming they didn't caucus, that would be nice to pick up some votes from the other side of aisle.

[surf]

"perjury?"
those messages about whether or not to vote come from a report i got from a person i still haven't forgiven for going to a D caucus.

The reason her precinct chose Obama? They didn't think Hillary could win. They voted against Hillary. i voted for someone :)

[JulioForPaul]

Are you a 15 yr old lawyer?:)

[nate895]

Are you a 15 yr old lawyer?:)

No, though I can read. It clearly states:


I declare that I am am a Republican and that have not or will not participate in the precinct caucus or convention process of any other party.

And since it's on an affidavit, it's testimony, which means lying is perjury.

[Sally08]

Haven't I read that RP supporters were told on *their* packets to not specify party, so they had a better chance of becoming (sleeper) delegates? (If so, that means that those missing in the counts now are highly involved *voters* when votes count.)

I believe they were successful in becoming delegates, but it didn't help the MSM reporting of meaningless "totals" all evening.

Similar situation in CA, I believe the RP supporters used paper ballots, avoiding the Diebold machines "like the plague", only to find out that those paper ballots were *not* included in the reported CA totals (CA has to have full results within *30* days!)

[nate895]

Haven't I read that RP supporters were told on *their* packets to not specify party, so they had a better chance of becoming (sleeper) delegates? (If so, that means that those missing in the counts now are highly involved *voters* when votes count.)

I believe they were successful in becoming delegates, but it didn't help the MSM reporting of meaningless "totals" all evening.

Similar situation in CA, I believe the RP supporters used paper ballots, avoiding the Diebold machines "like the plague", only to find out that those paper ballots were *not* included in the reported CA totals (CA has to have full results within *30* days!)

No, that was the caucus to not specify Presidential Preference.

[itsnobody]

You don't the Washington election process so you should but out.

This has absolutely nothing to do with our caucus. In our primary you have to swear (by checking a box) that you consider yourself a Republican (or Democrat), and that you won't participate in the caucuses of another party (we hold minor party ones too).

But the primary is Feb. 19th...the caucus was Feb. 9th....and the caucus is an OPEN caucus...so why does it matter if they're not marked?

According to the WA State site: "There is no registration by political party in Washington state"
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/register.aspx

[Banana]

Because you can't vote in a D caucus then fill out a R ballot for primary. That's the point; to ensure voters stay with one party for both events.

[nate895]

But the primary is Feb. 19th...the caucus was Feb. 9th....and the caucus is an OPEN caucus...so why does it matter if they're not marked?

According to the WA State site: "There is no registration by political party in Washington state"
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/register.aspx

It matters because it says on the ballot, if you don't mark it, it doesn't count, it doesn't matter about party registration.

[itsnobody]

It matters because it says on the ballot, if you don't mark it, it doesn't count, it doesn't matter about party registration.

Oh I see, so then it's no real problem, they just foolishly didn't mark it

[ChickenHawk]

But the primary is Feb. 19th...the caucus was Feb. 9th....and the caucus is an OPEN caucus...so why does it matter if they're not marked?

According to the WA State site: "There is no registration by political party in Washington state"
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/register.aspx

Since Washington State does not have party registration the only way to protect the party's freedom of association is to have voters declare what party they are. In the Caucus you declare by showing up and if you show up for a caucus it is illegal to declare for another party in the primary. If you don't declare then partisan votes on the ballot are not counted because you are not a party member and therefor have no right to help choose a party's nominee.

[surf]

Ok, but how many Ds caucused. i know a lot did, but more didn't.

i'm not condoning perjury, i didn't know that the Ds or Rs had to sign an oath on the ballot and i haven't seen a ballot yet (i'm one of the few that still enjoys going to a voting booth).

i appologize nate

[nate895]

Ok, but how many Ds caucused. i know a lot did, but more didn't.

i'm not condoning perjury, i didn't know that the Ds or Rs had to sign an oath on the ballot and i haven't seen a ballot yet (i'm one of the few that still enjoys going to a voting booth).

i appologize nate

I think apx. 50,000-100,000 caucused.