RON (not Paul) for President
Article published: Saturday, October 18th 2008
My friend votes in Virginia. Since she lives in West Yorkshire, I recently had the privilege of witnessing[1] her postal vote, and thus being present as the US electoral process takes an early tottering step.[2]
One surprise to me was her ballot paper, which includes a ‘Write In’ box under each of the candidate lists – like this one (from 2004). In other words, if the candidate you want doesn’t get on the ballot (or doesn’t even run for the nomination), you can STILL vote for her.
Am I naively alone in thinking this is amazing? In the UK we occasionally get to vote for independents like avuncular BBC war correspondents or Kidderminster doctors. By and large, though, we simply have to shut up, lower our trousers and accept whichever human enemas of bile and mediocrity the parties choose to administer through the ballot paper. If we don’t like any of them – including the independents – we don’t vote. Nowhere can we curse both their houses and still participate in the electoral process.
Does it ever happen? Do librarians from Milwaukee ever get a call from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs the day after the election asking them to come pick up the nuclear codes? Fount of truth and wisdom Wikipedia informs us that Democrat (later Republican) Senator Strom Thurmond was elected as South Carolina senator in 1954 as a write-in candidate. (Unfortunately, it turns out Thurmond was an arch segregationist who marshalled southern senators in support of Nixon, and delivered the longest-ever Senate filibuster trying to block the 1957 Civil Rights Act.)
But of course, actually electing someone off the write-in (aside from illustrating how surprisingly well-organised racists are) isn’t the point. The point is that the write-in should allow organisers to produce real, grown-up, counted-up protest votes of the kind that are generally regarded in the UK as sixth-form posturing. The kind that doesn’t just elevate a single issue through an independent candidate, but allows us to express our views about THE single issue: whether we think the entire electoral system itself is fit for purpose.
As a bonus, unlike the RON (Re-Open Nominations) option under Single Transferable Voting, the write-in would allow electoral reform campaigners to do it with some surrealist flair. Imagine a “Write-in my nan” campaign. Or “Write-in Sarah Palin’s foreign policy expertise”. Or “Write-in Ron Paul”. (No, that last one’s too weird).
In the meantime, I’ve long wondered how you would go about establishing a credible “Don’t Vote” or “Get Someone Better” campaign in the UK in 2010. How would you pitch a dirty, anarchisty-looking Don’t Vote initiative to tap across the political spectrum? How would you register and count Don’t Votes, and ensure people didn’t vote anyway? (Getting the Electoral Commission on side, and having people sending their uncompleted postal ballots to them?) How would you make it look, in short, grown-up? Honestly, please send suggestions: votefordavidmilibandsbanana@gmail.com
- Witnessing as in being present, not legally witnessing. It was decided that I couldn’t quite be trusted not to spoil, burn or disclose her ballot, so our more grown-up and responsible colleague legally witnessed it instead.
- Obviously I can’t say in which direction that step went, since that would be illegal. Let’s just say, based upon my West Yorkshire exit poll, that it’s not looking good for Ralph Nader in Virginia. Bob Barr probably shouldn’t be looking to rent out his DC apartment any time soon either.
More: Manchester
Comments
No comments found
The comments are closed.
