Obama Could Conceivably Be Listed Four Times on South Carolina Ballot
June 7th, 2008South Carolina permits fusion for all office. For president, South Carolina has used fusion in 1972 (when George McGovern was listed as the Democratic nominee and the United Citizens nominee) and in 1996 (when Ross Perot was listed as the Reform nominee and the Patriot nominee).
In 2008, it is possible that Barack Obama might be listed four times. He is almost certain to be the nominee of the Democratic, Working Families, and United Citizens Parties. The Independence Party is also considering nominating him. If this happens, it would be the first time in the history of government-printed ballots that any presidential candidate was listed as the nominee of four parties.
The last time any presidential nominee was listed as many as three times in any state was in New York in 2000, when Al Gore was listed as the nominee of the Democratic, Liberal, and Working Families Parties.
June 7th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Let’s here for the Socialist. Wow what aflashback I’m having this how Hugo Chavez got elected in Venezuela.
We need a more Libertarian voice in Government
June 7th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Richard:
Would they list four rows of parties with the candidate listed all four times?
Jonoathan:
What a bourgeois comment you made. By the way, if this website offered grammar and spelling check, would you utilize it?
June 7th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Yes. The voter in South Carolina can decide which party label to vote for, and there will be a vote tally under each party label. Oddly enough, in 1996, Perot got more votes as a Patriot Party nominee than a Reform Party nominee.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:12 am
South Carolina uses touch screen electronic voting machines.
Screenshots of the machines and demo videos can be found on the SC Electoral Commission website here:
http://www.scvotes.org/2008/01/01/how_to_vote
Its hard to see in the screenshots, but it looks like the candidates name is more prominent than the party lable. Could this result in many more votes for Obama on a non-dem party line?
It will be interesting to see how the SC Election Commission deals with fusion. I don’t believe they’ve had to deal with it since electronic voting came, but a few (losing) Democratic congressional candidates were cross-endorsed by the WFP in 2006.
Most of you will know that touch screen machines have a very bad reputation. There were numerous problems with the machines during the 2008 SC primaries. Googling “south carolina voting machines” will give you much more information.
June 7th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Thank you Richard and Scott!
June 7th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
There may be a lot of things about my home state, South Carolina, that are not praiseworthy. But I have to say that I am proud of its relatively
accessible ballot access provisions and also its’
allowing ballot-level fusion.
June 7th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
It will be interesting to see if the Vice-President would be the same on all four of those ballot lines. In 2004 in New York, Nader was listed on two ballot lines but with different Vice-Presidential candidates. The Independence Party had Nader/Pierce (receiving 84,247 votes) and the Peace and Justice Party had Nader/Camejo (receiving 15,626 votes).
June 8th, 2008 at 10:04 am
The Obama candidates for presidential elector will be the same individuals for all parties that nominate him. Therefore, it is inevitable that the v-p they are all pledged to will be the actual Democratic v-p candidate.
Under a 1968 South Carolina Supreme Court ruling, Wallace v Thornton, if a presidential candidate is on the ballot for two or more parties, but the candidates for presidential elector are different individuals on each slate, then the presidential candidate has a right to force one of the slates to withdraw. Otherwise the presidential candidate would be injured, because if the elector candidates are different people, the vote for the two slates couldn’t be combined.
June 8th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Fascinating system in South Carolina.
And ignore Jonathan: this is obviously partisan hate and nothing more.
June 8th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
I’m curious about what Scott is getting at. Is he suggesting that people might vote for Obama on some other party’s ticket, thinking they’re voting for Obama as a Democrat? Depending on how many people do that, is it possible McCain could win SC’s electoral votes even though more Democrats voted for Obama than Republicans voted for McCain?
June 9th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Thanks Richard, has anyone talked to the other parties to make sure they know that and either cross nominate the electors or understand that they won’t have any?
Also, that the vice-presidential candidates can and will withdraw in favor of the Democratic VP Nominee in August?
June 9th, 2008 at 11:30 am
No state requires a ballot-qualified party to have chosen its presidential or vice-presidential candidate earlier than September 4. That is because the Republicans this year won’t formally nominate their ticket until that day. The Republican Party persuaded all the states to postpone the deadline to September 4. So the ballot-qualified parties in all states have that freedom. The South Carolina qualified minor parties won’t certify their national tickets until late summer. Their decisions to nominate Obama are not formalized yet. They all know that their candidates for elector must be the same people as the Democratic candidates for elector.