Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Roland99

(53,342 posts)
Fri Nov 15, 2019, 11:50 PM Nov 2019

Federal judge declares Florida ballots unconstitutional, orders change

Source: Washington Post

A federal judge in Florida ordered the state Friday to change the way candidates are listed on election ballots — a decision that Democrats in the crucial swing state say will finally take away an unfair advantage Republicans have enjoyed for years.

...

The current law says that whichever party holds the governor’s office can list its candidates first on the ballot in general elections. That hurts an opposing party, U.S. District Court Judge Mark E. Walker said.

He gave Florida Secretary of State Laurel Lee two weeks to tell elections supervisors in all 67 counties that the current “ballot scheme” is unconstitutional. She has three weeks to come up with a new plan.

Walker heard testimony from researchers who said the “primacy effect” is real and can give a candidate a statistical advantage as great as 5.4 percentage points. Many voters tend to vote for the first name on the list of candidates, they said.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-judge-declares-florida-ballots-unconstitutional-orders-change/2019/11/15/0b91dc0a-0810-11ea-924a-28d87132c7ec_story.html

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Federal judge declares Florida ballots unconstitutional, orders change (Original Post) Roland99 Nov 2019 OP
I never even noticed that about the ballots radical noodle Nov 2019 #1
same here. n/t orleans Nov 2019 #2
It happened in Illinois late 70's or early 80's rpannier Nov 2019 #3
More to it than that kurtcagle Nov 2019 #4
You're surprised? AZ8theist Nov 2019 #11
Yikes! radical noodle Nov 2019 #12
great news. riversedge Nov 2019 #5
Here's a link to story WITHOUT A PAYWALL (Tallahassee Democrat) NurseJackie Nov 2019 #9
Since this is a federal court ruling, it will apply to all states DeminPennswoods Nov 2019 #6
Really? I thought fed courts worked by district? getagrip_already Nov 2019 #7
To start, but now that there is that ruling, why wouldn't Rs DeminPennswoods Nov 2019 #8
If there are any. Igel Nov 2019 #10

radical noodle

(8,000 posts)
1. I never even noticed that about the ballots
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 02:29 AM
Nov 2019

I find it shocking to hear that voters tend to vote for the first name on the list.

rpannier

(24,329 posts)
3. It happened in Illinois late 70's or early 80's
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 03:31 AM
Nov 2019

2 la rouchites running for the Democratic nomination won the primary. When people were asked why they voted for them, many responded, "They were the first two names on the ballot." The ballot was done alphabetically

kurtcagle

(1,602 posts)
4. More to it than that
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 05:41 AM
Nov 2019

Both of the La Rouchites had very stock English surnames, while their opponents had a very foreign surname. I lived in Illinois at the time - it was quite the scandal.

AZ8theist

(5,456 posts)
11. You're surprised?
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 06:49 PM
Nov 2019

That the US is full of low information idiots? Back in 2004, while at a sporting event, the conversation turned to politics. One of my friends acquaintances said loudly "I VOTED FOR GEORGE W!!".....I then asked him, Why?
He couldn't think of a single reason.

radical noodle

(8,000 posts)
12. Yikes!
Sun Nov 17, 2019, 01:10 AM
Nov 2019

Yes, I really am surprised. I don't know a soul who would do that, and even if they didn't know the candidates, they'd likely vote by party.

DeminPennswoods

(15,278 posts)
6. Since this is a federal court ruling, it will apply to all states
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 08:45 AM
Nov 2019

using this same method, including Pennsylvania. IMO, this was a very poorly thought out strategy. It won't flip Florida and could cost Dems Pennsylvania - again - and reverse gains Dems made in the state house and senate in 2018.

getagrip_already

(14,708 posts)
7. Really? I thought fed courts worked by district?
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 08:53 AM
Nov 2019

So a ruling in the 4th district would only effect states under its jurisdiction, not the whole country. Is that not the case?

DeminPennswoods

(15,278 posts)
8. To start, but now that there is that ruling, why wouldn't Rs
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 09:00 AM
Nov 2019

go to the federal court districts in other states where this method disadvantages them? Now they have this precedent to use.

But, tbh, given the US Supreme Courts refusal to get involved in partisan gerry-mandering, this ruling might well be overturned.

If these lawyers wanted to challenge the ballot listings, they should have sued in state, not federal, court.

Igel

(35,300 posts)
10. If there are any.
Sat Nov 16, 2019, 02:39 PM
Nov 2019

We wouldn't hear about that here. It's like gerrymandering--if you only check out one kind of source, all the evidence says that gerrymandering is a moral issue for (D), so that (D) would never do the immoral thing while (R) are responsible for all gerrymandering.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Federal judge declares Fl...