Is this common? (ballot question)

[Aunty Social]

Disclaimer - I don't want to know anything about who/what party/etc you are voting for. This is only an academic question. I'm hoping to educate myself a little.

 

We have nine open offices on our ballot. I always assumed that, being in a democracy, there would be a minimum of two candidates per office. After all, we have two major political parties and many smaller ones. But our ballot has only 13 people running on it. Five of the offices have only one candidate. Granted, most are small, local offices....but it seems odd. Is this common? What would happen in the (not ever really going to happen) event that no one voted for the sole candidate? Would the office be empty, or would they be elected anyway because there is no alternative? I used to think I knew how our political system works. As I get older, I realize I really know nothing. Educate me, please!

[snickelfritz]

Well... Most positions require a simple majority. So... Wouldn't 1 vote do it?

 

In the county I grew up in, the primaries decided races. You needed to be registered as a certain party to actually have any say.

 

ETA: Don't know if I explained it well. ALL local candidates were Democrats. You had to register as a Democrat, so that you actually got a vote (my state only allows Dems to vote in Dem primary and only Reps can vote in Rep primary) By the time it got to general election, there was only the Democratic candidate on the ballot.

Edited November 2, 2010 by snickelfritz

[KS_]

Five of the offices have only one candidate. Granted, most are small, local offices....but it seems odd. Is this common?

 

I don't know if it's common, but I did notice what seemed like a lot of positions on our ballot with only one candidate. I didn't count, but I think there was at least 10. . .

[Julie in Austin]

Yes, several people running unopposed on my ballot as well.

[jplain]

There were no unopposed races on my ballot this time, but it has happened in before.

 

Even in small towns, I think we can safely assume at least one vote (ie. the candidate, her mother, or her husband!), so I doubt there's ever a case where zero votes are cast in favor of an unopposed candidate.

[smrtmama]

We have several unopposed races.

[Tammyla]

Our ballot was two pages, with one office running unopposed. (Candidate currently hold the seat.)

[DarcyB]

Yes, there are often unopposed races where whichever candidate there gets it.

 

Hmm if no one voted for that person..would there have to be a run-off? :lol:

 

If no one is elected, the seat would be vacant, to be filled with by whatever requirements that municipality has in place...an appointment by other city officials/judges, special elections or empty spot to be filled by the assistant.

[Jean in Newcastle]

We have a number of unopposed positions each time. Usually they are positions like that of a judge or a smaller local position. If you don't like the candidate, you can write in someone else next to them but I think that would only work if you knew that a whole bunch of people were going to write in the same person.

[Old Dominion Heather]

I guess at least the person running would vote for him or herself, so if no one else voted, they would win with one vote.

 

We have a few people who run unopposed or virtually unopposed. If someone is really popular, the other party/parties are not going to waste money running someone against him.

[Suzanne in ABQ]

We have at least ten candidates running unopposed. It happens a lot here in New Mexico. I don't remember seeing it so much when I lived in California.

[babysparkler]

If noone voted for that single candidate, then that would mean that the candidate didn't vote for him/herself... so then I guess that would mean that the candidate doesn't want the office, right? :lol:

[Aunty Social]

Guess it's more common than I thought. I really wish voters who don't want to be registered with a party had some sort of say in the primaries though. It's not that we don't care or have an opinion. We just want to be free to make a decision without being tied to party lines. Oh well. I can see how that could turn into a logistical nightmare.

[SailorMom]

Sadly, I think we'll see more of this. With the economy in the dumps - people who make enough money and have enough spare time to be in those small positions are becoming fewer. Many of the small positions -have a small stipend - usually not enough to cover the gas these officials have to buy to do thier job.....

[jplain]

Guess it's more common than I thought. I really wish voters who don't want to be registered with a party had some sort of say in the primaries though. It's not that we don't care or have an opinion. We just want to be free to make a decision without being tied to party lines. Oh well. I can see how that could turn into a logistical nightmare.

Actually, it does exist in a few places. It is called an open primary.

 

States with an open presidential primary

 

States with open primaries for other elections

[JennyD]

Guess it's more common than I thought. I really wish voters who don't want to be registered with a party had some sort of say in the primaries though. It's not that we don't care or have an opinion. We just want to be free to make a decision without being tied to party lines. Oh well. I can see how that could turn into a logistical nightmare.

 

I think it's less logistics and more that the parties worry about strategic voting (i.e., I vote for a candidate that i have no intention of ever supporting because I think that s/he is the weakest opponent to my preferred candidate).

 

Some states (not mine) do have open primaries. I'm sure that political scientists have studied the ramifications but I don't know anything about that research.

[angela in ohio]

This happened a lot in the big city we used to live in, and it happens a lot in the tiny town we now live in. There are six people running this year unopposed. In the big city, it was because there was one very dominant party. The primary was where the action was, because instead of two parties, there were two groups from the same party that fought it out (if that makes sense.) The local media called them Team A and Team B. :lol: Because of the industries in the area and the urban setting, only one party had any real shot at winning a race.

 

Out here, I think it's because everyone knows the incumbent and no one wants to run against them. :001_smile: Especially in judicial races, it's often pointless to run against the incumbent. Political affiliation means a bit less here. We used to vote a straight ticket when we lived in the city, but there are local races that can go either way now. You can really get to know people.

 

Dh and i are such geeks, though, that we actually sit and research whether to vote for those running unopposed. :D

Edited November 2, 2010 by angela in ohio

[lisamarie]

On the local level, it's usually because there are only so many people who even want the position. 2 years ago I ran for trustee of my village and there were 3 open seats and only 2 candidates. A third person did win the 3rd seat by being a write in with only 18 votes. This year the 4 open seats are incumbents all running unopposed because no one else wanted to run.

 

Other times it is an incumbent running unopposed because no one wants to bother running against them because it's highly unlikely they'll win. Or else in a heavily one-party area, the election is won in the primary so there will only be one option on the general election ballot.

 

This year I was actually pretty surprised by how many "extra" parties there were on the ballot. Usually we get the Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and sometimes the Green Party, and this year a new one was the U.S. Taxpayers or something like that. I'm not sure I've ever seen that party on the ballot before.

[FaithManor]

It's happening a lot here on the local levels. Every county and township has been so hard hit in the budget departments and there are NO good places to make cuts but cuts must be made. So, no one wants a lot of these jobs because it will be a lot like sitting with your hind end in the fire! There is no glory for those that make the tough choices and help an area survive. The poor local politicians are only known for being "that guy over there that cut my program's budget!"

 

It's disheartening because America is supposed to be about choice at elections and then you get there and NO CHOICE!

 

Faith