What’s in a name? Election officials worked into the morning counting – and sometimes decoding – write-in votes

Published 8:31 am Monday, August 11, 2014

Photo by Abby Morris-Frye A dry-erase board shows a range of spellings questioned by write-in ballot-counters after the polls closed Thursday in Carter County. All of the variations shown were deemed acceptable.

Photo by Abby Morris-Frye
A dry-erase board shows a range of spellings questioned by write-in ballot-counters after the polls closed Thursday in Carter County. All of the variations shown were deemed acceptable.

Mark Twain once said “Anyone who can only think of one way to spell a word obviously lacks imagination.”
Election officials worked into the wee hours Friday morning as they counted write-in votes – and encountered a bit of imagination with some of the creative ways voters chose to spell candidates’ names.
Administrator of Elections Tracy Harris said counting of write-in votes began after polls closed at 8 p.m. on Thursday night and continued until about 4 Friday morning.
Once the counting began, it could not be stopped, she said.
Just days before the election, members of the Election Commission approved a long list of various spellings of the names of four certified write-in candidates. Though the list was extensive, members of the commission said there was no way to include every possible spelling of a name on the list, so they voted to give themselves some leeway in making sure votes were counted.
That leeway was needed.
If a name was encountered during the counting process that was not on the spelling list, the vote was set to the side and members of the Election Commission inspected the questioned vote to see if voter intent could be determined.
Harris said the vast majority of the write-in votes cast during Thursday’s election were determined to be countable for the candidate. She added those votes which were determined to not be countable were either for individuals who were not certified write-in candidates or the voter’s intent could not be determined.
In the race for Carter County sheriff, 5,416 write-in votes were completed. Of that number, 5,291 were determined to be for certified write-in candidate Chris Mathes. Only 125 of the write-in votes were not countable as votes for Mathes.
Mathes lost the election to Republican nominee Dexter Lunceford by a margin of 1,703 votes.
The race for superintendent of roads, 2,736 write-in votes were cast. Of those votes, 2,583 were counted for certified write-in candidate Jason Shell, leaving 153 votes which could not be counted.
Shell lost the election to Republican nominee Roger Colbaugh by a margin of 5,931 votes.
In the race for Circuit Court clerk, certified write-in candidate Donna McKinney received 567 of the 638 write-in votes cast, leaving 71 votes not countable.
McKinney lost to Republican nominee Johnny Blankenship, who received 7,731 votes. John Street, who ran as an independent candidate for that office, received 2,974 votes.
The Third District constable’s race saw 75 write-in votes cast. Of those, 63 were for certified write-in candidate Jerry Miller, with 12 votes that could not be counted.
Miller lost his try for one of two constable positions to Republican nominees James T. Bowers, who received 812 votes, and Scott Whaley, who received 925 votes.
In addition to the votes for the certified write-in candidates, election workers also saw some imaginative ways in which residents exercised their right to vote.
Some voters were of the opinion that popular cartoon characters such as “Donald Duck,” his three nephews “Huey,” “Dewey,” and “Louie,” and the ever-popular “Mickey Mouse” would be better suited to public office than the cadidates whose names appeared on the ballot.
Harris said votes for cartoon characters were something of a tradition in write-in votes.
Some write in votes simply said “N/A” while others expressed the sentiment “anyone but.”
One voter cast a write-in ballot for the office of county mayor which said “eliminate the position.”
Several voters did multiple write-ins on their ballot, using the same name, possibly their own, for a variety of different offices.

Subscribe to our free email newsletter

Get the latest news sent to your inbox