[EM] Uncontested elections

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 08:07 AM 12/29/2005, PROUT - Progressive Utilisation wrote:
>Can uncontested elections, eg 3 candidates for 3 positions, be considered
>real elections.  What is the theory. Are they valid.
>
>It appears that an uncontested election can still be a valid election.  On a
>quick look around there are numerous instances of this and it is the norm.
>Here are a few examples.

The provision for write-in candidates is, in my view, an essential 
safeguard against coercion and intimidation. It could be that nobody 
else is willing to declare a candidacy because of serious personal 
danger from doing so; in this context, the electorate may still elect 
an alternative through write-in vote.

Indeed, to my mind, "running for election" has always had a bad taste 
to it. Kind of like lawyers who solicit business, "Trust Me, I can 
get you lots of money for your injuries."

Obviously, there are jurisdictions where write-in candidacies are not 
allowed (or are not considered important enough to merit holding a 
poll), but even where there is no write-in, or no successful 
write-in, the vote for a candidate is an indication of support. It is 
one thing, for example, where a sole candidate, on 10,000 ballots, 
with votes cast for other offices, has few marked ballots for his or 
her election, and quite another if most of the ballots contain a vote 
for that sole candidate.

In my view, elections are really a poor substitute for direct 
deliberative democratic process, where, even if there were no more 
than one candidate for an office, would require a motion, due 
process, and a vote before the sole candidate is considered elected. 
It is a peculiarity of some statutory jurisdictions, such as 
generally in the U.S., that an election can take place without the 
approval of a majority of those voting.