HONESTLY! What is the point of unopposed candidates appearing on ballots?

Question

Could you think of a bigger display of egotism? Is it to create the illusion that we've actually been given a choice? I'm always tempted to write "Elmer Fudd" in the blank.

Really? Can you give me examples of when that's happened? And what's the chance that each individual will pick enough the same choice on such an open-ended write-in? And who has enough friends to persuade that it would change the stats?

Answer 1

It is to give you a choice. You don't HAVE to vote for that candidate if you don't want to. And here, for your write-in questions, is a recent example:

Kantele Franko
University Wire
05-03-2006
(The Post) (U-WIRE) ATHENS, Ohio -- Despite a filing error that kept his name from Wednesday's ballot, Ohio Sen. Charlie Wilson's grassroots campaign as a write-in candidate paid off as he captured the Democratic primary for the U.S. Congressional seat for Ohio's 6th District.

With incomplete reports from four counties, Wilson had grabbed more than 60 percent of the district votes in a rare write-in win; Bob Carr and John Luchansky, the candidates listed on the ballot, received about 24 percent and 12 percent, respectively.

Answer 2

Actually, it's so you are given a choice. Instead of complaining about it, commit yourself to a write-in campaign. If not for yourself, then for the opponent defeated in the primaries, or for a community leader whom you support. Yes, write-in campaigns do win elections, even over "un-opposed" incumbants.

Answer 3

To lend the appearance of legitimacy.