- Joined
- Jul 14, 2008
- Messages
- 18,490
- Points
- 113
is there some hinting that the RO could "influence" the outcome of the voting from reading this post? This is serious...
You don't think the government is daft enough to do something so stupid ... the whole world watches this election.
Ok, I admit I am one of the "naive" sheep regarding the role of the RO. He is supposedly to be neutral.
One of his job / role is to decide on marking and decide if an ambiguously marked vote slip as acceptable or not right? but during the vote counting, all candidates can send representative to view the process no? They will know if there is an ambiguity?
And there is always the avenue of requesting for re-count - as in the case in this erection.
And as pointed out by one brother - we get to vote and just that 60% chose to vote MIW.
I got another question, i know regarding the constitution the CEO of PA always become the RO. However, since voting concerns the constitution and needs to be very transparent and impartial. Why not the CJ be the RO? Like that he represent the law, he is neutral.
You don't think the government is daft enough to do something so stupid ... the whole world watches this election.
Ok, I admit I am one of the "naive" sheep regarding the role of the RO. He is supposedly to be neutral.
One of his job / role is to decide on marking and decide if an ambiguously marked vote slip as acceptable or not right? but during the vote counting, all candidates can send representative to view the process no? They will know if there is an ambiguity?
And there is always the avenue of requesting for re-count - as in the case in this erection.
And as pointed out by one brother - we get to vote and just that 60% chose to vote MIW.
I got another question, i know regarding the constitution the CEO of PA always become the RO. However, since voting concerns the constitution and needs to be very transparent and impartial. Why not the CJ be the RO? Like that he represent the law, he is neutral.