Well, another nefarious scheme by some ballot designer or another is apparently not all that nefarious after all. The Ohio ballot SNAFU mentioned earlier on MO and all over most of the Conservative hemisphere of the blogosphere appears to be nothing more than a combination of confusing design, misunderstanding of the process, and photoshopping jerks.
As I wrote earlier:
Before everyone gets all revolutionary about this, we need to find out which (if either) of the pictures represents the actual ballot.
What I wanted to see, in order to verify claims that the order of candidates rotated and/or that John Kerry wouldn’t always be the beneficiary of the confusing ballot, was a picture of a different ballot.
Gail, who also commented on my site earlier with some good info, sent him a pic of one of these alleged ballots with candidates in a different order. Go check out the Politburo Diktat for the goods.
Curiously, this version of the ballot also seems to fit the 4-6-8-10-12 pattern IF you put ‘1’s in front of some numbers. (Well, the theory actually held that the candidates were numbered 6-8-10-12-14, but you get the idea.) I find that a little weird, and the photoshopping claims against some earlier versions (some of which appear to be ‘real’ photoshops(?)) would also apply to these.
Of course, this ‘Gail’ could just be John Edwards putting in a little OT trying to convince us the nefarious plot isn’t so nefarious after all. Now THAT would be nefarious.
(Speaking of ‘nefarious’, have I mentioned that the Democrats are going to make an electoral quagmire out of Ohio?)
In any event, I’m a little relieved that this is just ‘normal’ election confusion instead of ‘intentional’ election confusion. I think.