This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on September 6, 2012 9:48 AM. The previous post in this blog was Rogue Clackamas commission takes shaky bond deal into back room. The next post in this blog is "Street seats" nightmare gets closer. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Writing in LaVonne for mayor

We're dead serious when we say that we're writing in LaVonne Griffin-Valade for Portland mayor in November. Griffin-Valade, or "LVGV" for short, is capable, outspoken, and smart, and we think she'd make a great mayor. In contrast, the two candidates who are on the ballot will both be terrible -- equally terrible, but in different ways. So we're going with our gut and doing the right thing.

Can you write in a candidate's name in a runoff election? Absolutely, yes. But the votes won't be counted unless all write-in votes total more than one each of the two candidates whose names are printed.

Do you have to spell the write-in candidate's name perfectly? Probably not. But you don't get to abbreviate their name, at least according to this document from the Oregon secretary of state's office:

For example, Joseph Walton has publicly announced he is running a write-in campaign (he did not file to be on the printed ballot in time).... Counting boards, when tallying write-in votes for this office, will count the abbreviated name Joe Walton towards Joseph Walton, since Joe is a common abbreviation of Joseph. However, they may not count a write-in name of J Walton towards the count for Joseph Walton, because this initial "J" could stand for any number of names beginning with a J, such as Jane, Jim or Jessica.

In the case of Griffin-Valade, that's kind of a drag, because she's got a hard name to spell out. It would be great if we could just write "Lavonne," but that's not going to be good enough. How about "Lavonne Griffin," without the "Valade"? That might fly, but we wouldn't count on it.

So think about joining us in writing in her name. And get practicing.

Comments (26)

LaVonne Griffin-Valade
LaVonne Griffin-Valade
LaVonne Griffin-Valade
LaVonne Griffin-Valade
LaVonne Griffin-Valade

OK, I think I am ready. ;o)

And yeah, there is no way am I voting for either Smith or Hales.

Having worked at COP, she is one sharp cookie, and seems willing to address difficult City issues, though no one, certainly at the O, seems inclined to report much about her findings.

Hopefully, she can be convinced to run in 2016.

It's interesting ... and more than a bit sad ... that she seems to stand out among top city officials because she does her job competently.

She's got my vote.

I was going to hold my nose (very tightly) and vote for Hales, in order to keep Jefferson Smith out of office. Smith seems an awful lot like Adams to me - "Young! Frenetic! Big ideas!"

Anyway, Hales decided to secretly record and leak a conversation like something out of the Wire, or a Jimmy Hoffa movie. We don't need someone doing that sort of stuff from the Mayor's office.

A craven cop-out. One of the two miscreants on the ballot will be our next Mayor. We need to pick the lesser of two leasts, whoever that may be. There was a time for other choices. It's the primary election. If you think this is a way to absolve yourselves from responsibility for the election result, that's a fantasy.

I didn't vote for either of them in the primary and I'm not going to do it now. I don't think it is a way to absolve myself from anything, I'm just voting my conscience.

And, IMO (no more or less valid than your own) there is no lesser of the two leasts...they are equally unpalatable to me, and I do not believe that either of them would be a good mayor for our city. I cannot vote for someone who I think will completely suck in office, if you can and want to do that, more power to ya.

I'd just not vote for mayor, but I DO think that LaVonne (or Scott Fernandez, I voted for him in the primary) would make a good mayor. And having a write-in candidate who even gathers enough votes to make the news sends a message that there was not overall support for the two lousy choices on the ballot.

Allan L. wrote: "A craven cop-out."

I read your rational.

But there are sitations where BOTH candidates violate a person's values and principles.

If such is the case and a person has enough revulsion towards both candidates, then, I see nothing wrong with voting for a third party or candidate.

If enough people do that it sends a message.

I do agree that likely it will have minimal impact, still, who are you to tell others it's a cop-out.

Just goes to show, one man's cop-out is another person's principled stand.

So, where you stand, depends on where you sit.

And, that's politics.

Get used to it.

It's pathetic that the two "supported" candidates present a choice between excrement from animal "A" vs animal "B".

I'm in!

I voted for Scott and agree that he'd have made a much better candidate than either of the "run-off" contenders. They both elicit revulsion and emesis, rather than trust.

From what I've heard about the Auditor's researches, I will happily write in LaVonne's full hyphenated name.

Go LaVonne Griffith-Valade!

There is no way I am voting for dumb and corrupteder.

I do have to derive some pleasure since Sam must be kicking himself for not running.

I'll write her in for sure. I think she has more ethics based on her stand than about everyone rolled together in City Hall. What'd they say, you can wade thru the ocean of souls there and barely get your feet wet?

LaVonne Griffin-Valade

Got it, and it will be easy because I see no difference between either candidate for Mayor, and I feel both would be just as bad. Either way, Portland is lost!

Smith will turn Portland into an complete public laughingstock. Hales will keep order and quietly enrich his pals.
I think I will vote for Smith to bring on the zombie apocalypse then get rescued eventually.

"I think I will vote for Smith to bring on the zombie apocalypse then get rescued eventually."

Agreed. Hales will be status quo. I think we need to reach the abyss before the masses will wake up. Voting for LaVonne is a waste and serves no purpose except for the right to say I told you so later.

I agree with "m" and "ConcordBridge." I am reluctantly voting for Smith only because it will speed up the inevitable fiscal collapse of the City. Hales will maintain the status quo, which merely prolongs the City's death spiral. With the triumvirate of Smith, Novick and Fish, the death spiral speeds up considerably and maybe, just maybe, the voters wake up and the ship can at last be righted. Otherwise, I'd happily vote for LVGV.

That's an interesting argument to vote for Smith.

The Russians couldn't keep Napoleon and his army from taking Moscow so they burned it down to make it inhospitable to the invader, sort of like using chemotherapy to kill off cancer.

Would Smith be chemotherapy for Portland?

I'm in with LaVonne, too. And I don't view her as a protest vote. Writing in Mickey Mouse would be a protest vote. Writing in Ms. Griffin-Valade is a vote for sensible, proven leadership. Probably no one can prevent Portland falling off the fiscal cliff, but if anyone can, it's LaVonne.

Re: Smith: remember, that we were all wondering aloud about how long Adams could possibly make it in office before imploding and he's still here.

Can supporters of a write-in candidate legally campaign for the write-in candidate during an election? Can a write-in candidate campaign at this point in an election? Talk about keeping Portland weird...

We see her picture on the side of the blog, but it would really be worthwhile to have some of her accomplishments to pass on to others that each of us who are interested in voting for her, could pass on to our friends. Then if interested they could pass on to their friends etc. Is this material available? Remember unknown Bud Clark?

Ok Jack, I'm on board.

I voted Fernadez in the primary and while I'm surrounded by Smith voting family, I will at least be able to say I voted with a clean conscience.

I assume that since the pinheads in charge read this blog, that our candidate is aware of this. Would she dare comment here?

Also, are the other two smart enough to understand why people feel this way?

Roy -

The other two are smart enough, but they don't care as they are sure there is no opportunity for a "people's choice" candidate to compete in the face of the media pre selection of the three "viable" candidates in the primary.

Why can't the name "LaVonne" be legally registered in some fashion to substitute for Griffin-Valade so that Kate Brown and the Goldschmidt mafia can't throw it out? Does Kate throw out every write-in that is misspelled or she can't read with her horn-rimmed spectacles?

lw -

The Sec State has little if anything to do with counting the ballots or certifying the results in a City of Portland election. Its the Mult. Co. Director of Elections and in part, the City Auditor, Lavonne Griffin-Valade.

Nonny, well, that settles it. Let's have LaVonne count the ballots and certify the write-in attempts on her own behalf. Conflict of Interest means nothing around these parts. Her name in some fashion will be on my ballot.

I'm just going to sit this one out. There's no way a write-in is going anywhere, and the other two clowns aren't worth the ink. Although I believe one of the two is a lawyer. Just shows that anyone can get a law degree these days. Both are worthless losers, and the only reason they're on the ballot is because local media selected them.

I really think it's about time that Oregon seceded from Portlandia and forced it to become the 51st state.

I'm writing in Lavonne Griffin-Valade, who knows what the City Charter is and what is says. She had to know this to point out the risk the taxpayers are put in by the violations of the City Charter by city officials. If, by a miracle, she is elected, she will no doubt have some ideas about how to clean up the adolescent-boy messes.

Clicky Web Analytics