If there's one lesson I have learned from my runs for minor office [Buncombe Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor], it has been to greatly increase my appreciation for the secret ballot. It seems nothing less than miraculous that suddenly, in a community that, far from outgrowing middle school, merely heaps employment concerns upon its oppressions, [and] election day can turn a political and personal world of absolutely zero-solidarity, total-pariah status and nearly universal censorship into one with over 12,000 secret admirers. …
One other thing that I have discovered about the secret ballot in my campaigns is its limits. I learned that although individual votes are secret, neighborhood (precinct) votes are not.
This neighborhood voter information will be extremely useful when I choose which neighborhood to live in, as it should be for everyone, but it also could easily subject voters to collective retaliation. …
— Alan Ditmore
Leicester
Huh?
And these rambling paranoid delusions are exactly why I’m so happy Mr. Ditmore was not elected, although I’m fascinated as to why 12,000 people actually voted for him.
I mean, come on…. His platform was “There’s too many people on the planet. HERP. DERP!”
Ditto. What a rambling stream of nearly incoherent verbiage.
Alan,
Will you have time now to do a show on public access with Jeff Turner now?
RB
I used to think Ditmore was Dionysis! LOL
Ditmore lives in Leicester but maybe not permanently?
“…but it also could easily subject voters to collective retaliation…”
It already does. We are collectively subjected to retaliation in the form of higher taxes and involuntary annexations.
Am I correct in recollecting that one’s past voting trends are public records and easily obtainable? If so, that negates much of the privacy protection that seret balloting provides.
“I used to think Ditmore was Dionysis! LOL
Ditmore lives in Leicester but maybe not permanently?”
Please. I might be wordy, but my posts usually come close to being coherent.