An election is defined with one report precinct,
three partisan voter groups (Republican, Democrat, Libertarian) as well as a
polling voter group. Three jurisdiction-wide races are
- a endorsement race with the three partisan voter
- a non-endorsed question
endorsed precinct committee race linked to the polling voter group, with
three endorsed candidates
styles are created: one correctly contains the endorsement race, the
question and the precinct committee race, and the other contains the
endorsement race and question.
Or create a closed primary with a straight party race,
Should GEMS be able to distinguish that
question responses are non-endorseable?
Questions are treated like any candidate race. In
fact, you can endorse "yes" if you want.
Perhaps you are suggesting that we should not allow a
race to have an endorsement controlling race unless there are endorsed
candidates in the race? I suppose we could do that, but I don't really see
why we would want to. There is nothing paticularly "wrong" with assigning
an endorsement race with no endorsed candidates. Its just a strange thing
Consider the same election, without the
question. Two ballot styles are created, one correctly containing the
endorsement and precinct committee races, the other one erroneously containing
the endorsement race only.
believe this is the same as saying:
Create an election with exactly one race, an
endorsement race. Generate ballots. GEMS erroneously creates a
ballot with that race on it.
could add a feature to GEMS to not put the endorsement race on the ballot if
there are no races that use that endorsement race. If we find a
jurisdiction which has this condition, we will consider it. After
considering it, we will probably conclude it is easier to not print that