I would agree that the best way for a candidate to remove himself from consideration for the ticket would be to say something like: I am not running for this ticket and I will not accept the nomination if offered. That way his or her intentions would be plain to all.
Submitted by officeworks on April 7, 2024 - 9:15am.
While the candidate can most certainly decline by so saying, it is important to be assured that the person declining is, indeed, the candidate in question. Perhaps a requirement for a digital signature (or a .pdf of a live signature) at the outset would impose some security measure--for this and other issues.
Submitted by Deb from TX on April 7, 2024 - 10:00am.
It sounds like all the above ideas have the issue thoroughly covered. The only thing I might add is a status on any Unity08 page of the candidate saying what the candidate's current position is on actually running: undecided, acceptance confirmed... Of course they'd be removed if they definitely declined. Maybe note when that was done so they don't drop out of sight completely.
Submitted by DallasKJG on April 19, 2024 - 8:20am.
I think the list of status is a good idea. Wouldn't you also want to know who refused for future reference? Once someone refuses, they should be removed from all ballots, obviously, but I think it would be worth-while to have a list of those who chose not to serve (or at least not to run as a Unity candidate.)
I would agree that the best way for a candidate to remove himself from consideration for the ticket would be to say something like: I am not running for this ticket and I will not accept the nomination if offered. That way his or her intentions would be plain to all.
I agree with nathanalbright (and probably others) --
If the candidate declares "I will not run if nominated and I will not serve if elected," we ought to believe them!
Ask three times, allowing for a polite refusal, or some misgivings. but at the third decline, take them at their word and move on.
I agree with the Sherman-like statement. It has become the standard in politics (although hardly used).
While the candidate can most certainly decline by so saying, it is important to be assured that the person declining is, indeed, the candidate in question. Perhaps a requirement for a digital signature (or a .pdf of a live signature) at the outset would impose some security measure--for this and other issues.
It sounds like all the above ideas have the issue thoroughly covered. The only thing I might add is a status on any Unity08 page of the candidate saying what the candidate's current position is on actually running: undecided, acceptance confirmed... Of course they'd be removed if they definitely declined. Maybe note when that was done so they don't drop out of sight completely.
Deb from TX
I think the list of status is a good idea. Wouldn't you also want to know who refused for future reference? Once someone refuses, they should be removed from all ballots, obviously, but I think it would be worth-while to have a list of those who chose not to serve (or at least not to run as a Unity candidate.)
Kevin Gilhooly
Dallas, TX