Name order on ballots: important issue for Super Tuesday?

[Unsane]

When watching post-NH primary coverage, one pundit cited as a partial reason why Obama may have lost a few votes was because his name was buried on the ballot. That is, when physically looking at a paper (or electronic) ballot in NH, voters had to scroll down a long list of Democratic candidates before finding his name. Hillary's name was the first name listed on the ballot. The argument is that by forcing voters to labor in order to find Obama's name on the ballot, a few undoubtedly give up and simply vote for their second choice.

Moving ahead to other voting primaries (such as SC and subsequent Super Tuesday states), has any person heard whether Obama's name is still buried on the ballots, or if it is listed near the top (where it should be for a mainstream candidate)?

[Gman]

1. Ballot order is usually luck of the draw

in other words, it's names drawn out of a hat for ballot order.

Ballot order can be important in elections where there are a lot of undecideds, ... like coming up Super Tuesday.

[Unsane]

3. Is that really how it's decided?

Universally?

Biden, Richardson, Dodd's names I assume are removed? But people like Mike Gravel and Lee Mercer Jr would still be in the hat, so to speak?

And yes, it will be important.

[Gman]

5. Yeah, universally. That is the only fair way to do it

Mercer or Gravel could be first and Hillary or Obama last. Here in Texas each county has a drawing for ballot positions. Someone could be first in Dallas and last in Houston and in the middle somewhere else. It's luck of the draw.

[Pyrzqxgl]

2. In most states not all ballots have the names in the same order.

Whereas Edwards may be listed first on one ballot, Obama might be first on another in the same precinct.

[bbinacan]

4. Well if they vote based

on the sole reason that the candidate is close to the top of the batting order, then they're too fucking stupid to vote and should stay home.:mad: