Perennial Nevada election loser ‘none’ records its best showing in a presidential contest

CARSON CITY — Nevada’s perpetual ballot loser “none” took more votes than ever before in Tuesday’s presidential contest, reflecting dissatisfaction among some of the electorate with both major party candidates.

“None of these candidates,” a unique option on all statewide races in Nevada for 40 years, received 28,824 votes, or 2.6 percent of the total, in the presidential contest between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton.

“None” came in fourth behind Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. Clinton won Nevada with 48 percent, but Trump swept a large swath of the country to become president-elect.

David Damore, a nonpartisan political science professor at UNLV who has studied the effect of “none” on Nevada election outcomes, said he was surprised it did not receive more votes, given that both Trump and Clinton suffered from low likability ratings.

In comparison, “none” received a mere 5,770 votes in the 2012 presidential contest between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney and 6,267 when Obama defeated John McCain in 2008.

“None” came in third in the hotly contested U.S. Senate race to replace retiring Democratic Minority Leader Harry Reid. But while it played a role in the defeat of Republican Joe Heck by Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto, it alone wasn’t a spoiler.

Four other candidates received a combined 48,850 votes — 6,765 more than “none” — and also siphoned potential votes from the two major party contenders.

“None’s” strongest showing came in five Nevada appellate court races — all of which had incumbents running unopposed. “None” can never win an election. If it did get the most votes, the candidate with the next highest vote tally would be declared the victor.

In the two Supreme Court and three Court of Appeals races, “none” earned nearly 30 percent of votes cast.

Damore was among the hundreds of thousands of voters who preferred “none” in those races over the sitting members of the Nevada judiciary.

“I think it’s offensive when there’s no choice on the ballot,” he said.

Contact Sandra Chereb at schereb@reviewjournal.com or 775-461-3821. Follow @SandraChereb on Twitter.