1. Explain the difference between hard and soft money:
Hard money is money raised usually for one candidate. Soft money is money given to party organizations for "party-building activities".

2. What is the electoral process and is this something that you agree or disagree with and why?
First a possible candidate has to be nominated, and then they can run for office.
I agree. There are alot of ways to be nominated to run for office so it gives alot of people who would like to run a chance.
3. What is the difference between a closed and open primary?
In a closed primary, only the members of that party can vote. In an open primary, any registered voter can vote.
4. Explain what absentee voting is and what the positives and negative may be with regards to it:
Absentee voting is a process by which someone can vote without actually going to polling places on election day.  It would allow someone to vote even if they had to work or were going to be out of town.
5. What changes do you see in the way we run elections ten years from now?
I don't think there will be alot of changes, but I could see us having candidates from more than two parties in presidential elections.

6. Explain your views on money and elections with regards the amount of money that is spent:
I realize that money is needed to campaign, but a rediculous amount of money is being spent on campaigns, and I think a good amount of it could be put to better use.

7. Go to cnn.com or foxnews.com and find an article dealing with the election process.  Post the article in your blog and provide your viewpoints pertaining to the article.

(CNN)- The judge presiding over Alaska's Senate race challenge is expected to issue a ruling Friday.

Arguments began Wednesday in the legal challenge filed by Joe Miller which asserts that Alaska law prohibits misspelled write-in ballots from being counted and bars the state from applying more lenient standards for write-in ballots than other ballots.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski ran for re-election as a write-in candidate, after losing the Republican primary to Miller.
Five weeks after election day, Miller trails Murkowski by over 10,000 votes.
But a federal court will not allow the election results to be certified until the state court rules.
Joe Miller's lawsuit against the Alaska Division of Elections is expected to be decided in two days.
The Murkowski campaign considers this a positive step toward resolving the case in time for Murkowski to be certified as the winner before the Senate convenes on January 5.
"Mr. Miller today continued his efforts to disenfranchise Alaska voters, and he is continuing these efforts without the possibility of winning the election," Murkowski's campaign manager Kevin Sweeney said, in a statement Wednesday.
"While we are fighting for the fundamental and constitutional principle that every Alaskan's vote should count, we cannot determine exactly what principle Mr. Miller is trying to defend by seeking to take those votes out."
Miller explained his motive, saying, "This is not about my winning or losing. This is about upholding the integrity of the electoral process, and ensuring that the public can be confident in the results."
In a statement, Miller cited concerns that include write-in ballots from precincts that appear to be in the same handwriting and people on the sex offender registry that have been recorded in election registers as having voted.
Calling these "circumstances (that) appear troubling enough to warrant further investigation," Miller said he expects a different result than Murkowski's camp.
"We are confident the court will enforce Alaska law as written, invalidate the illegal standards… and allow us to obtain further information regarding the other apparent improprieties with the election."
Miller's statement also indicated that the Superior Court will stay the effect of any order it enters on Friday to allow the losing side to appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court.

    I think Miller should let it go. He lost regardless of the spelling of names, and he's just creating problems.