thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 12th, 2014 at 12:00:30 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Way too inaccurate and would take way too long. You can debate what kind of machines work best, but a hand-count can only work in very thinly populated areas.



Like the UK?
Very thinly populated, that island of 60 million plus. It works. There is no need of diebold machines or any other craziness. UK election results are done in 24 hours. First results in the cities are counted withing 60 minutes. Same in Canada, you get boxes counted for some wards within 30 minutes of the polls closing, reported and up on Elections Canada. Plus, as I say, there is not requirement for election results to be done fast, only a desire by the media.

But punch machines are fine. Just make it a simple rule... either the hole is punched and it's a vote, or it's not. Make the onus on the elector to check their vote.

Quote:


My only issue with absentee ballots is that I feel you should be required to vote in-person with ID the first time you vote (ie: no absentee ballot for your first vote.) Only way out is pick up the absentee ballot at election bureau in person. This is to prevent fraud and should not hinder anyone.



That seems reasonable, assuming military personnel and the like can get their ballots sent to them still? Going to the election bureau I would assume be whatever is local regardless of where you vote? Say I am out of state for a one month job posting, but the ballot isn't printed until 2 weeks before the election. Then what?
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
March 12th, 2014 at 12:26:33 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit



But punch machines are fine. Just make it a simple rule... either the hole is punched and it's a vote, or it's not. Make the onus on the elector to check their vote.



As I said, we can debate the kind of machine. I'd rather optical-read where you fill in a choice SAT-style than punch machines but just because I dislike moving parts. At my precinct it is all touch-screen. I told them they should have it make a fake "ker-chunk" sound like the old lever ones did just like slots have coin-drop sounds, just for satisfaction sake.



Quote:

That seems reasonable, assuming military personnel and the like can get their ballots sent to them still? Going to the election bureau I would assume be whatever is local regardless of where you vote? Say I am out of state for a one month job posting, but the ballot isn't printed until 2 weeks before the election. Then what?



Military could get them sent as long as they were registered to vote and voted once prior to deployment, same as anyone else. Most military folks will have had this taken care of, few will decide they want to vote for the first time while on a deployment then register by mail. If it was still an issue, major bases could stamp or otherwise certify the registration.

Election Bureaus are generally at the county seat. In your out-of-state example you would need to have someone forward your mail.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 12th, 2014 at 12:37:19 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

As I said, we can debate the kind of machine. I'd rather optical-read where you fill in a choice SAT-style than punch machines but just because I dislike moving parts. At my precinct it is all touch-screen. I told them they should have it make a fake "ker-chunk" sound like the old lever ones did just like slots have coin-drop sounds, just for satisfaction sake.



And as I said, you don't need them at all. ;)


Quote:

Military could get them sent as long as they were registered to vote and voted once prior to deployment, same as anyone else. Most military folks will have had this taken care of, few will decide they want to vote for the first time while on a deployment then register by mail. If it was still an issue, major bases could stamp or otherwise certify the registration.

Election Bureaus are generally at the county seat. In your out-of-state example you would need to have someone forward your mail.



Gotcha, the registration has to be in person, not the collection of the ballot.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
March 12th, 2014 at 12:46:17 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

And as I said, you don't need them at all. ;)



I just prefer their accuracy. If you have ever taken inventory in a warehouse or storeroom you know how easy it is to mis-count something. Even when you balance a till you can be off because of a miscount. With ballots getting longer and longer all the time this becomes an issue.

FWIW not only does the media demand a quick count, the public does as well. When Spitzer got elected NY-AG it took forever to get a count. I was with one of my bosses and asked if he heard anything and he said "I just had the same conversation with Frank yesterday. No idea."


Quote:

Gotcha, the registration has to be in person, not the collection of the ballot.



Only if they want to vote absentee the first time they vote. After that it is established they are not someone's Border Collie. I would also have a limit absentee ballots you could make before you were purged, same as if you do not vote for 6-8 years in most places. Then you need to show up again. If you are an expatriate for that long you are no longer a resident anyways.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
Beethoven9th
Beethoven9th
  • Threads: 75
  • Posts: 5072
Joined: Jul 30, 2012
March 12th, 2014 at 1:35:53 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

But we do not need all this "early voting" for a week before. It was called Election Day for a reason.

+1

As you said, it's Election DAY, not Election MONTH or Election WEEK.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 12th, 2014 at 3:33:09 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

I just prefer their accuracy. If you have ever taken inventory in a warehouse or storeroom you know how easy it is to mis-count something. Even when you balance a till you can be off because of a miscount. With ballots getting longer and longer all the time this becomes an issue.



As long as there is a physical slip of paper. I really don't trust electronic voting machines.

Quote:

FWIW not only does the media demand a quick count, the public does as well. When Spitzer got elected NY-AG it took forever to get a count. I was with one of my bosses and asked if he heard anything and he said "I just had the same conversation with Frank yesterday. No idea."



Sure, but it doesn't matter if Spitzer is elected Thursday or Monday, in the grand scheme of things.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
March 21st, 2014 at 6:31:39 PM permalink
Lest anyone think trying to ban Voter ID is about enabling fraud, Woman Convicted of Voter Fraud Honored by Ohio Democrats!

Now, why would any party honor someone who went to jail for voter fraud when there supposedly is no fraud?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
March 24th, 2014 at 4:33:42 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Lest anyone think trying to ban Voter ID is about enabling fraud, Woman Convicted of Voter Fraud Honored by Ohio Democrats!

Now, why would any party honor someone who went to jail for voter fraud when there supposedly is no fraud?



They've been positioning their argument as "there isn't much fraud" so it isn't worth all the effort to prevent it. They are okay with some of it; they even honor it! My position on a guy locally (Republican) who is accused of voter fraud is prosecute him to the fullest if you have the evidence. I am consistent--the same goes for ANYONE accused of voter fraud. The position they seem to support is to have someone "take one for the team" and vote 8 or 9 times, then celebrate them as some kind of a hero.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 3:52:12 AM permalink
I am so glad there is no Voter Fraud going on in the USA!

35,000 people voting more than once is hardly a reason to require ID to vote and purge the rolls regularly.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 4:21:53 AM permalink
...for those who don't like Fox, here is another link on the same topic:

"North Carolina's check found 765 registered North Carolina voters who appear to match registered voters in other states on their first names, last names, dates of birth and the final four digits of their Social Security numbers. Those voters appear to have voted in North Carolina in 2012 and also voted in another state in 2012."

"The crosscheck also found 35,570 voters in North Carolina who voted in 2012 whose first names, last names and dates of birth match those of voters who voted in other states in 2012, but whose Social Security numbers were not matched."

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/politics&id=9489311

Nothing at all to worry about, folks!!

Clear matches on over 700 folks, pretty darn good matches on 35,000 or so, and 50 or so dead people who voted.

There is no voter fraud. There is no voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

Perhaps it is time for Voter ID and SS (Last Four) confirmation. At the local level, one vote sometimes makes the difference.

I am sure some of the numbers will move down as they investigate this issue--they usually move in ongoing investigations like this--but this clearly points to a problem with voter identity.

Do you want your vote to truly count or not?
Twirdman
Twirdman
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 5:11:24 AM permalink
Quote: RonC

...for those who don't like Fox, here is another link on the same topic:

"North Carolina's check found 765 registered North Carolina voters who appear to match registered voters in other states on their first names, last names, dates of birth and the final four digits of their Social Security numbers. Those voters appear to have voted in North Carolina in 2012 and also voted in another state in 2012."

"The crosscheck also found 35,570 voters in North Carolina who voted in 2012 whose first names, last names and dates of birth match those of voters who voted in other states in 2012, but whose Social Security numbers were not matched."

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/politics&id=9489311

Nothing at all to worry about, folks!!

Clear matches on over 700 folks, pretty darn good matches on 35,000 or so, and 50 or so dead people who voted.

There is no voter fraud. There is no voter fraud. There is no voter fraud.

Perhaps it is time for Voter ID and SS (Last Four) confirmation. At the local level, one vote sometimes makes the difference.

I am sure some of the numbers will move down as they investigate this issue--they usually move in ongoing investigations like this--but this clearly points to a problem with voter identity.

Do you want your vote to truly count or not?



Again the 35,570 are not pretty good cases sine it is easily possible to share a first and last name and even birth date with someone if you have a common enough name like John Smith. So lets go with the clear cases 700 how would those have been prevented by voter ID? it was most likely someone who voted in their own state where they could have easily presented an ID since we are not accusing them of voting as another person and then sent in their standard absentee ballot.

And you can't just get rid of absentee ballots since there are a number of people who use them for legitimate purposes for instance military families, students, or a host of others who have to be out of the state for one reason or another.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 5:28:29 AM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

Again the 35,570 are not pretty good cases sine it is easily possible to share a first and last name and even birth date with someone if you have a common enough name like John Smith. So lets go with the clear cases 700 how would those have been prevented by voter ID? it was most likely someone who voted in their own state where they could have easily presented an ID since we are not accusing them of voting as another person and then sent in their standard absentee ballot.



Well, as a start if you require a state issued ID it makes it harder as when you get a new drivers license they punch a hole in the old one to show it is void. If you put expiration dates on the ID then the person needs to get a new one which is harder if they moved.

But hey, we are only talking about keeping clean elections and all. What is the big deal, right? First it wasn't happening at all so we don't need ID. Then we show a woman in OH who voted for Obama 6 times but that was an isolated thing and no big deal. Now 35,000 possibles, 700 clear matches, and 50 dead people and still no big deal?

When will liberals give up and admit the only reason to be against Voter ID is to be for voter fraud? EVERYONE has or can easily get an ID.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 5:41:43 AM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

Again the 35,570 are not pretty good cases sine it is easily possible to share a first and last name and even birth date with someone if you have a common enough name like John Smith. So lets go with the clear cases 700 how would those have been prevented by voter ID? it was most likely someone who voted in their own state where they could have easily presented an ID since we are not accusing them of voting as another person and then sent in their standard absentee ballot.

And you can't just get rid of absentee ballots since there are a number of people who use them for legitimate purposes for instance military families, students, or a host of others who have to be out of the state for one reason or another.



It isn't as simple as Voter ID, though that is one step that needs to be implemented. All of the noise about how it discriminates and keeps down the vote of certain people is rubbish. It is amazing how people can find an ID to do the things they truly want to do (cash a check, fly somewhere, apply for benefits, etc.) but it is somehow impossible to get them in order to vote.

That won't stamp out everything, I agree. That is where running these cross-checks of voter rolls before and after elections, perhaps notifying folks who are registered in two places that they have been noticed before the elections, prosecuting double voters, etc. could help. Requiring the last four of the SSN would be a good step to help the accuracy of the cross-matching.

I know--it all costs money. Perhaps a phased in approach would work best, adding more security measures as we find more issues.

The point right now is really not as much "how" we fix it as it is that their IS a voter fraud issue. One side has been denying this and their denial rings even more hollow today than it did before.
rxwine
rxwine
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 12164
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 8:31:32 AM permalink
Quote: RonC

It isn't as simple as Voter ID, though that is one step that needs to be implemented. All of the noise about how it discriminates and keeps down the vote of certain people is rubbish.



Except the courts have found the opposite with some laws. So, it can't all be rubbish. In fact even when there is voter fraud, it's still a separate issue from discriminatory laws.

Quote:

The point right now is really not as much "how" we fix it as it is that their IS a voter fraud issue.



Except that's exactly the complaint many Republicans make with the ACA. It DOES matter how we enact laws. Or does it? Which is it?

Quote:

One side has been denying this and their denial rings even more hollow today than it did before.



The other side have been trying to pass bad law and even get rid of early voting for very nebulous reasons. Clearly more than one side is passing gas and calling it righteous.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 8:42:35 AM permalink
Quote: rxwine

Except the courts have found the opposite with some laws. So, it can't all be rubbish. In fact even when there is voter fraud, it's still a separate issue from discriminatory laws.



But Voter ID is not a discriminatory law. It applies to everyone and affects everyone equally. Just show your ID at the polling place.


Quote:

The other side have been trying to pass bad law and even get rid of early voting for very nebulous reasons. Clearly more than one side is passing gas and calling it righteous.



The reason for getting rid of early voting is there is no good reason for it and by keeping polls open for days or weeks leaves more chances for fraud. It is Election DAY not Election Week/Month.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 8:48:40 AM permalink
Quote: RonC

It isn't as simple as Voter ID, though that is one step that needs to be implemented. All of the noise about how it discriminates and keeps down the vote of certain people is rubbish.



Quote: rxwine

Except the courts have found the opposite with some laws. So, it can't all be rubbish. In fact even when there is voter fraud, it's still a separate issue from discriminatory laws.



A court somewhere can find any which way; that doesn't mean that is the way it will end up when tested to the Supreme Court. I am sure that laws can be crafted to avoid discrimination and provide for identification. I'm fine with testing it through the courts; sometimes that helps knock the kinks out of things if they come close to discrimination.

Quote: RonC

The point right now is really not as much "how" we fix it as it is that their IS a voter fraud issue.



Quote: rxwine

Except that's exactly the complaint many Republicans make with the ACA. It DOES matter how we enact laws. Or does it? Which is it?



You took that particular sentence out of context--the articles cited show results that indicate voter fraud at a higher level than acknowledged by the "voter fraud deniers".

Of course it matters how we enact laws. The inept way the ACA (Obamacare) has been enacted is a great example of how not to do it. There is a whole thread about that for discussion of that issue.

Quote: RonC

One side has been denying this and their denial rings even more hollow today than it did before.



Quote: rxwine

The other side have been trying to pass bad law and even get rid of early voting for very nebulous reasons. Clearly more than one side is passing gas and calling it righteous.



If I take your statement for a fact, you are pretty much saying that neither side should do anything about it.

It is the whole Obama/Bush thing that everyone talks about--one was bad so the other one is allowed to be bad, too. In saying that, you are basically saying we'll just ignore voter fraud because the laws passed to prevent it might not be perfect. Why not acknowledge it and demand good laws?
rxwine
rxwine
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 12164
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 8:58:09 AM permalink
Quote: RonC

AIf I take your statement for a fact, you are pretty much saying that neither side should do anything about it.

It is the whole Obama/Bush thing that everyone talks about--one was bad so the other one is allowed to be bad, too. In saying that, you are basically saying we'll just ignore voter fraud because the laws passed to prevent it might not be perfect. Why not acknowledge it and demand good laws?



Hey now, you just brought up Bush not me. My statement only says both sides don't sound righteous rather than just one side.

This is a partisan issue. Not everyone on your side wants it for the right reason. I'm just stating what has been said by some, when they don't know the mic is hot.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
Twirdman
Twirdman
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 8:58:12 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Well, as a start if you require a state issued ID it makes it harder as when you get a new drivers license they punch a hole in the old one to show it is void. If you put expiration dates on the ID then the person needs to get a new one which is harder if they moved.

But hey, we are only talking about keeping clean elections and all. What is the big deal, right? First it wasn't happening at all so we don't need ID. Then we show a woman in OH who voted for Obama 6 times but that was an isolated thing and no big deal. Now 35,000 possibles, 700 clear matches, and 50 dead people and still no big deal?

When will liberals give up and admit the only reason to be against Voter ID is to be for voter fraud? EVERYONE has or can easily get an ID.



Again this doesn't prevent anything since what about people who vote absentee? I mean this might be a big issue but saying voter ID will fix it is simply wrong. Right now I live in Florida and haven't yet but could easily get a Florida license and register to vote in Florida, all things I probably will do since I will be here for the next 4 to 5 years or more depending on how long grad school takes. What is stopping me from then getting an absentee ballot from California where I am still registered to vote. I have a legitimate ID in the state I am voting in in person. Are we to stop allowing absentee ballots because what about students who don't want to change their place of residence and want to still vote in their old state. What about military. Again ID does nothing for this problem.

RonC brought up a good point about purging voter rolls every so often and I agree we should do that. If it is clear someone is registered in multiple places they are given say 1 month, give or take some time just threw out a number, to rectify it if they don't they are automatically purged from the system. Or we could simply have it that registering in one state automatically removes you from being registered in the other state. Those can actually prevent this kind of fraud and those I could agree with but you have to explain what a voter idea would do to stop a person from voting in 2 states.
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 9:15:20 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

The reason for getting rid of early voting is there is no good reason for it

It gives people greater flexibility in when they vote, and hence makes it less inconvenient to participate. I would think you would be in favor the government getting out of peoples way.

Early voting also reduces the waits on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. It is like flex time for civic participation.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 9:31:52 AM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

Again this doesn't prevent anything since what about people who vote absentee? I mean this might be a big issue but saying voter ID will fix it is simply wrong. Right now I live in Florida and haven't yet but could easily get a Florida license and register to vote in Florida, all things I probably will do since I will be here for the next 4 to 5 years or more depending on how long grad school takes. What is stopping me from then getting an absentee ballot from California where I am still registered to vote. I have a legitimate ID in the state I am voting in in person. Are we to stop allowing absentee ballots because what about students who don't want to change their place of residence and want to still vote in their old state. What about military. Again ID does nothing for this problem.



So your reply is basically that because ID won't solve every problem it won't solve any problem?

Quote:

Those can actually prevent this kind of fraud and those I could agree with but you have to explain what a voter idea would do to stop a person from voting in 2 states.



I already explained that when your ID in the old state expires it can no longer be used.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 9:34:27 AM permalink
Quote: endermike

It gives people greater flexibility in when they vote, and hence makes it less inconvenient to participate. I would think you would be in favor the government getting out of peoples way.



Nice try. Elections are a valid and constitutional responsibility of government.

Quote:

Early voting also reduces the waits on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. It is like flex time for civic participation.



Yes, that 20-25 minute wait can be a killer. Sorry, I still don't see the need.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 9:51:18 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Nice try. Elections are a valid and constitutional responsibility of government.

Yes. However, the government has great latitude in how they run elections. Choosing to set them up to be easy and convenient is a public good. Would you have no objection to the polls only being open from 2am to 4am on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November? I would. It would be obvious that the government is actively trying to reduce the number of people who vote. That isn't a good thing.

Quote: AZDuffman

Yes, that 20-25 minute wait can be a killer. Sorry, I still don't see the need.

Every presidential election cycle there are people who have to wait hours to vote.
Twirdman
Twirdman
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 9:54:47 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

So your reply is basically that because ID won't solve every problem it won't solve any problem?



I already explained that when your ID in the old state expires it can no longer be used.



But again no one is physically voting in 2 states so the second state can't check an ID. About not solving all problem this is the issue you chose to bring up to support voter ID so it is your job to either abandon as not proof or defend it. You have to present proof that an ID requirement both solves a problem, which you have failed to do with this 700 people example, are there problems possibly but it is your job to present those since you are the one arguing for ID. Then the question becomes does the benefit outweigh the cost and it is entirely possible that it does but again you first have to provide evidence of not just fraud but fraud that will be prevented by an ID.

Also you mention a 20 minute wait yeah that might be true in some districts but hardly all. You have plenty of less affluent districts having wait times in the hours sometime 4+ hours so yeah reduced wait time is a significant benefit.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 10:47:24 AM permalink
Quote: endermike

Yes. However, the government has great latitude in how they run elections. Choosing to set them up to be easy and convenient is a public good. Would you have no objection to the polls only being open from 2am to 4am on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November? I would. It would be obvious that the government is actively trying to reduce the number of people who vote. That isn't a good thing.



That is kind of a silly example. In most places polls are open 14-16 hours on election day, plenty of time for any normal person to get there. If you have an odd job like a trucker or oil platform worker you can get an absentee ballot.

Quote:

Every presidential election cycle there are people who have to wait hours to vote.



I have never seen anything like this in person. If it is the case then the local election bureau needs to add staffing.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 10:51:17 AM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

But again no one is physically voting in 2 states so the second state can't check an ID. About not solving all problem this is the issue you chose to bring up to support voter ID so it is your job to either abandon as not proof or defend it. You have to present proof that an ID requirement both solves a problem, which you have failed to do with this 700 people example, are there problems possibly but it is your job to present those since you are the one arguing for ID. Then the question becomes does the benefit outweigh the cost and it is entirely possible that it does but again you first have to provide evidence of not just fraud but fraud that will be prevented by an ID.



I already did this twice now. I did not say it was foolproof, I said it helps solve a problem. It does help and really at no cost to the voter, both good things.

Quote:

Also you mention a 20 minute wait yeah that might be true in some districts but hardly all. You have plenty of less affluent districts having wait times in the hours sometime 4+ hours so yeah reduced wait time is a significant benefit.



What does affluence have to do with wait times? You don't pay to get in some kind of faster line. All that has to happen is the county bureau needs to staff properly. Most I ever waited was about 30 minutes, which is not all that bad. There is no good reason it cannot be done in one day, and no good reason it should not.

For security reasons alone it should be in one day.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 11:16:26 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

That is kind of a silly example. In most places polls are open 14-16 hours on election day, plenty of time for any normal person to get there. If you have an odd job like a trucker or oil platform worker you can get an absentee ballot.

Many people have very busy lives. Finding an extra half an hour (or more) on a particular day is not something they wish to do. However by having an early option they can find time over the course a a week or two where it fits their schedule better, most notably weekends.

Quote: AZDuffman

I have never seen anything like this in person. If it is the case then the local election bureau needs to add staffing.

There have been many news stories. I forgive your missing them, however I would recommend eliminating that talking point from your argument. Using incorrect facts undercuts your valid points.

Edited: spelling
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 12:22:06 PM permalink
Quote: endermike

Many people have very busy lives. Finding an extra half an hour (or more) on a particular day is not something they wish to do. However by having an early option they can find time over the course a a week or two where it fits their schedule better, most notably weekends.



If they can't find an hour on the one day of the year there is an election then tough. Move your schedule around, you know all year what day the election is. Voting is not supposed to be as simple as ordering a pizza.

Quote:

There have been many news stories. I forgive your missing them, however I would recommend eliminating that talking point from your argument. Using incorrect facts undercuts your valid points.



Oh, I've seen a story or two. But it is not a widespread problem at all. If you read what I said I wrote "in person." The news media has been known to whip up problems, and I can easily see a local district intentionally making long lines to make the news and make the public think we need a week to vote. We do not.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
rxwine
rxwine
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 12164
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 1:33:13 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

If they can't find an hour on the one day of the year there is an election then tough. Move your schedule around, you know all year what day the election is. Voting is not supposed to be as simple as ordering a pizza.



People who are so worried about security should volunteer to work polls then. Everyone of them has an hour or two.

That's a much better solution.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 1:46:11 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Nice try. Elections are a valid and constitutional responsibility of government.



Yes, that 20-25 minute wait can be a killer. Sorry, I still don't see the need.



Not sure where you get to vote, but apparently it's somewhere they staff the polls adequately to the demand. In my county in 2008, there were several precincts that the wait was upward of 3 hours (yes, we have video documentation) including mine, and statewide, more than a few of 4 to 6 hours standing in line. I early voted that year, and it was still almost 2 hours. Given, it wasn't THIS:



which was a joyous day in Soweto, but it was out the door, down the sidewalk, and along the street. People have jobs. Very few employers excuse people to vote. I like living in a democracy that makes every effort to include.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
Twirdman
Twirdman
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 2:03:39 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

I already did this twice now. I did not say it was foolproof, I said it helps solve a problem. It does help and really at no cost to the voter, both good things.



What does affluence have to do with wait times? You don't pay to get in some kind of faster line. All that has to happen is the county bureau needs to staff properly. Most I ever waited was about 30 minutes, which is not all that bad. There is no good reason it cannot be done in one day, and no good reason it should not.

For security reasons alone it should be in one day.




Again the 700 is an example because people don't present and can't really be compelled to present ID for an absentee ballot so ID stop nothing. Also it is not no cost because there are plenty of people who don't have ID and would be unable to vote. So you need to provide compelling evidence of fraud that would be stopped by an ID.

Also I love how you dismiss the long waits to vote as anecdotes and thus unworthy of doing anything. In fact we should make the lines longer by eliminating early voting and then use an example of 1 person voting 6 times as proof that we need massively restrictive voter ID laws.
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 2:10:42 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Move your schedule around

That is quite simply something many folks can't do.
Quote: AZDuffman

If they can't find an hour on the one day of the year there is an election then tough.

Suprising considering your stance on the stanctity of voting regarding a tiny amount of fraud.
Quote: AZDuffman

Oh, I've seen a story or two. But it is not a widespread problem at all. If you read what I said I wrote "in person."

So you trust your own experience when it comes to whether something is a widespread problem over dozens of news reports. Have you personally seen voter fraud? When you make an argument from only your personal experience it will too often be flawed. This is similar to why the members of this site take so much issue with outlandish "strike rate" claims.
Quote: AZDuffman

The news media has been known to whip up problems

This is true about all media outlets, their goal is read/listen/view-ership. But in this case, I can tell you that is not a concern. The lines have been unreasonably long. If you deny it again I will slam this your incorrect assertion with a wall of links.
Quote: AZDuffman

and I can easily see a local district intentionally making long lines to make the news and make the public think we need a week to vote.

In the states I know of these decisions are made at the state level. Conspiracy theory much? Oh wait that was done (at the state level). By the same people pushing voter ID laws. Hmm imagine that.
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 2:35:26 PM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

..and then use an example of 1 person voting 6 times as proof that we need massively restrictive voter ID laws.



Holy crap! Showing an ID that you have to show for tons of other things is somehow "massively restrictive"?

Instead of lots of days of early voting and as a compromise for just one day, how about "Election Weekend"--the polls open for 48 hours starting at 8 p.m. on Friday in every precinct.

One problem with early voting is that there is always that last minute story that drops showing one candidate out there somewhere to be a turd...but a lot of people who would change their vote can't do so. Why risk it? 48 hours should give everyone who wants to vote a chance to get to the polls. Fine the heck out of the responsible jurisdiction (and the person in charge) of any polling site with consistently long waits for no good reason (longer than 1 hour for more than 25% of the 48 hours or something similar).
rxwine
rxwine
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 12164
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 2:44:56 PM permalink
Quote: RonC

Instead of lots of days of early voting and as a compromise for just one day, how about "Election Weekend"--the polls open for 48 hours starting at 8 p.m. on Friday in every precinct.



I think most people outside politics would prefer more days than fewer to vote. (but I'm guessing) I see no reason to go out of the way to make it harder to find time to vote, if you can do the opposite.

Don't republicans keep voting for convenience, say in instant background checks for guns? Suddenly, it's worrisome to have extra voting days.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 2:50:40 PM permalink
Quote: rxwine

I think most people outside politics would prefer more days than fewer to vote. (but I'm guessing) I see no reason to go out of the way to make it harder to find time to vote, if you can do the opposite.

Don't republicans keep voting for convenience, say in instant background checks for guns? Suddenly, it's worrisome to have extra voting days.



That's exactly why I am not making it harder at all. Instead of making folks travel to different precincts (early voting takes place in a limited number of precincts in this state; not sure how it works everywhere), open their precinct for the equivalent of six days (48 hours, 8 hours day) over one weekend. If you need more, what the heck...make it 72 hours. All in one shot without any down time--the polls stay open until they close.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 3:07:39 PM permalink
Quote: rxwine

People who are so worried about security should volunteer to work polls then. Everyone of them has an hour or two.

That's a much better solution.



Not really. I pay my taxes so government can do government functions of which voting is one. Having someone at the polls 24/7 because some voters can't seem to arrange a 20 minute stop is not "better."

Don't republicans keep voting for convenience, say in instant background checks for guns? Suddenly, it's worrisome to have extra voting days.



Having a gun is a right. Extra voting days are not.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 3:14:09 PM permalink
Quote: endermike

That is quite simply something many folks can't do.



Too bad, learn to do it.

Quote:

So you trust your own experience when it comes to whether something is a widespread problem over dozens of news reports. Have you personally seen voter fraud?



I see a system easily gamed and want to improve it by asking for ID, which every adult has to have to make it thru life.

Quote:

In the states I know of these decisions are made at the state level. Conspiracy theory much? Oh wait that was done (at the state level). By the same people pushing voter ID laws. Hmm imagine that.



Uh, the Constitution says the decisions are supposed to be at the state level.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 3:14:31 PM permalink
Quote: RonC

That's exactly why I am not making it harder at all. Instead of making folks travel to different precincts (early voting takes place in a limited number of precincts in this state; not sure how it works everywhere), open their precinct for the equivalent of six days (48 hours, 8 hours day) over one weekend. If you need more, what the heck...make it 72 hours. All in one shot without any down time--the polls stay open until they close.

It's a cool idea. I'm in favor of things being open 24/day like is common in Vegas. I think they would need to be open on what is currently called election day (first Tuesday after the first Monday) for constitutional reasons (but of course I could be wrong on this point). But I don't think that is a huge weakness. Say they opened Friday at 8pm and stayed open for 96 hours and closed at 8pm on Tuesday local time. I'm not sure that would be enough for everyone's tastes, but I think it would cover mine. Two weekdays and two weekend days; Morning, Noon, and Night; I can't list an objection off the top of my head.

I would guess the biggest issue would be staffing all the polls for all those hours. I have no idea if that would be a sticking point or not.
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 3:27:40 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: endermike

So you trust your own experience when it comes to whether something is a widespread problem over dozens of news reports. Have you personally seen voter fraud?

I see a system easily gamed and want to improve it by asking for ID, which every adult has to have to make it thru life.

So I take it that's a no. You trust reports of voter fraud without seeing it but you don't trust reports of long waits. It must be easier to argue your points when you don't accept anything that doesn't fit your conclusion.

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: endermike

In the states I know of these decisions are made at the state level. Conspiracy theory much? Oh wait that was done (at the state level). By the same people pushing voter ID laws. Hmm imagine that.



Uh, the Constitution says the decisions are supposed to be at the state level.

Yes, and so why did you say:
Quote: AZDuffman

I can easily see a local district intentionally making long lines to make the news and make the public think we need a week to vote.

You know these lines are not created by local level folks. Those folks just want to get the line to move quickly and go home.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 4:22:01 PM permalink
Quote: endermike

So I take it that's a no. You trust reports of voter fraud without seeing it but you don't trust reports of long waits. It must be easier to argue your points when you don't accept anything that doesn't fit your conclusion.



I've given a solution to long waits if they do exist, have more polling places or/and have them better staffed on election day.

Yes, and so why did you say:
You know these lines are not created by local level folks. Those folks just want to get the line to move quickly and go home.



The states I have lived (3) in make the laws and the counties (6) to the polling place details.

Each polling place additionally does some of their own logistical work. For example, in some polling places they allowed a picture of Obama on the wall until someone from above had to tell them to cover it up. Some will make you cover up *anything* that smacks of electioneering no matter how innocent it seems to the person wearing it. In Philadelphia they let a Black Panther stand in front with a club. There is latitude until someone up the food chain gets involved.

So I can see a local precinct manager making long lines to make the news.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
terapined
terapined
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 6087
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
April 3rd, 2014 at 4:34:58 PM permalink
I say 1 or 2 whole weeks to vote,
Why not?
I vote in every election but I have also been very lucky.
I have a lot of responsibilities at work, sometimes I have to go in very early and stay very late, Granted its somewhat rare but it does happen. I am so lucky that this situation has not occurred on election day. We have early voting in FL and I love it. Last Presidential election I was out of town but thanks to early voting, I got my vote in. I just never know what can happen at work that may require me to go in very early and stay very late. For that reason I always vote early. Don't want to chance not being able to vote because I am a dedicated employee.
I'm single, no kids, cant imagine how tough it is for a single working parent with children to vote.
Lets give everybody a couple of weeks to vote. Why not? Lets make it easy to vote.
Last election I remember Ann Coulter saying the last presidential election was one on the most important elections in her lifetime. Ann is absolutely right on the money, these elections are so important, we should give the American People a couple weeks so we can insure EVERY American citizen that wants to vote can do so easily.
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 4:49:36 PM permalink
The Constitution speaks to election day (not week, days, or month):

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 4: Election day

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing [sic] the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Maybe we should just figure out how to do it in one day.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 4:57:01 PM permalink
Quote: RonC

The Constitution speaks to election day (not week, days, or month):

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 4: Election day

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing [sic] the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Maybe we should just figure out to do it in one day.



NICE!
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 4:59:42 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

I've given a solution to long waits if they do exist

I love how you continue, in the face of overwhelming evidence, to insist they only may exist. This is making it much more clear why you were (are?) a climate change denier. An the exchange we had from that thread:
You: We do not have a long enough data set
Me: AZD, is there some amount of data which would change your mind on any of those points?
You: 2,000 years
Me: Is there a particular reason that 2,000 years is enough? Or did you just mean "a lot more" and then some time in the future?
You: Ideally I would like to see 1% of the history of the planet
Me: That's a pretty big ask. The planet has existed for around 4.5 billion years. That would ask for accurate records/models going back from present to 45 million years ago. Loosely that correlates with the transition from simpler primates to higher ones. (Humans seem to of emerged as their own species around 200k-500k years ago)

I'm not saying that based on those assumptions you are wrong, but I am saying with that as the burden of proof there is no argument based on human science that could ever change you mind.


Similarly, I feel there is no argument based on human journalism that could change your mind. Best of luck with that. I will repeat my advice:
Quote: endermike

I would recommend eliminating that talking point from your argument. Using incorrect facts undercuts your valid points.

Why can't we use an "all of the above approach" to election wait times? I agree we should have good logistics. I agree we should have lots of resources. And I agree we should have more than just 12-14 voting hours.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
April 3rd, 2014 at 5:30:27 PM permalink
Quote: endermike

I love how you continue, in the face of overwhelming evidence, to insist they only may exist. This is making it much more clear why you were (are?) a climate change denier.



I am a climate change denier because there is no "overwhelming evidence" in the matter, and common sense says not to believe the nonsense we are being told. Common sense says that when every "solution" to the problem is taking our money and freedoms, then something is wrong.

Quote:

Why can't we use an "all of the above approach" to election wait times? I agree we should have good logistics. I agree we should have lots of resources. And I agree we should have more than just 12-14 voting hours.



Because as was pointed out here before, Constitutionally it is Election DAY. Not "week" or "weekend." DAY. If we want to change it via amendment that is another story. But we are supposed to follow the law of the land.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
rxwine
rxwine
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 12164
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 5:38:02 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Because as was pointed out here before, Constitutionally it is Election DAY. Not "week" or "weekend." DAY. If we want to change it via
amendment that is another story. But we are supposed to follow the law of the land.



Money is not free speech then like conservative court rules. The word is not even close to free speech. Much farther off than day is to days or weeks. So that's even more egregious.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
endermike
endermike
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 584
Joined: Dec 10, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 5:49:42 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Because as was pointed out here before, Constitutionally it is Election DAY. Not "week" or "weekend." DAY. If we want to change it via amendment that is another story. But we are supposed to follow the law of the land.

I thought this might be a consequence of citing the constitution. If you can find the phrase "election day" in the US constitution I will pay $20 to you as well Answers in Genesis (suffice to say, an organization I would not like to support). My reply will have three parts:

1) An excellent article on the legality of early voting: http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/10/11/the-rights-war-on-early-voting-false-constituti/190566
2) You would think if it wasn't constitutional fewer than 30 some states would offer it.
3) Article 1 section 4 (aka why states get to run elections)

Boomshakalaka
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 6:30:46 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Because as was pointed out here before, Constitutionally it is Election DAY. Not "week" or "weekend." DAY. If we want to change it via amendment that is another story. But we are supposed to follow the law of the land.



The consitution defines a day on which the electors must vote, not a day on which they must be choosen:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

and

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

There might be other laws that says the electors are voted on by the populace, I guess.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
Twirdman
Twirdman
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1004
Joined: Jun 5, 2013
April 3rd, 2014 at 6:56:36 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

The consitution defines a day on which the electors must vote, not a day on which they must be choosen:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

and

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

There might be other laws that says the electors are voted on by the populace, I guess.



Even if there was though all they would have to do is collect votes and then wait to count them. The day of the election need not be the day electors are chosen or vote.
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 7:12:50 PM permalink
Quote: Twirdman

Quote:


There might be other laws that says the electors are voted on by the populace, I guess.



Even if there was though all they would have to do is collect votes and then wait to count them. The day of the election need not be the day electors are chosen or vote.



Makes sense to me. Didn't want to be definitive, I've only read the Constitution a couple of times and it doesn't govern me.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
April 3rd, 2014 at 8:16:03 PM permalink
"In 1845, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November became the official presidential election date. And in 1872 the Apportionment Act added the election of members of the House."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2000/11/why_are_federal_elections_held_the_first_tuesday_in_november.html

I don't understand why keeping Election Day as a one day event is seen as impossible. If they could travel for days to get there and back (it was held on Tuesday so no one had to travel on Sunday), why can't we just do it in one day. I've also proposed alternatives, but none of them involve keeping the polls open for weeks at a time.
  • Jump to: