The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: happyg on February 27, 2014, 08:38:16 pm
-
Former President Clinton said Wednesday the greatest “assault” on the United States’ values are new restrictive voting laws springing up across the country.
In a five-minute video, Clinton announced a new initiative by the Democratic National Committee to defend voting rights at a time when, he said, opponents of progress want fewer people to vote.
"There is no greater assault on our core values than the rampant efforts to restrict the right to vote," Clinton said.
He added: "Now all across the country, we are seeing a determined effort to turn the clock back, an effort taking many different forms."
Earlier this week, Vice President Biden went even further, calling laws in North Carolina, Texas and Alabama examples of hate.
Clinton cited laws that have shortened voting hours and pared back early voting, as well as measures requiring increased identification.
"They are all designed to make it harder for working people — especially people of color, the elderly, those with disabilities and young college students — to get to the polls," he said.
Attorney General Eric Holder has launched lawsuits in Texas and North Carolina aimed at the new voting laws.
Clinton mentioned the governor's race in Virginia last year, in which he said Republicans predicted their only path to victory would be decreased turnout on Election Day. Democrat Terry McAuliffe, for whom Clinton campaigned, eventually won the race over Republican Ken Cuccinelli.
The DNC effort will aim to register more people, simplify the process and make sure all voters are counted. Clinton said it would take the form of legislation, education and advocacy.
As an example of past reform, Clinton named the National Voter Registration Act, which he signed in 1993, that allowed people to register to vote when getting a driver's license or dealing with other state or local government agencies.
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/199425-bill-clinton-new-voting-laws-assault-on-values#ixzz2uYam0cuX
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
-
The reason that Democrats are not getting any traction with their over-the-top rhetoric about Voter ID is that voters KNOW that Voter ID makes sense. It's reasonable and rational.
Cutting back on early voting, however, is counter-productive. It looks mean and it is mean. Hell, I love early voting and lots of other Republicans do too. Why cut back on it?
-
The reason that Democrats are not getting any traction with their over-the-top rhetoric about Voter ID is that voters KNOW that Voter ID makes sense. It's reasonable and rational.
Cutting back on early voting, however, is counter-productive. It looks mean and it is mean. Hell, I love early voting and lots of other Republicans do too. Why cut back on it?
Agreed. If we got our butts out and helped our side get to the polls the way the Dims do, no election would be close.
On a related note, I heard Prager mention something recently: why is it that when recounts occur, only the Dim side finds votes? The Republicans and Libertarians never do. That's really odd. The Dims always find boxes of already-cast ballots in someone's trunk. He said they vote in 2 places: at the polls and at someone's trunk.
-
[[ Cutting back on early voting, however, is counter-productive. It looks mean and it is mean. Hell, I love early voting and lots of other Republicans do too. Why cut back on it? ]]
Nope, it's common sense.
Every new-fangled introduction to the voting process, including (but not limited to):
- early voting
- motor voter
- all kinds of "helpful" registration schemes
- provisional ballots
- electronic voting without a paper trail
- mail-in voting
- absentee ballots (with the exception of military and infirm)
... is a thinly-veiled attempt to introduce fraud into the system.
The voting process should be simple, as it was in the proverbial "old days". That is:
- You show up on election day to vote
- If you haven't pre-registered within a specific time frame, you don't vote
- If they don't know who you are, and you can't prove who you are, you don't vote.
- Only absentee ballots accepted are as above (from people who _really_ can't be there)
Call it as mean-spirited as you want, I don't give a damn.
If left unchecked, voter fraud is going to destroy any chance of getting things righted again (not that I believe there's much chance of that, anyway).
-
[[ Cutting back on early voting, however, is counter-productive. It looks mean and it is mean. Hell, I love early voting and lots of other Republicans do too. Why cut back on it? ]]
Nope, it's common sense.
Every new-fangled introduction to the voting process, including (but not limited to):
- early voting
- motor voter
- all kinds of "helpful" registration schemes
- provisional ballots
- electronic voting without a paper trail
- mail-in voting
- absentee ballots (with the exception of military and infirm)
... is a thinly-veiled attempt to introduce fraud into the system.
The voting process should be simple, as it was in the proverbial "old days". That is:
- You show up on election day to vote
- If you haven't pre-registered within a specific time frame, you don't vote
- If they don't know who you are, and you can't prove who you are, you don't vote.
- Only absentee ballots accepted are as above (from people who _really_ can't be there)
Call it as mean-spirited as you want, I don't give a damn.
If left unchecked, voter fraud is going to destroy any chance of getting things righted again (not that I believe there's much chance of that, anyway).
Uh, there is no widespread evidence of "voter fraud" anywhere. Yes, there was a recent story of 70 people who improperly voted, and other stories of a person here or there.
But it's silly to restrict voting opportunities. Voter ID is an entirely different matter; THAT is where fraud can occur. But allowing someone to show up a couple of weeks before an election to cast a ballot at their leisure so they don't have to stand in line is only common sense.
I say let voters decide. I'm betting most voters like the convenience of early voting.
-
[[ Cutting back on early voting, however, is counter-productive. It looks mean and it is mean. Hell, I love early voting and lots of other Republicans do too. Why cut back on it? ]]
Nope, it's common sense.
Every new-fangled introduction to the voting process, including (but not limited to):
- early voting
- motor voter
- all kinds of "helpful" registration schemes
- provisional ballots
- electronic voting without a paper trail
- mail-in voting
- absentee ballots (with the exception of military and infirm)
... is a thinly-veiled attempt to introduce fraud into the system.
The voting process should be simple, as it was in the proverbial "old days". That is:
- You show up on election day to vote
- If you haven't pre-registered within a specific time frame, you don't vote
- If they don't know who you are, and you can't prove who you are, you don't vote.
- Only absentee ballots accepted are as above (from people who _really_ can't be there)
Call it as mean-spirited as you want, I don't give a damn.
If left unchecked, voter fraud is going to destroy any chance of getting things righted again (not that I believe there's much chance of that, anyway).
You saved me a lot of typing, thanks.
One word comes to mind, responsibility. Obama went to NC in 08 and overnight people could vote for nearly 2 weeks before. Now people can still vote early but not for weeks or some states a month ahead. The dems like this because they can stuff the ballot box for weeks busing in voters.
Bill Clinton speaking like this shows he is not a good ole guy from Arkansas that feels your pain. He and his wife are as corrupt as Obama. This also shows the desperation of the democrats that they are complaining about this.
-
This is one of the reasons Clinton is screaming all of the voters rights rhetoric.
If someone cannot make time to vote TEN DAYS before the election day, there is a severe problem outside of voting.
Why doesn't Holder cease the law-suit against NC and just bus in his voters and dead people ballots now? Oh wait, the bused in people will need ID.
NC counties reduce early voting hours for primary
By GARY D. ROBERTSON-Associated Press Thursday, February 27, 2014
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - Almost a third of North Carolina’s 100 counties have received permission from the State Board of Elections to reduce early-voting hours heading into the May 6 primary below what last year’s elections overhaul law demanded of them.
The law, pushed through by state Republican leaders, remains a divisive issue with legal challenges as the upcoming primary provides a key test of how new rules will work before the November general election.
The law actually decreased the number of early-voting days leading to an election from 17 days to 10, but it came with a qualification. Counties would still have to offer at least the same number of cumulative hours for people to vote ahead of election day - compared to the 2010 primary.
Republican Gov. Pat McCrory had defended the divisive elections law, which also includes photo ID requirements and no more same-day registration during early voting, in part by pointing repeatedly to the hourly requirement. It’s supposed to make counties expand daily voting hours or open additional voting sites during the 10-day period.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/27/nc-counties-reduce-early-voting-hours-for-primary/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/27/nc-counties-reduce-early-voting-hours-for-primary/)
-
You saved me a lot of typing, thanks.
One word comes to mind, responsibility. Obama went to NC in 08 and overnight people could vote for nearly 2 weeks before. Now people can still vote early but not for weeks or some states a month ahead. The dems like this because they can stuff the ballot box for weeks busing in voters.
Bill Clinton speaking like this shows he is not a good ole guy from Arkansas that feels your pain. He and his wife are as corrupt as Obama. This also shows the desperation of the democrats that they are complaining about this.
Where's the evidence that voters are bussed in "for weeks" anywhere?
-
Voters were bused in, in WI.
Election workers reporting people bused in to vote.
Dem workers ACORN? were going to mental wards to get the D vote in NC
Overseas military ballots were not counted.
Obama got over 100% of the vote in Philly and some other places.
Do the research yourself. The woman on the news confessing to busing (riding people) to vote in vans and the reports of people paying people to vote. No matter what I post I have a feeling you will say it is not enough evidence. But common sense prevails that there is a huge Obama get out the vote cheat machine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8itpv7yasHM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8itpv7yasHM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EHDyVr61JU
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EHDyVr61JU)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Iswh2ZUN8Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Iswh2ZUN8Q)
Military Absentee Ballots Delivered One Day Late, Would Have Swung Election For Romney
http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/11/military-absentee-ballots-delivered-one-day-late-would-have-swung-election-for-romney/ (http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/11/military-absentee-ballots-delivered-one-day-late-would-have-swung-election-for-romney/)
http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2012/11/06/federal-job-corps-vans-used-to-bus-voters-in-wisconsin (http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2012/11/06/federal-job-corps-vans-used-to-bus-voters-in-wisconsin)
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=9615 (http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=9615)
http://www.truethevote.org/news/true-the-vote-announces-new-findings-of-voter-fraud-in-ohio-new-york-florida-and-rhode-island (http://www.truethevote.org/news/true-the-vote-announces-new-findings-of-voter-fraud-in-ohio-new-york-florida-and-rhode-island)
http://www.truethevote.org/news/how-widespread-is-voter-fraud-2012-facts-figures (http://www.truethevote.org/news/how-widespread-is-voter-fraud-2012-facts-figures)
http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/the-big-list-of-vote-fraud-reports/ (http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/the-big-list-of-vote-fraud-reports/)
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/22-signs-that-voter-fraud-is-wildly-out-of-control-and-the-election-was-a-sham (http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/22-signs-that-voter-fraud-is-wildly-out-of-control-and-the-election-was-a-sham)
-
I don't know...
I see the words "Clinton... assault on values" in one head line and I figure I'm experiencing some sort of messed up 1989 laced crippy flashback, and expect to see pictures of Monica Lewinsky in that stupid beret floating up out of my monitor.
-
Voter ID is the sine qua non of fighting election fraud. Without a robust means of determining who is, and who is not, entitled to vote, getting rid of all early voting methods won't put much of a dent in existing election fraud because those who wish to engage in fraud will simply use the time-honored methods of rounding up a bunch of "voters", giving them the minimum info needed to satisfy the poll worker - like the name of one of the hundreds of thousands of dead people still on voter rolls - and then running them around to a whole bunch of different polling places to max out the number of votes they cast.
With a robust means of voter ID, it won't matter how early someone wants to vote, their early ballot will be subjected to the same stringent ID requirements, will be tossed if they cannot demonstrate their entitlement to vote, and once the fact of that early ballot is associated with their voter ID in the election district's records, will ensure that they don't try to cast any additional votes.
-
Voters were bused in, in WI.
Election workers reporting people bused in to vote.
Dem workers ACORN? were going to mental wards to get the D vote in NC
Overseas military ballots were not counted.
Obama got over 100% of the vote in Philly and some other places.
Do the research yourself. The woman on the news confessing to busing (riding people) to vote in vans and the reports of people paying people to vote. No matter what I post I have a feeling you will say it is not enough evidence. But common sense prevails that there is a huge Obama get out the vote cheat machine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Iswh2ZUN8Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Iswh2ZUN8Q)
Military Absentee Ballots Delivered One Day Late, Would Have Swung Election For Romney
http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/11/military-absentee-ballots-delivered-one-day-late-would-have-swung-election-for-romney/ (http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/11/military-absentee-ballots-delivered-one-day-late-would-have-swung-election-for-romney/)
http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2012/11/06/federal-job-corps-vans-used-to-bus-voters-in-wisconsin (http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2012/11/06/federal-job-corps-vans-used-to-bus-voters-in-wisconsin)
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=9615 (http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=9615)
http://www.truethevote.org/news/true-the-vote-announces-new-findings-of-voter-fraud-in-ohio-new-york-florida-and-rhode-island (http://www.truethevote.org/news/true-the-vote-announces-new-findings-of-voter-fraud-in-ohio-new-york-florida-and-rhode-island)
http://www.truethevote.org/news/how-widespread-is-voter-fraud-2012-facts-figures (http://www.truethevote.org/news/how-widespread-is-voter-fraud-2012-facts-figures)
http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/the-big-list-of-vote-fraud-reports/ (http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/the-big-list-of-vote-fraud-reports/)
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/22-signs-that-voter-fraud-is-wildly-out-of-control-and-the-election-was-a-sham (http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/22-signs-that-voter-fraud-is-wildly-out-of-control-and-the-election-was-a-sham)
Were these people registered to vote?
-
I don't know...
I see the words "Clinton... assault on values" in one head line and I figure I'm experiencing some sort of messed up 1989 laced crippy flashback, and expect to see pictures of Monica Lewinsky in that stupid beret floating up out of my monitor.
I thought I told you to lay off the acid! :silly:
-
I don't know...
I see the words "Clinton... assault on values" in one head line and I figure I'm experiencing some sort of messed up 1989 laced crippy flashback, and expect to see pictures of Monica Lewinsky in that stupid beret floating up out of my monitor.
I have hundreds of jpgs from the "blue dress" days. They go back to Whitewater.
...wait....there's a knock at the door..... :pondering:
-
I have hundreds of jpgs from the "blue dress" days. They go back to Whitewater.
...wait....there's a knock at the door..... :pondering:
Was it a man that was in a black sedan? Did he look like inspector gadget or men in black?
-
Voter ID is the sine qua non of fighting election fraud. Without a robust means of determining who is, and who is not, entitled to vote, getting rid of all early voting methods won't put much of a dent in existing election fraud because those who wish to engage in fraud will simply use the time-honored methods of rounding up a bunch of "voters", giving them the minimum info needed to satisfy the poll worker - like the name of one of the hundreds of thousands of dead people still on voter rolls - and then running them around to a whole bunch of different polling places to max out the number of votes they cast.
With a robust means of voter ID, it won't matter how early someone wants to vote, their early ballot will be subjected to the same stringent ID requirements, will be tossed if they cannot demonstrate their entitlement to vote, and once the fact of that early ballot is associated with their voter ID in the election district's records, will ensure that they don't try to cast any additional votes.
You hit it so square on the head I heard the bang of the hammer.
-
[[ Cutting back on early voting, however, is counter-productive. It looks mean and it is mean. Hell, I love early voting and lots of other Republicans do too. Why cut back on it? ]]
Nope, it's common sense.
Every new-fangled introduction to the voting process, including (but not limited to):
- early voting
- motor voter
- all kinds of "helpful" registration schemes
- provisional ballots
- electronic voting without a paper trail
- mail-in voting
- absentee ballots (with the exception of military and infirm)
... is a thinly-veiled attempt to introduce fraud into the system.
The voting process should be simple, as it was in the proverbial "old days". That is:
- You show up on election day to vote
- If you haven't pre-registered within a specific time frame, you don't vote
- If they don't know who you are, and you can't prove who you are, you don't vote.
- Only absentee ballots accepted are as above (from people who _really_ can't be there)
Call it as mean-spirited as you want, I don't give a damn.
If left unchecked, voter fraud is going to destroy any chance of getting things righted again (not that I believe there's much chance of that, anyway).
Spot on!!
goopo
-
Were these people registered to vote?
Same day registration says yes.
(http://www.canadaka.net/modules/My_eGallery/gallery/funnypics/animals/And_now_you_know.jpg)
-
And just what, pray tell, does Bill Clinton know about "values"???
-
A subscriber to Obamacare must present ID to get insured. In Bill's world, if someone doesn't have ID, does that mean that person doesn't get insurance? Would that be suppressing certain people who have no identification? And, that person would be subject to a fine for not having an ID. They want it both ways, and thinking people can see through it.
These people use any means they deem necessary to get votes, including illegal techniques to get their liberal person elected. Republicans should publically laugh this off, and make the democrats look like the idiots they are.
-
A subscriber to Obamacare must present ID to get insured. In Bill's world, if someone doesn't have ID, does that mean that person doesn't get insurance? Would that be suppressing certain people who have no identification? And, that person would be subject to a fine for not having an ID. They want it both ways, and thinking people can see through it.
These people use any means they deem necessary to get votes, including illegal techniques to get their liberal person elected. Republicans should publically laugh this off, and make the democrats look like the idiots they are.
NC protesters of voter ID need to show an ID to Protest
(http://antzinpantz.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/voter-id45t0.jpg?w=640)
(http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.608032112063875945&pid=1.7)
-
Good one, Gazoo!
-
Cutting back on early voting, however, is counter-productive. It looks mean and it is mean. Hell, I love early voting and lots of other Republicans do too. Why cut back on it?
Because the more time you have to vote, the more time you have to run around to multiple precincts to vote. Early voting encourages voter fraud. Keeping the voting window relatively small helps make sure that people can vote, but vote only once.
-
Exactly, because fake voter IDs are SO hard to produce, don'tcha know.
-
Because the more time you have to vote, the more time you have to run around to multiple precincts to vote. Early voting encourages voter fraud. Keeping the voting window relatively small helps make sure that people can vote, but vote only once.
Then absentee ballots should not be allowed. period. are we prepared to take that step?
-
Because the more time you have to vote, the more time you have to run around to multiple precincts to vote. Early voting encourages voter fraud. Keeping the voting window relatively small helps make sure that people can vote, but vote only once.
Why can't I run around on Election Day and vote multiple times? Your example is silly.
-
Then absentee ballots should not be allowed. period. are we prepared to take that step?
Even with absentee ballots most states have laws that you must verify your registration. If you are an active voter you will have already been verified by ID or electric bill.
http://www.longdistancevoter.org/verify_voter_registration#north_carolina (http://www.longdistancevoter.org/verify_voter_registration#north_carolina)
Absentee ballots WERE -outside of Obama's new laws- a rarity for the very sick and dying, as well as military serving outside of CONUS.
But in most cases/states they are verified via registration.
-
Then absentee ballots should not be allowed. period. are we prepared to take that step?
I am. And no voting on electronic machines, go back to the paper ballots that are run through optical scanners and register your vote in front of you. Either we take back our voting system or this country will be toast... and if it means people having to actually go vote on election day then sobeit.
Why do you think Colorado Dems pushed through mail-in ballots like Oregon - easy to have those old people in nursing homes return ballots which are signed and sealed by the Democrats running the homes and never even looked at by the old people (and yes that is happening around the country)...
-
Even with absentee ballots most states have laws that you must verify your registration. If you are an active voter you will have already been verified by ID or electric bill.
http://www.longdistancevoter.org/verify_voter_registration#north_carolina (http://www.longdistancevoter.org/verify_voter_registration#north_carolina)
Absentee ballots WERE -outside of Obama's new laws- a rarity for the very sick and dying, as well as military serving outside of CONUS.
But in most cases/states they are verified via registration.
And that's why I have no problem with them; however, if the ability to vote prior to the actual day of an election facilitates fraud, then all absentee ballots must be done away with because they provide the ability to vote prior to election day.
-
In Florida in the district Alan West lost there was reports of voters showing up to vote and being told someone else had already voted in their name on paper.
-
I am. And no voting on electronic machines, go back to the paper ballots that are run through optical scanners and register your vote in front of you. Either we take back our voting system or this country will be toast... and if it means people having to actually go vote on election day then sobeit.
Why do you think Colorado Dems pushed through mail-in ballots like Oregon - easy to have those old people in nursing homes return ballots which are signed and sealed by the Democrats running the homes and never even looked at by the old people (and yes that is happening around the country)...
With respect to voting machines, I very much agree that this is one place where "paperless" is a vice, not a virtue. Ballots should be large, on paper, easily and demonstrably markable (i.e., no hanging chad issues), and kept as backup to substantiate the reported results. Paper ballots can "disappear" but not as readily as electronic ballots can.
-
I am. And no voting on electronic machines, go back to the paper ballots that are run through optical scanners and register your vote in front of you. Either we take back our voting system or this country will be toast... and if it means people having to actually go vote on election day then sobeit.
Why do you think Colorado Dems pushed through mail-in ballots like Oregon - easy to have those old people in nursing homes return ballots which are signed and sealed by the Democrats running the homes and never even looked at by the old people (and yes that is happening around the country)...
So, voting only on the first Tuesday of November and only on paper.
That's not going to happen.
Voter ID, yes. But restricting the times people can vote, no. We should make it as convenient as possible to vote.
-
With respect to voting machines, I very much agree that this is one place where "paperless" is a vice, not a virtue. Ballots should be large, on paper, easily and demonstrably markable (i.e., no hanging chad issues), and kept as backup to substantiate the reported results. Paper ballots can "disappear" but not as readily as electronic ballots can.
The machines used in this country are (or were until recently) manufactured in Venezuela and the same machines Hugo used to swing all his elections his way. Even a member here from Las Vegas said he voted for Romney and watched as his machine said Obama in 2012. We use the optical scanner here which is is fill in the black boxes (no hanging chads) and it is scanned and then we receive a receipt for our vote. Many of these electronic machines do not produce a paper trail, there was multiple reports of old people not understanding how to use them and "monitors" walking over to their machines and without asking who they wanted - they put in a vote for Obama. In addition there was machines which were illegally taken home and then returned the next day in PA and Ohio....
-
To paraphrase Josef Stalin, it's not the people who vote or how they vote that decide elections. It's the people who count the votes, and how they count them that do.
-
To paraphrase Josef Stalin, it's not the people who vote or how they vote that decide elections. It's the people who count the votes, and how they count them that do.
which is why the democrats have made a point of trying to gain as many of the secretary of state offices as they can since it is usually the secretary of state who is responsible for certifying the results of an election.
-
which is why the democrats have made a point of trying to gain as many of the secretary of state offices as they can since it is usually the secretary of state who is responsible for certifying the results of an election.
That is the George Soros project - his personal pet project. Worked pretty well in WI when we had the recount and suddenly found a lot of votes for the comedian as well as Washington State, etc.
-
That is the George Soros project - his personal pet project. Worked pretty well in WI when we had the recount and suddenly found a lot of votes for the comedian as well as Washington State, etc.
which brings up another failing of republicans/conservatives, namely, failing to appreciate the consequences of this and failing to focus on winning secretary of state offices.
-
which brings up another failing of republicans/conservatives, namely, failing to appreciate the consequences of this and failing to focus on winning secretary of state offices.
I agree. It is as important as who is governor - especially here in AZ where we have a SOS and a governor and no Lt. Governor, if the governor leaves (Napolitano) the SoS becomes governor (Jan Brewer)
-
I agree. It is as important as who is governor - especially here in AZ where we have a SOS and a governor and no Lt. Governor, if the governor leaves (Napolitano) the SoS becomes governor (Jan Brewer)
Not only that, but I would hazard a guess that it is the secretary of state who certifies the results of the election for governor, meaning that, in effect, the secretary of state has the power to pick the governor.
-
Not only that, but I would hazard a guess that it is the secretary of state who certifies the results of the election for governor, meaning that, in effect, the secretary of state has the power to pick the governor.
Absolutely. Look at Washington State for evidence of your example... both governor AND senate races were thrown from the GOP to the Democrats by the SoS and questionable recounts with "found" ballots that were sitting in a backroom somewhere and mysteriously appeared.
-
[[ Then absentee ballots should not be allowed. period. are we prepared to take that step? ]]
Sounds good to me, with two exceptions:
- active military on duty (overseas or away from home states)
- elderly and infirm/hospitalized (who can prove need).
Yep, I'm prepared to "take that step".
-
[[ Then absentee ballots should not be allowed. period. are we prepared to take that step? ]]
Sounds good to me, with two exceptions:
- active military on duty (overseas or away from home states)
- elderly and infirm/hospitalized (who can prove need).
Yep, I'm prepared to "take that step".
Why the exceptions? What's the rational basis for excluding, for example, people who, because of unavoidable commitments, cannot be at their assigned polling station on election day?
-
[[ We should make it as convenient as possible to vote. ]]
No, NO, N-O !!
We should NOT make it "convenient" to vote, ever.
It must remain, literally, a duty of citizenship.
Making it "easy" makes it easy to introduce fraud. That's the whole point.
Make voting a chore that requires effort, and you'll ensure that those who DO vote will be doing so with a personal commitment to the electoral system. And that those who are trying to commit fraud may just find it's not worth their time or trouble...
-
[[ We should make it as convenient as possible to vote. ]]
No, NO, N-O !!
We should NOT make it "convenient" to vote, ever.
It must remain, literally, a duty of citizenship.
Making it "easy" makes it easy to introduce fraud. That's the whole point.
Make voting a chore that requires effort, and you'll ensure that those who DO vote will be doing so with a personal commitment to the electoral system. And that those who are trying to commit fraud may just find it's not worth their time or trouble...
then why not limit the vote to people who have real skin in the game: people who own real property and who have significant capital investments (i.e., "stuff" that the government could take from them and give to others)?
-
[[ Why the exceptions? What's the rational basis for excluding, for example, people who, because of unavoidable commitments, cannot be at their assigned polling station on election day? ]]
Because dem's da breaks.
See my post 42 above.
Voting should be "a chore". If someone chooses to be at some other "commitment" during voting day, well, that's his/her "choice" (I'm pro-choice, eh?).
And that includes you, sir. If you don't want to show up at the polls on election day, you've given up your right to be heard politically through that means of expression.
A soldier on duty CAN'T vacate himself from his duty to get to the polls. He has no option, no choice.
Same for the elderly who are physically unable to get to the polls, even if they want to go.
By the way, I put my money where my mouth is. This past November's election day, I chose to visit a severly handicapped friend in another state, rather than vote. No claim for an absentee ballot or any of that. I wasn't there, I didn't vote.
Like I said above, dem's da breaks.
-
[[ Why the exceptions? What's the rational basis for excluding, for example, people who, because of unavoidable commitments, cannot be at their assigned polling station on election day? ]]
Because dem's da breaks.
See my post 42 above.
Voting should be "a chore". If someone chooses to be at some other "commitment" during voting day, well, that's his/her "choice" (I'm pro-choice, eh?).
And that includes you, sir. If you don't want to show up at the polls on election day, you've given up your right to be heard politically through that means of expression.
A soldier on duty CAN'T vacate himself from his duty to get to the polls. He has no option, no choice.
Same for the elderly who are physically unable to get to the polls, even if they want to go.
By the way, I put my money where my mouth is. This past November's election day, I chose to visit a severly handicapped friend in another state, rather than vote. No claim for an absentee ballot or any of that. I wasn't there, I didn't vote.
Like I said above, dem's da breaks.
You do realize, don't you, that by not requesting an absentee ballot you have made it possible for someone to pretend to be you and cast a vote in your name while you're away. If I know ahead of time that you'll be out of town, all I need do is gussy up enough ID - whatever is, or is not, required - present myself at your polling station, and vote; I can get away with it because I know you'll never show up to object.
"Dem's da breaks" is a not a particularly good way to run an electoral system.
And, more to the point, I have not seen any persuasive evidence that early voting or absentee voting per se causes or permits election fraud. Without a good way to associate a vote with a real person, there is the opportunity for fraud, but that opportunity exists solely because of the lack of a good voter ID system, and is just as effective when there are no absentee ballots as when there are.
It is the lack of voter ID, not the ability to vote at some point in time before election day, that facilitates election fraud.