NationStates Jolt Archive

We had municipal City Council elections today here in my little town in Missouri. I should mention that I'm 19.

I found out my county now has Sequoia optical-scan machines. Darn it, I liked the manual punch cards better.

We had a municipal election today; I showed up with less than an hour before the polls closed, and the machine (there was only one) said that I cast the 73rd ballot. I deliberitely undervoted (no Board of Ed vote for me because I didn't know enough about the candidates to cast an informed vote) but it didn't spit my ballot back out and ask me if I had intended to undervote. I thought optical-scan machines were supposed to do that now?http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/images/shrug.gif

At any rate, if 72 people voted before me, I'm assuming that my precinct only recorded about eighty votes. Darn, that's low, and we had some really hot-button local issues, namely a really controversial land sale to a local businessman. The City Council actively ignored about 1,000 people who showed up at the meeting to protest said land sale, and mind you, this is in a college town of 17,000. I'm on the university precinct, and if only eighty people voted (there are about 6,000 in my precinct, don't know how many registered), *sigh*

This wasn't anything like November, where I had to wait more than an hour to vote. I was the only person, other than the election judges, in the room. They must have been bored to hell.

I voted for the only incumbent candidate who actively voted against the land sale, and I also voted in favor of an $8 million bond issue for school renovation and a $0.15/$100 of assessed valuation tax increase to extend mental health services. I figured the latter tax increase was needed to offset the cuts that Gov. Blunt is proposing.

/end http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/images/rant.gif

meh

meh

Curse you for your evil apathy! :D

A thousand people showed up to protest, and only 80 showed up to vote?

Am I missing something?

A thousand people showed up to protest, and only 80 showed up to vote?

Am I missing something?

if its anything like my college town experience, they don't exactly go out of the way to inform people of when the election is or where you are supposed to vote.

if its anything like my college town experience, they don't exactly go out of the way to inform people of when the election is or where you are supposed to vote.

Heh, they pull that in NYC, all the time. Sure, the 'big' candidates are in Nov., but there all these little pissy votes that happen under the rose - for school board and the like.

Even in Nov. There usually isn't any choice. Lots of seats are uncontested. It's like a peoples republic. (stupid democrats).

A thousand people showed up to protest, and only 80 showed up to vote?

Am I missing something?

The "80 people" stat was only for my precinct, not the entire town. Though it is the university precinct, and as such, the most heavily populated. The thousand people were from the town at large.

Political apathy is what stops politicians from being lined up against a wall and shot.

Why do Americans need these fancy schmancy voting machines?

What is wrong with a pencil and a piece of paper? :confused:

Why do Americans need these fancy schmancy voting machines?

What is wrong with a pencil and a piece of paper? :confused:

Don't ask me... I really don't know why we can't stick to the old way. Perhaps it's because our vote counters are lazy...?

Why do Americans need these fancy schmancy voting machines?

What is wrong with a pencil and a piece of paper? :confused:

Which is why I liked the punch card ballot I voted on in November. I would feel a lot more comfortable about the voting machines if their manufacturers were required by campaign finance laws to stay out of politics (I don't know about Sequoia, but Diebold, the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S., maintains some ties with the Republicans). For example, they slipped some money to Sen. Voinovich (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/detail.asp?CID=N00003583&cycle=2000). (Scroll down to Misc. Business/Misc Manufacturing & Distributing.) Not necessarily their only involvement in politics, just the first bribe, er, campaign donation I found. I point this out only to illustrate that voting machine manufacturers can and do find ways to contribute to political campaigns, which I see as a conflict of interest.

Why do Americans need these fancy schmancy voting machines?

What is wrong with a pencil and a piece of paper? :confused:

That little pink rubbey thing on the other end of the pencil is what's wrong.

Pencil and paper is the best way to go IMHO, simply because if someone disagrees with the results you can physically show them the papers and let them watch as they are counted.

Why do Americans need these fancy schmancy voting machines?

What is wrong with a pencil and a piece of paper? :confused:

Our political system is very corrupt in certain places. (NYC, Chicago, and the rest).

The vote counters used to take their own little pencils and alter the ballots.

Thus the voting machine was born. To avoid fraud.

Edit: They used to stuff ballot boxes too.

Our political system is very corrupt in certain places. (NYC, Chicago, and the rest).

The vote counters used to take their own little pencils and alter the ballots.

Thus the voting machine was born. To avoid fraud.

Edit: They used to stuff ballot boxes too.

Ironically, they can also encourage it if manufactured by politically active corporations; in an earlier (edited) post, I gave an example of a voting machine manufacturer making a political contribution, which I see as a conflict of interest.

In my town the only way to find out when the little local votes are is to check the cable access channel.

That little pink rubbey thing on the other end of the pencil is what's wrong.

I prefer pen and paper. No little pink rubby thingie to alter the ballot with (and if the voter screws up, s/he can always request a new ballot).

Our political system is very corrupt in certain places. (NYC, Chicago, and the rest).

The vote counters used to take their own little pencils and alter the ballots.

Thus the voting machine was born. To avoid fraud.

Edit: They used to stuff ballot boxes too.


Didn't they get sent to jail for that? :confused: That's what would have happened here... Surely the independant scrutineers, the party scrutineers and the electoral commission people would have noticed?

What do you mean by 'stuffing the ballot boxes?' Stuff them with what? Or do they break them?

Didn't they get sent to jail for that? :confused: That's what would have happened here... Surely the independant scrutineers, the party scrutineers and the electoral commission people would have noticed?

Not if they're all being bribed by the people that are cheating.



What do you mean by 'stuffing the ballot boxes?' Stuff them with what? Or do they break them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballot_stuffing

I prefer pen and paper. No little pink rubby thingie to alter the ballot with (and if the voter screws up, s/he can always request a new ballot).
When South Africa had its first free elections, my grandfather was really excited about being allowed to vote for the first time. He was wheeled to the booth and stuff, but he didn't put his glasses on right away, so he voted for the wrong party, and had to get a new ballot.

He could have done wih a little pink thingy!

Didn't they get sent to jail for that? :confused: That's what would have happened here... Surely the independant scrutineers, the party scrutineers and the electoral commission people would have noticed?

Not really, it was kind of endemic. I think it was a bunch of reformers that came up with the voting machines with support from the press. Somewhere like NYC, where the democrats have been in control since they took over from the no-nothing party, electoral shennangins are par for the course. (As it patronage but that's a seperate issue). It's not as bad today of course, as there are only democrats left - allegedly - but apparently at its height, everyone was on the party payroll.

What do you mean by 'stuffing the ballot boxes?' Stuff them with what? Or do they break them?

When the polls close, the precinct workers shove extra ballots into the box for their chosen candidate, thus swelling the number of votes he or she gets.

Not if they're all being bribed by the people that are cheating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballot_stuffing


How the hell do you get more than one ballot? Don't they have to account for every ballot and then compare it to the list of voters to make sure that the ammount of ballots handed out and counted is the same as the number of voters who voted? How can they get away with this? It boggles my mind! :eek:

How the hell do you get more than one ballot? Don't they have to account for every ballot and then compare it to the list of voters to make sure that the ammount of ballots handed out and counted is the same as the number of voters who voted? How can they get away with this? It boggles my mind! :eek:

You really don't understand corruption. Enough money can accomplish pretty much anything.

How the hell do you get more than one ballot? Don't they have to account for every ballot and then compare it to the list of voters to make sure that the ammount of ballots handed out and counted is the same as the number of voters who voted? How can they get away with this? It boggles my mind! :eek:

The people who are doing the stuffing are the people who hand out the ballots.

So they can stuff for as many people who didn't vote that day. (Hence these retarded precincts with like a 95% turn out rate all voting for the same incumbent.)

The people who are doing the stuffing are the people who hand out the ballots.

So they can stuff for as many people who didn't vote that day. (Hence these retarded precincts with like a 95% turn out rate all voting for the same incumbent.)

Ah, Daley's machine.

Meh, I voted with the majority at the last local election. Thats what they get for using postal votes.

Ah, Daley's machine.

I would vote for a Chicago Republican just to smite teh Daley machine (and I could have chosen to register in Chicago, too, but I registered in MO where I go to college). But that doesn't guarantee that my vote would be counted. :D

I would vote for a Chicago Republican just to smite teh Daley machine (and I could have chosen to register in Chicago, too, but I registered in MO where I go to college). But that doesn't guarantee that my vote would be counted. :D

Yeah right. You would vote for a Chicago Democrat just like everyone else if you knew what was good for you. :)

Yeah right. You would vote for a Chicago Democrat just like everyone else if you knew what was good for you. :)

Hey, who said I wanted to live? :D Especially with the re-election of booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh :(

You really don't understand corruption. Enough money can accomplish pretty much anything.

You are probably right. :(

The people who are doing the stuffing are the people who hand out the ballots.

So they can stuff for as many people who didn't vote that day. (Hence these retarded precincts with like a 95% turn out rate all voting for the same incumbent.)

Well what do they do when they have to return the blank and unused ballots to be counted? Just say they lost them? Or can bribery actually become that endemic?

Ah, Daley's machine.

Yes, and I believe they modeled my precinct upon it.

One of my neighbors is a straight line conservative voter* - even though she is ideological liberal - just because it is so fucking ridiculous.

Really, you can vote for who you want here safe in the knowledge that the voting portion of the public is largely irrelevant to most election outcomes.

We're currently having a ballot recount for local special elections because of suspected corruption. Personally, I was there handing out doughnuts most of the day and I doubt there was any in my precinct. I think the incumbent, who's an idiot, imho, was just ticked that he lost the election to an up and comer. Yes, I'm active on the political front now. I was pretty apathetic until recently when a good friend was fined for breaking an ordinance that very few knew about.

We're currently having a ballot recount for local special elections because of suspected corruption. Personally, I was there handing out doughnuts most of the day and I doubt there was any in my precinct. I think the incumbent, who's an idiot, imho, was just ticked that he lost the election to an up and comer. Yes, I'm active on the political front now. I was pretty apathetic until recently when a good friend was fined for breaking an ordinance that very few knew about.

Mine if I ask which ordinence it was? I hope it's the one about ducks wearing pants...

Well what do they do when they have to return the blank and unused ballots to be counted? Just say they lost them? Or can bribery actually become that endemic?

What unused ballots? They used them didn't they.

The big problem too is that it wasn't just bribery per se causing people to do this either. Places like NYC have large political organizations with entrenched patronage. So precinct workers are related to civil servants - whose careers can be effected by elected politicians - or are just party workers that have infiltrated the system, or are just idelogues. It's more that just money changing hands, because that would be easy to deal with: It's a whole system of favor and influence peddling.

Makes me quite distrustful of government in general really.

What unused ballots? They used them didn't they.

The big problem too is that it wasn't just bribery per se causing people to do this either. Places like NYC have large political organizations with entrenched patronage. So precinct workers are related to civil servants - whose careers can be effected by elected politicians - or are just party workers that have infiltrated the system, or are just idelogues. It's more that just money changing hands, because that would be easy to deal with: It's a whole system of favor and influence peddling.

Makes me quite distrustful of government in general really.


Nepitism I don't mind, but electoral fruad is just wrong.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that if a booth is given 800 ballots and 600 people vote that they are not required to reconcile the number of votes to the number of voters? That no one says "You were given 800 ballots, you've used 600 so give us back the remaining 200?" :eek:

Nepitism I don't mind, but electoral fruad is just wrong.

Well, it's a little more than nepotism. And it causes the fraud. So it's a disctinction without a difference in this instance.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that if a booth is given 800 ballots and 600 people vote that they are not required to reconcile the number of votes to the number of voters? That no one says "You were given 800 ballots, you've used 600 so give us back the remaining 200?" :eek:

Well, we have the voting machines now, (and have for a very long time), but I would imagine the procedure went like this:

Precinct has 800 people; 200 come to vote; polls close; precinct workers record everyone -or nearly everyone as having voted; Mark up the ballots and stuff the boxes. That way there is no ballots to account for as they are all used.

Sure, it could be investigated, but that's pretty difficult when the district attorney and the police are all in the 'pay' - if you will - of the local party machine.

At any rate, this is why we have the voting machines. It was to combat this problem, somewhat. You can also go down and watch the machines get "locked" - i.e. no more voting, when the polls close, to try and alleviate this problem.

The machines are then sent to a big depot for processing. Though what happens to them there, god only knows. The idea is though, that being central, oversight is easier.

BTW, NYC has mechanical voting machines, not electronic ones.

Precinct has 800 people; 200 come to vote; polls close; precinct workers record everyone -or nearly everyone as having voted; Mark up the ballots and stuff the boxes. That way there is no ballots to account for as they are all used.
Ahh, OK, I understand now. Here voting is compulsary, so if someone tried to do that chances are they would cross off the name of someone who had voted elsewhere, thus exposing their ill practices. What's more election representitives have to sign every ballot here, so we'd know who was playing dirty too.

Ahh, OK, I understand now. Here voting is compulsary, so if someone tried to do that chances are they would cross off the name of someone who had voted elsewhere, thus exposing their ill practices. What's more election representitives have to sign every ballot here, so we'd know who was playing dirty too.

While philosophically I am against the idea of compulsory voting inasmuch as I believe it is a right to abstain from having to vote for or against the current douche-bag, I can see some of the advantages.

While philosophically I am against the idea of compulsory voting inasmuch as I believe it is a right to abstain from having to vote for or against the current douche-bag, I can see some of the advantages.

Compulsary voting does not mean you have to vote for someone if you like none of the candidates, you can always choose none of the above...

Compulsary voting does not mean you have to vote for someone if you like none of the candidates, you can always choose none of the above...

That I could get behind.