NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/10/21/rowlands.voter.fraud.cnn

Though this time the Republicans doing it in California, which seems idiotic at the outset.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/10/21/rowlands.voter.fraud.cnn

Though this time the Republicans doing it in California, which seems idiotic at the outset.

Yeah, do you know how much fraud they'd need to win California? They'd have to get all the Chihuahuas to vote for McCain. :p

Yeah, do you know how much fraud they'd need to win California? They'd have to get all the Chihuahuas to vote for McCain. :p

Well I think this just demonstrates the absurdity of the ACORN nonsense also. Sure they tricked a bunch of folk into registering, but they still won't vote Republican. Seems like a case of good old fashioned fraud to me.

Yeah, do you know how much fraud they'd need to win California? They'd have to get all the Chihuahuas to vote for McCain. :p
Or all the illegal Cubans.

Or all the illegal Cubans.

They're all in Florida. In California, you'd need Mexicans or Chinese. If they want chinese votes, maybe they could install Diebold machines into the cargo containers they're being smuggled in. ;)

Yeah, do you know how much fraud they'd need to win California? They'd have to get all the Chihuahuas to vote for McCain. :p

We have other things at stake, despite our streak of voting for the Democratic candidate since 1984, we have a Republican governor (though he's not up for election again) but things like our state legislature and Proposition 8 which will change our constitution to make same sex marriage illegal (since our supreme court recently ruled that not allowing it is unconstitutional).

But the dude was clearly just padding his bill and doing it unscrupulously. Kind of hilarious that this is accused of being a distraction from ACORN when this one is clearly organizational (the guy even forged an address so he could operate in California) when it's not clear at all that ACORN was anything more than individual canvasers faking forms to get out of having to do the work. Anyone who has worked for a temp agency has met these cats.

They're all in Florida. In California, you'd need Mexicans or Chinese. If they want chinese votes, maybe they could install Diebold machines into the cargo containers they're being smuggled in. ;)Darn, I forgot about Mexico and thought you'd have only illegal Cubans.

Chinese votes don't matter, the 1.5 billion Chines share like 5 names so they can only vote 5 times.:tongue:

Darn, I forgot about Mexico and thought you'd have only illegal Cubans.

Chinese votes don't matter, the 1.5 billion Chines share like 5 names so they can only vote 5 times.:tongue:

I don't know if this is the case anymore, but I believe it at least used to be the case that if Cubans can make it to land they have automatic immunity, so they're only illegal as long as they're at sea. Mexicans do not have that.

We have other things at stake, despite our streak of voting for the Democratic candidate since 1984, we have a Republican governor (though he's not up for election again) but things like our state legislature and Proposition 8 which will change our constitution to make same sex marriage illegal (since our supreme court recently ruled that not allowing it is unconstitutional).

But the dude was clearly just padding his bill and doing it unscrupulously. Kind of hilarious that this is accused of being a distraction from ACORN when this one is clearly organizational (the guy even forged an address so he could operate in California) when it's not clear at all that ACORN was anything more than individual canvasers faking forms to get out of having to do the work. Anyone who has worked for a temp agency has met these cats.

"Oh, this overblown case of Republican voter registration fraud is just a distraction from the nearly identical overblown case of Democratic voter registration fraud!"

:p

I don't know if this is the case anymore, but I believe it at least used to be the case that if Cubans can make it to land they have automatic immunity, so they're only illegal as long as they're at sea. Mexicans do not have that.

Maybe they should travel to Cuba and catch a raft. ;)

They tried doing it in Michigan too

http://michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote

They tried doing it in Michigan too

http://michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote
Ugh....I'm a little ill now...

you know there are conservative counties in California they might have been going after congressional seats more then the presidency.

I don't know if this is the case anymore, but I believe it at least used to be the case that if Cubans can make it to land they have automatic immunity, so they're only illegal as long as they're at sea. Mexicans do not have that.
Indeed.

The wet foot, dry foot policy is the name given to a consequence of the 1995 revision of the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 that says, essentially, that anyone who fled Cuba and got into the United States would be allowed to pursue residency a year later. After talks with the Cuban government, the Clinton administration came to an agreement with Cuba that it would stop admitting people found at sea. Since then, in what has become known as the "wet foot, dry foot" policy, a Cuban caught on the waters between the two nations (i.e., with "wet feet") would summarily be sent home or to a third country. One who makes it to shore ("dry feet") gets a chance to remain in the United States, and later would qualify for expedited "legal permanent resident" status and U.S. citizenship.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/10/21/rowlands.voter.fraud.cnn

Though this time the Republicans doing it in California, which seems idiotic at the outset.

Bwahahaha I love how republicans are crying foul about this. You democrats are distracting people from our own blown out of proportion accusations of acorn. bwahahaha:eek:

They tried doing it in Michigan too

http://michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote

So homeless people aren't allowed to vote in the US? Fan-fucking-tastic democracy they got there.

So homeless people aren't allowed to vote in the US? Fan-fucking-tastic democracy they got there.

My understanding is that you can indeed vote if you're homeless but you need some sort of address to establish which congressional district, state legislature districts and which local offices and such you vote for. What the MIGOP was trying to do was basically throw their registrations out on the basis that they no longer reside where they did, thus forcing them to reapply. Of course, Michigan has a Republican Secretary of State (much like Ohio in 2004) so good old Mike Cox may have just caused some sort of delay in getting those registrations completed in time.

So homeless people aren't allowed to vote in the US? Fan-fucking-tastic democracy they got there.

if you had a home your likely not homeless. more then likely you moved elsewhere and they just want to make sure that is where you vote form.

I don't understand the 'registration' thing.

In my country, the government just knows that you can and should vote and thus an invitation is send to your home.

I don't understand the 'registration' thing.

In my country, the government just knows that you can and should vote and thus an invitation is send to your home.

yeah its a hold over from long before the government knew everything about its people. A lot of people still decry privacy issues.

yeah its a hold over from long before the government knew everything about its people. A lot of people still decry privacy issues.

I don't see those people crying at the airports.

I don't see those people crying at the airports.

Because they don't care about their freedoms, only their safety. They would rather be safe than free. So why don't we just lock them all up? That way, they can be in nice, safe prisons.

Because they don't care about their freedoms, only their safety. They would rather be safe than free. So why don't we just lock them all up? That way, they can be in nice, safe prisons.

I would love to go to prison in Norway. Not so much here in the US.

I have seen far too many stories regarding efforts by the Republican party to prevent people from voting to believe that they have any intention of "winning" upcoming elections through the competence of their canidates or the effectiveness of their platform.

They ARE trying to steal this election...and everyone who cares about democracy in the U.S. ought to be outraged.

I don't see those people crying at the airports.

I see them all the time, at departure halls, where parents and loved ones tearfully bid farewell to the departees, about to face the violations of grubby customs officials, ready to tear to shreds the last remaining dignity and sense of privacy that they hold dear, before showering them with the debris as they laugh in malice.

:p

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/10/21/rowlands.voter.fraud.cnn

Though this time the Republicans doing it in California, which seems idiotic at the outset.

They know this state won't go Republican in the presidential election.

But...

the fight over Proposition 8 remains very close.

They know this state won't go Republican in the presidential election.

But...

the fight over Proposition 8 remains very close.

Which makes me sad...so very sad (I had a tense moment with my mom when I thought she might actually be considering voting yes on 8, which she may have been but having her sons tell her that's fucking stupid might have changed her mind...)

Which makes me sad...so very sad (I had a tense moment with my mom when I thought she might actually be considering voting yes on 8, which she may have been but having her sons tell her that's fucking stupid might have changed her mind...)

Yeah... my whole family is pretty liberal, even my grandparents. So as far as I know, my relatives are all voting no on it.

Yeah... my whole family is pretty liberal, even my grandparents. So as far as I know, my relatives are all voting no on it.

My parents are homophobic. Good times.

My parents are homophobic. Good times.

That's a real drag. I don't agree with my mom on all things political, but none of it involves bigotry.

That's a real drag. I don't agree with my mom on all things political, but none of it involves bigotry.

If they were outright about it it would be a different thing to deal with. If they'd just go, "I don't like fags" I could just go, "Damn that's a stupid thing to say." But they're the 'polite' kind, the ones that say, "I don't mind that they're gay" and then the all important, and usually misinformed "but."

I think we've chipped away at most of my mom's 'buts', my dad would be a harder nut to crack.

Why do politician bitch about voter fraud? Haven't voters tolerated their fraud all along?

If they were outright about it it would be a different thing to deal with. If they'd just go, "I don't like fags" I could just go, "Damn that's a stupid thing to say." But they're the 'polite' kind, the ones that say, "I don't mind that they're gay" and then the all important, and usually misinformed "but."

I think we've chipped away at most of my mom's 'buts', my dad would be a harder nut to crack.

To me, "but" nothing. Either you see people of a different sexual orientation as human beings who deserve equal rights, or you don't. That's all that there is to it. Good luck chipping away at the "but"s. We need to get as many people to vote against that travesty of a proposition as possible.

Here's a good article from Rolling Stone...it's a bit long, but worth the read.

Emphasis mine...

These days, the old west rail hub of Las Vegas, New Mexico, is little more than a dusty economic dead zone amid a boneyard of bare mesas. In national elections, the town overwhelmingly votes Democratic: More than 80 percent of all residents are Hispanic, and one in four lives below the poverty line. On February 5th, the day of the Super Tuesday caucus, a school-bus driver named Paul Maez arrived at his local polling station to cast his ballot. To his surprise, Maez found that his name had vanished from the list of registered voters, thanks to a statewide effort to deter fraudulent voting. For Maez, the shock was especially acute: He is the supervisor of elections in Las Vegas.

Maez was not alone in being denied his right to vote. On Super Tuesday, one in nine Democrats who tried to cast ballots in New Mexico found their names missing from the registration lists. The numbers were even higher in precincts like Las Vegas, where nearly 20 percent of the county's voters were absent from the rolls. With their status in limbo, the voters were forced to cast "provisional" ballots, which can be reviewed and discarded by election officials without explanation. On Super Tuesday, more than half of all provisional ballots cast were thrown out statewide.

This November, what happened to Maez will happen to hundreds of thousands of voters across the country. In state after state, Republican operatives — the party's elite commandos of bare-knuckle politics — are wielding new federal legislation to systematically disenfranchise Democrats. If this year's race is as close as the past two elections, the GOP's nationwide campaign could be large enough to determine the presidency in November. "I don't think the Democrats get it," says John Boyd, a voting-rights attorney in Albuquerque who has taken on the Republican Party for impeding access to the ballot. "All these new rules and games are turning voting into an obstacle course that could flip the vote to the GOP in half a dozen states."

Suppressing the vote has long been a cornerstone of the GOP's electoral strategy. Shortly before the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Paul Weyrich — a principal architect of today's Republican Party — scolded evangelicals who believed in democracy. "Many of our Christians have what I call the 'goo goo' syndrome — good government," said Weyrich, who co-founded Moral Majority with Jerry Falwell. "They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. . . . As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."

Today, Weyrich's vision has become a national reality. Since 2003, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, at least 2.7 million new voters have had their applications to register rejected. In addition, at least 1.6 million votes were never counted in the 2004 election — and the commission's own data suggests that the real number could be twice as high. To purge registration rolls and discard ballots, partisan election officials used a wide range of pretexts, from "unreadability" to changes in a voter's signature. And this year, thanks to new provisions of the Help America Vote Act, the number of discounted votes could surge even higher.

Passed in 2002, HAVA was hailed by leaders in both parties as a reform designed to avoid a repeat of the 2000 debacle in Florida that threw the presidential election to the U.S. Supreme Court. The measure set standards for voting systems, created an independent commission to oversee elections, and ordered states to provide provisional ballots to voters whose eligibility is challenged at the polls.

But from the start, HAVA was corrupted by the involvement of Republican superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, who worked to cram the bill with favors for his clients. (Both Abramoff and a primary author of HAVA, former Rep. Bob Ney, were imprisoned for their role in the conspiracy.) In practice, many of the "reforms" created by HAVA have actually made it harder for citizens to cast a ballot and have their vote counted. In case after case, Republican election officials at the local and state level have used the rules to give GOP candidates an edge on Election Day by creating new barriers to registration, purging legitimate names from voter rolls, challenging voters at the polls and discarding valid ballots.

To justify this battery of new voting impediments, Republicans cite an alleged upsurge in voting fraud. Indeed, the U.S.-attorney scandal that resulted in the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales began when the White House fired federal prosecutors who resisted political pressure to drum up nonexistent cases of voting fraud against Democrats. "They wanted some splashy pre-election indictments that would scare these alleged hordes of illegal voters away," says David Iglesias, a U.S. attorney for New Mexico who was fired in December 2006. "We took over 100 complaints and investigated for almost two years — but I didn't find one prosecutable case of voter fraud in the entire state of New Mexico."

There's a reason Iglesias couldn't find any evidence of fraud: Individual voters almost never try to cast illegal ballots. The Bush administration's main point person on "ballot protection" has been Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department attorney who has advised states on how to use HAVA to erect more barriers to voting. Appointed to the Federal Election Commission by Bush, von Spakovsky has suggested that voter rolls may be stuffed with 5 million illegal aliens. In fact, studies have repeatedly shown that voter fraud is extremely rare. According to a recent analysis by Lorraine Minnite, an expert on voting crime at Barnard College, federal courts found only 24 voters guilty of fraud from 2002 to 2005, out of hundreds of millions of votes cast. "The claim of widespread voter fraud," Minnite says, "is itself a fraud."

Allegations of voter fraud are only the latest rationale the GOP has used to disenfranchise voters — especially blacks, Hispanics and others who traditionally support Democrats. "The Republicans have a long history of erecting barriers to discourage Americans from voting," says Donna Brazile, chair of the Voting Rights Institute for the Democratic National Committee. "Now they're trying to spook Americans with the ghost of voter fraud. It's very effective — but it's ironic that the only way they maintain power is by using fear to deprive Americans of their constitutional right to vote." The recently enacted barriers thrown up to deter voters include:

1. Obstructing Voter-Registration Drives

Since 2004, the Bush administration and more than a dozen states have taken steps to impede voter registration. Among the worst offenders is Florida, where the Republican-dominated legislature created hefty fines — up to $5,000 per violation — for groups that fail to meet deadlines for turning in voter-application forms. Facing potentially huge penalties for trivial administrative errors, the League of Women Voters abandoned its voter-registration drives in Florida. A court order eventually forced the legislature to reduce the maximum penalty to $1,000. But even so, said former League president Dianne Wheatley-Giliotti, the reduced fines "create an unfair tax on democracy." The state has also failed to uphold a federal law requiring that low-income voters be offered an opportunity to register when they apply for food stamps or other public assistance. As a result, the annual number of such registrations has plummeted from more than 120,000 in the Clinton years to barely 10,000 today.

2. Demanding "Perfect Matches"

Under the Help America Vote Act, some states now reject first-time registrants whose data does not correspond to information in other government databases. Spurred by HAVA, almost every state must now attempt to make some kind of match — and four states, including the swing states of Iowa and Florida, require what is known as a "perfect match." Under this rigid framework, new registrants can lose the right to vote if the information on their voter-registration forms — Social Security number, street address and precisely spelled name, right down to a hyphen — fails to exactly match data listed in other government records.

There are many legitimate reasons, of course, why a voter's information might vary. Indeed, a recent study by the Brennan Center for Justice found that as many as 20 percent of discrepancies between voter records and driver's licenses in New York City are simply typing mistakes made by government clerks when they transcribe data. But under the new rules, those mistakes are costing citizens the right to vote. In California, a Republican secretary of state blocked 43 percent of all new voters in Los Angeles from registering in early 2006 — many because of the state's failure to produce a tight match. In Florida, GOP officials created "match" rules that rejected more than 15,000 new registrants in 2006 and 2007 — nearly three-fourths of them Hispanic and black voters. Given the big registration drives this year, the number could be five times higher by November.

3. Purging Legitimate Voters From the Rolls

The Help America Vote Act doesn't just disenfranchise new registrants; it also targets veteran voters. In the past, bipartisan county election boards maintained voter records. But HAVA requires that records be centralized, computerized and maintained by secretaries of state — partisan officials — who are empowered to purge the rolls of any voter they deem ineligible. Ironically, the new rules imitate the centralized system in Florida — the same corrupt operation that inspired passage of HAVA in the first place. Prior to the 2000 election, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris and her predecessor, both Republicans, tried to purge 57,000 voters, most of them African-Americans, because their names resembled those of persons convicted of a crime. The state eventually acknowledged that the purges were improper — two years after the election.

Rather than end Florida-style purges, however, HAVA has nationalized them. Maez, the elections supervisor in New Mexico, says he was the victim of faulty list management by a private contractor hired by the state. Hector Balderas, the state auditor, was also purged from the voter list. The nation's youngest elected Hispanic official, Balderas hails from Mora County, one of the poorest in the state, which had the highest rate of voters forced to cast provisional ballots. "As a strategic consideration," he notes, "there are those that benefit from chaos" at the ballot box.

All told, states reported scrubbing at least 10 million voters from their rolls on questionable grounds between 2004 and 2006. Colorado holds the record: Donetta Davidson, the Republican secretary of state, and her GOP successor oversaw the elimination of nearly one of every six of their state's voters. Bush has since appointed Davidson to the Election Assistance Commission, the federal agency created by HAVA, which provides guidance to the states on "list maintenance" methods.

4. Requiring Unnecessary Voter ID's

Even if voters run the gauntlet of the new registration laws, they can still be blocked at the polling station. In an incident last May, an election official in Indiana denied ballots to 10 nuns seeking to vote in the Democratic primary because their driver's licenses or passports had expired. Even though Indiana has never recorded a single case of voter-ID fraud, it is one of two dozen states that have enacted stringent new voter-ID statutes.

On its face, the requirement to show a government-issued ID doesn't seem unreasonable. "I want to cash a check to pay for my groceries, I've got to show a little bit of ID," Karl Rove told the Republican National Lawyers Association in 2006. But many Americans lack easy access to official identification. According to a recent study for the Election Law Journal, young people, senior citizens and minorities — groups that traditionally vote Democratic — often have no driver's licenses or state ID cards. According to the study, one in 10 likely white voters do not possess the necessary identification. For African-Americans, the number lacking such ID is twice as high.

5. Rejecting "Spoiled" Ballots

Even intrepid voters who manage to cast a ballot may still find their vote discounted. In 2004, election officials discarded at least 1 million votes nationwide after classifying them as "spoiled" because blank spaces, stray marks or tears made them indecipherable to voting machines. The losses hit hardest among minorities in low-income precincts, who are often forced to vote on antiquated machines. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, in its investigation of the 2000 returns from Florida, found that African-Americans were nearly 10 times more likely than whites to have their ballots rejected, a ratio that holds nationwide.

Proponents of HAVA claimed the law would correct the spoilage problem by promoting computerized balloting. Yet touch-screen systems have proved highly unreliable — especially in minority and low-income precincts. A statistical analysis of New Mexico ballots by a voting-rights group called VotersUnite found that Hispanics who voted by computer in 2004 were nearly five times more likely to have their votes unrecorded than those who used paper ballots. In a close election, such small discrepancies can make a big difference: In 2004, the number of spoiled ballots in New Mexico — 19,000 — was three times George Bush's margin of victory.

6. Challenging "Provisional" Ballots

In 2004, an estimated 3 million voters who showed up at the polls were refused regular ballots because their registration was challenged on a technicality. Instead, these voters were handed "provisional" ballots, a fail-safe measure mandated by HAVA to enable officials to review disputed votes. But for many officials, resolving disputes means tossing ballots in the trash. In 2004, a third of all provisional ballots — as many as 1 million votes — were simply thrown away at the discretion of election officials.

Many voters are given provisional ballots under an insidious tactic known as "vote caging," which uses targeted mailings to disenfranchise black voters whose addresses have changed. In 2004, despite a federal consent order forbidding Republicans from engaging in the practice, the GOP sent out tens of thousands of letters to "confirm" the addresses of voters in minority precincts. If a letter was returned for any reason — because the voter was away at school or serving in the military — the GOP challenged the voter for giving a false address. One caging operation was exposed when an RNC official mistakenly sent the list to a parody site called GeorgeWBush.org — instead of to the official campaign site GeorgeWBush.com.

In the century following the Civil War, millions of black Americans in the Deep South lost their constitutional right to vote, thanks to literacy tests, poll taxes and other Jim Crow restrictions imposed by white officials. Add up all the modern-day barriers to voting erected since the 2004 election — the new registrations thrown out, the existing registrations scrubbed, the spoiled ballots, the provisional ballots that were never counted — and what you have is millions of voters, more than enough to swing the presidential election, quietly being detached from the electorate by subterfuge.

"Jim Crow was laid to rest, but his cousins were not," says Donna Brazile. "We got rid of poll taxes and literacy tests but now have a second generation of schemes to deny our citizens their franchise." Come November, the most crucial demographic may prove to be Americans who have been denied the right to vote. If Democrats are to win the 2008 election, they must not simply beat John McCain at the polls — they must beat him by a margin that exceeds the level of GOP vote tampering.


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/23638322/block_the_vote

It simply baffles me that anyone can support the Republican party when it engages in such blatantly anti-democratic measures.

Here's a good article from Rolling Stone...it's a bit long, but worth the read.

Emphasis mine...



http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/23638322/block_the_vote

It simply baffles me that anyone can support the Republican party when it engages in such blatantly anti-democratic measures.

I deem that anyone supporting the GOP is supporting criminals and criminal activities, and is therefore a criminal themself. Thus, we should arrest all registered republicans for the crime of being republican.

I'm also being serious. I know it sounds like satire, but dammit, republicans should be shot, by the guns they fight so dearly to own.

I deem that anyone supporting the GOP is supporting criminals and criminal activities, and is therefore a criminal themself. Thus, we should arrest all registered republicans for the crime of being republican.


I think you can put in treason and subverting the government as part and parcel of the crimes of the GOP too.

Here's a good article from Rolling Stone...it's a bit long, but worth the read.

Emphasis mine...



http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/23638322/block_the_vote

It simply baffles me that anyone can support the Republican party when it engages in such blatantly anti-democratic measures.

Of course the Republicans do all they can to stifle suppress voter turnout. There are almost 20 million more democrats than republicans. They have to do something, or else they'd never win.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/23638322/block_the_vote

It simply baffles me that anyone can support the Republican party when it engages in such blatantly anti-democratic measures.

The whole system is flawed really, you vote on a Thursday not over the weekend you sometimes have to travel long distnces to ensure that you can vote if you live in away from major cities they don't come to you to ensure that you vote, there are a couple of others I don't remember, but of course you aren't democratic anyway your President must be at least 35 and can only serve two terms that's pretty lame.

I deem that anyone supporting the GOP is supporting criminals and criminal activities, and is therefore a criminal themself. Thus, we should arrest all registered republicans for the crime of being republican.

I'm also being serious. I know it sounds like satire, but dammit, republicans should be shot, by the guns they fight so dearly to own.

Not all people who fight for this right are Republicans, and even now your just taking some Republicans and painting them with the same brush.

The whole system is flawed really, you vote on a Thursday not over the weekend you sometimes have to travel long distnces to ensure that you can vote if you live in away from major cities they don't come to you to ensure that you vote, there are a couple of others I don't remember, but of course you aren't democratic anyway your President must be at least 35 and can only serve two terms that's pretty lame.

We vote on tuesdays.

I think it's funny, the two term limit. It was argued heavily for by Republicans, kind of the anti-FDR rule. However, the first president it can be seen to have affected was Eisenhower. And the second it can be seen to have affected was also a republican, Ronnie Ray-Gun.

What I really can't stand is the polls closing at 8:00 PM. That's bullshit. They should open at 12:00 AM or as early as possible, and close at midnight.

We vote on tuesdays.

I think it's funny, the two term limit. It was argued heavily for by Republicans, kind of the anti-FDR rule. However, the first president it can be seen to have affected was Eisenhower. And the second it can be seen to have affected was also a republican, Ronnie Ray-Gun.

What I really can't stand is the polls closing at 8:00 PM. That's bullshit. They should open at 12:00 AM or as early as possible, and close at midnight.

Tuesday that's right yeah well same thing on a week day, what this do the polls open?

Didn't truman bring in the two term limit thing? And yes it probably did effect Eisenhower, one of the better Presidents of the US.

Not all people who fight for this right are Republicans, and even now your just taking some Republicans and painting them with the same brush.

I didn't say that all gun toting maniacs are republicans. I joked that all republicans were gun toting maniacs. However, taking into account the satire of my statement, I meerly said that republicans have the image of liking their guns, moreso than the democrats.

However, could you indulge me, and show me an example of a republican who is for more gun control and less gun rights? I'm not denying their existance, I've just not encountered it yet.

you sometimes have to travel long distnces to ensure that you can vote if you live in away from major cities

What? I've never lived anywhere near a major city and I've never had to travel more than 15 miles to vote. In most rural places in the US township halls, high school and perhaps middle schools are used as polling places.

Of course, maybe in some of the sparsely populated Western states like Montana you have to go 200 miles to vote, but out there you have to travel 200 miles to buy milk.

However, could you indulge me, and show me an example of a republican who is for more gun control and less gun rights? I'm not denying their existance, I've just not encountered it yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Rudy_Giuliani#Gun_control.2Fgun_rights

What? I've never lived anywhere near a major city and I've never had to travel more than 15 miles to vote. In most rural places in the US township halls, high school and perhaps middle schools are used as polling places.

Of course, maybe in some of the sparsely populated Western states like Montana you have to go 200 miles to vote, but out there you have to travel 200 miles to buy milk.

Exactly whereas if it was really democratic and they wanted your vote they would come to you rather than you having to go to them.

Exactly whereas if it was really democratic and they wanted your vote they would come to you rather than you having to go to them.

So what does living in a big city have to do with it? It's not like they go door to door in big cities collecting votes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Rudy_Giuliani#Gun_control.2Fgun_rights

Thanks. ^^

So what does living in a big city have to do with it? It's not like they go door to door in big cities collecting votes.

Wait a minute what, you lost me. But in a big city they have or at least should have booths that are quite close to where you live.

Wait a minute what, you lost me. But in a big city they have or at least should have booths that are quite close to where you live.

They're fairly close in rural areas as well. In fact, given the smaller populations, it probably takes less time to get to those polling areas in rural areas. For example, my sister lives in Detroit and it takes her about 30 mins to get to the local high school, which is her polling place, and that's given normal traffic. On election day it'll probably take her twice as long. Where I live it's physically farther away but I can go 80kph the entire way, even with "heavy" traffic and it takes me 15 minutes.

Tuesday that's right yeah well same thing on a week day, what this do the polls open?

Didn't truman bring in the two term limit thing? And yes it probably did effect Eisenhower, one of the better Presidents of the US.

Um... no. It was a constitutional amendment. The president has between little and nothing to do with those.

They're fairly close in rural areas as well. In fact, given the smaller populations, it probably takes less time to get to those polling areas in rural areas. For example, my sister lives in Detroit and it takes her about 30 mins to get to the local high school, which is her polling place, and that's given normal traffic. On election day it'll probably take her twice as long. Where I live it's physically farther away but I can go 80kph the entire way, even with "heavy" traffic and it takes me 15 minutes.

Even those living in very remote areas?

Even those living in very remote areas?

In states using the township system (which is most of the US east of the Mississippi) yes. Townships are generally about 36 miles^2 in size and township halls are always polling places.

I'm not entirely sure how things are done out West, not having ever lived out there. Again, I know that various schools and local government offices are generally used as polling places.

Of course, you'll have some people that live in such remote areas that it's a hassle to get to a polling place, but it's such an insignificant portion of the population that I don't really think it's worth the state installing Diebold machines into National Guard helicopters to go ensure those people can vote. Either way, that's why it's much easier to get absentee ballots these days.

In states using the township system (which is most of the US east of the Mississippi) yes. Townships are generally about 36 miles^2 in size and township halls are always polling places.

I'm not entirely sure how things are done out West, not having ever lived out there. Again, I know that various schools and local government offices are generally used as polling places.

Of course, you'll have some people that live in such remote areas that it's a hassle to get to a polling place, but it's such an insignificant portion of the population that I don't really think it's worth the state installing Diebold machines into National Guard helicopters to go ensure those people can vote. Either way, that's why it's much easier to get absentee ballots these days.


This is exactly my point not very democratic to not allow them to do this, not that it has to be National Guard helicopters. No vote is insignificant. But well hey just my opinion, for a minute there i thought I was about to go correct an American Studies/Political scientist professor then.

This is exactly my point not very democratic to not allow them to do this, not that it has to be National Guard helicopters. No vote is insignificant. But well hey just my opinion, for a minute there i thought I was about to go correct an American Studies/Political scientist professor then.

If it's really that difficult for them to get to their polling place they can request an absentee ballot. I know people who do that simply because they don't want to go wait in line at the township hall.

If it's really that difficult for them to get to their polling place they can request an absentee ballot. I know people who do that simply because they don't want to go wait in line at the township hall.

Yeah ok, there were a few other faults but I can't remember them now.

Yeah ok, there were a few other faults but I can't remember them now.

There are certainly numerous faults, just getting to a polling place (although there have been instances of being told the wrong place) once you're registered (which can also be an issue) isn't really one of them.

I've thought about this and this is just registration fraud. Condemnable but at least it isn't voter fraud. They can register 3 billion 'people' in California but registrations don't matter. It's if they vote.

This is just a rough idea. Haven't put a lot of thought into it but perhaps, off the top of my head, the easiest way to keep this crap from happening is to require voters to show two forms of IDs when they go to vote. One is a state issued driver's licence or US Birth certificate (or naturalization forums) and the other is your Social Security card or Passport. A computer system would be set up to verify the IDs prior to anyone being able to go into the ballot box. This would prevent any illegals from voting and anyone trying to ballot hop. Some may squeak through but this is just a rough idea. I'm sure there is more we can do to secure it.

Perhaps mail-in ballots would only be accepted for military persons overseas, or those who work overseas. If so, then we can require all mail-ins from overseas to be given, by hand, to the US embassy at whatever nation that citizen is in. Again, citizens would be required to show two forms of legal ID prior to the embassies accepting the ballots.

Also make the penalty for voter fraud a minimum of 5-10 years in jail and a $100,000 mandatory fine per offense. Perhaps even make voter registration penalties this stiff as well....that would stop this ACORN-type nonsense all together.

Hell, maybe a National ID card like the RealID act is exactly what we need.

Somewhat related ...

Just ran across this site on voting machine hackability (http://dvice.com/voting/), broken out cleverly by state and also by machine type (http://dvice.com/voting/machines.php).

I'm in an optical scan county in North Carolina, which they rate as 2nd most risky. Might be interesting to put together a list of swing states and their hacking probability ...

In states using the township system (which is most of the US east of the Mississippi) yes. Townships are generally about 36 miles^2 in size and township halls are always polling places.

I'm not entirely sure how things are done out West, not having ever lived out there. Again, I know that various schools and local government offices are generally used as polling places.

Of course, you'll have some people that live in such remote areas that it's a hassle to get to a polling place, but it's such an insignificant portion of the population that I don't really think it's worth the state installing Diebold machines into National Guard helicopters to go ensure those people can vote. Either way, that's why it's much easier to get absentee ballots these days.

Schools, post offices, city hall/town hall, county courthouse, other courthouses are used as polling places. My polling place, if I didn't vote absentee, would be the Alameda Council Boy Scout office, a few blocks away.

I deem that anyone supporting the GOP is supporting criminals and criminal activities, and is therefore a criminal themself. Thus, we should arrest all registered republicans for the crime of being republican.

I'm also being serious. I know it sounds like satire, but dammit, republicans should be shot, by the guns they fight so dearly to own.

Good luck with that. My recommendation to you is, don't show up at MY door with an idea like that.

Why do politician bitch about voter fraud? Haven't voters tolerated their fraud all along?
/thread, for real.

Good luck with that. My recommendation to you is, don't show up at MY door with an idea like that.

Why? Are you threatening to put a bullet through his skull?

but of course you aren't democratic anyway your President must be at least 35 and can only serve two terms

Umm, how exactly is that undemocratic?

Why? Are you threatening to put a bullet through his skull?

No. The police in CT look very poorly on people that attempt breaking and entering, kidnapping/unlawful imprisonment, and/or murder.

Um, I happen to live "out West" and I can tell you that things are not anywhere near as difficult as you guys seem to think, voting wise.

Usually, areas for voting are broken up into a large number of precincts, which all have polling places in one area or another that's super close to everyone as possible, so the net result is not having to really go all that much farther than you would in a city. It's just rural miles as opposed to city miles.

early voting and absentee voting negates any trouble the remote voter might face.

if you live 200 miles from the voting booth you still have to go into town sometime between the opening of absentee voting applications and election day. you get it done then.

They tried doing it in Michigan too

http://michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote

LOL, that's the county that I live in.

*hugs Macomb County, MI*

LOL, that's the county that I live in.

*hugs Macomb County, MI*

And Cox decided to run with Bishop's newest silliness. At least he hasn't issued a formal opinion yet.

http://www.freep.com/article/20081025/NEWS15/810250301

And I think this is possibly right on.

http://www.freep.com/article/20081025/COL10/81025022