Or, in many cases like the lady in the OP, vote by mail. Twenty-eight states allow no-excuse voting by mail.
This is as much a voter education problem as anything else.
Fuck the voting by mail shit. We have a right to vote on election day in person (except that one state, Oregon?). If one candidate gets caught with a live boy or dead girl on election eve, we should be able to account for that in our voting. So don’t go saying that we should be satisfied with anything less than voting in person with no extraordinary waits. Sure, have early voting and vote by mail for those that want it. But don’t shove it down our throats.
Here’s what you do- shitcan the electronic voting devices. They’re too expensive, easy to rig for the Republicans, and slow things down too much. Just use optically scanned printed ballots. Want to put two more booths in a precinct? Get a fucking folding table, a folded piece of cardboard for privacy, two folding chairs, and two pens. You can fucking rent the tables and chairs. You could but 100 voting stations in each precinct for what, say a couple hundred bucks? Have 10 workers signing people in and checking names rather than the two blue-haired ladies you normally have. Run two shifts, 6 in the morning till 10 at night.
Then make some accountability- if the state’s secretary of state can’t organize an election where everyone gets to vote in a reasonable time, he/she can be charged with a felony. Put some teeth into it. Make little pricks like Ohio’s Blackwell of 2004 fame either work for a fair election or spend some time in jail.
Liberals - for when whining about everything else gets boring, you whine about FOX.
She was not denied her right to vote. But if you want to complain about someone being uncaring, try complaining about the asshole election judge who couldn’t be bothered to allow her to move to the head of the line out of sheer compassion.
But of course, that would be the logical person to be pissed off at, and that person might be a Democrat, so better whine about FOX instead.
I have two proposals for voter ID. The first is, I believe, relatively inexpensive: require each voter to affix a inked fingerprint to the voter rolls next his his name, unless there is some compelling reason he cannot.
The second is to support the extant photo ID laws developed in various states. This is more expensive and less definitive as far as obtaining positive ID for convictions, but works reasonably well and does a great deal to increase voter confidence in the integrity of the system.
Neither system purports to guarantee no voter fraud. Both systems would increase confidence in the outcome of elections.
Those are two specific proposals.
Your turn.
No, you don’t. You have a right to vote. The mechanism of voting is not defined in the constitution.
You can vote by mail on election day. Did you think you couldn’t?
I know it won’t cost that much, because Indiana has been doing it for years.
No state has ever, to my knowledge, fielded a system which guarantees no single voter has to wait 51 minutes,or three hours. So that cost is far more speculative.
Again, focusing on average wait times allows you to estimate costs a bit more reasonably.
Once again, this doesn’t really address any points I have made.
I don’t include you in that admittedly gratuitous slam. You have consistently spoken of reducing AVERAGE wait times, which I believe is a very realistic goal and with which I have no quarrel.
My proposal is that Fox News not be allowed to lie about a non-existant problem like voter fraud unless they had evidence. That would increase confidence in the outcome of elections at much less cost. Your turn.
Just to clarify: just because I wasn’t the target of your remarks, doesn’t mean I’m OK with what you said.
You “believe” that this would be inexpensive. Based on a gut feeling? An estimate? A guess?
I say it would cost a ton of money. To pay for your proposal, should we raise taxes by 50%? That will kill the economy – if it turns out that’s what’s needed, should we do it?
Wait… is there an echo in here?
Gosh, we sure have some great plans afoot to promote voter equality and opportunity! Shirley, no political organization will oppose such a thing, seeing as it will promote a much greater voter turnout!
Me? Tequila and bongwater, why do you ask?
Um… ok. Let’s explore that.
In light of the existence of the First Amendment, could you explain just how you intend to implement your proposal?
I contend your proposal has some severe social costs associated with vitiating the First Amendment.
I wasn’t being serious. It’s funny how you can’t turn your robotness off to read normally for even two seconds.
But I find it funny that the same party that is telling lies to the public the erode confidence in the voting system based on a non-existing problem, and proposes voter registration that will surely disproportionately benefit their party and cost quite a bit of money, then goes around to complain about “cost” of keeping voters from waiting 3 hours in line in the case of Bricker here…anyone who can’t see that the game is afoot is a fool and I have a bridge to sell them.
No such luck: unlike liberals, when I say something about costs, I actually have specifics in mind.
Adding a fingerprint space to voter rolls will increase the vertical space taken up by a voter’s name and address threefold. I know this, because this idea came to me while I was serving as an election volunteer, and I measured. Therefore, it means that we will triple printing costs for voter rolls. Kinko’s will produce a bound volume of voter roll size for $125. That means that, even assuming no volume discounts, we’re talking less than $250 per voter roll now printed.
Ink pads included in round number.
Your turn.
Oh, joking?
Funny how so many liberal ideas dissolve under scrutiny and then turn out to be jokes all along.
See, that was a joke too.
Or was it?
Don’t much care. But I wanted to be clear that your idea is fine, even so.
Except
-
Vote by mail without special reason isn’t legal in every state (mine, for instance).
-
Actual, real, prosecuted voter fraud usually involves vote by mail, since the person suborning the voter can watch the voter fill out the ballot.
-
If you misvote by mail (fill in three ovals when you were only supposed to vote for two candidates, etc.) there’s no way to fix the problem. If you vote at the polling place, you can spoil your ballot, get a new ballot, and vote correctly.
-
If you vote ahead of time, and the candidate you voted for dies before the election, you’re out of luck. This happened to me in 2002.
A simpler answer is to require paper ballots for all elections. Get rid of voting machines, which are the root of the problem. Paper ballots don’t break down, are quickly counted by optical scan machines, and provide a paper trail for recounts. In the last election, when people were waiting for a voting booth, we handed out clip boards to voters who didn’t want to wait for a booth. No muss, no fuss, virtually no expense.
Oregon and Washington seem to be doing just fine, and they only have vote by mail. Vote-by-mail maintains an 81% approval rating in Oregon. I wonder how many other states rate that high.
And what if there are important last-minute revelations about a candidate? Like, the night before election we discover that the guy we already voted for is a secret Russian Communist spy. I will be kind of mad at myself for being such an eager beaver if this ever happens.