The Military Ballots, et al

Great Debates
1

I started a new thread…I think the following comment deserves notice. No one is obligated to read it or respond to it.

I was watching some kind of town hall thing and the Bush people getting apopletic over the absentee votes of the military issue, getting all puffed up and purple about “our men and women serving their country overseas!” foam, foam…

Well, I can understand the strong feelings. The men and women of our armed forces are the folks we rely on to save our asses in case the shit hits the fan, they are the ones who are going to be on the front lines if necessary, dying, if necessary, so we should feel a special desire to honor their votes. I agree with the sentiment.

But by the same token…I’m quite sure that a fair number of the elderly voters in Florida either fought in WWII or Korea, or had brothers and husbands who fought or even DIED in either conflict. This is the generation that actually DID save the world and kept it safe for Democracy, the generation that actually PAID the price, not just were ready to…don’t THEIR votes deserve a special consideration as well? I certainly think so. They surely deserve better than to be told they are too old and stupid to have their vote honored.

In fact, I think all Americans’ votes deserve to be heard, counted, and included. But if we’re going to get into this business of elevating one segment of the population’s votes above another, I honestly believe my point should be addressed.

stoid

2

Stoidela,

This is fascinating!

First: you assert that the military are taught not to think (please see the people hunting thread for verification) and then you assert their votes should be counted. If you don’t feel they’re thinking, then why do you support their voting?

Second: So only the folks who fought in actual battles deserve your consideration? Why is that? Is that because the latest group of Soldiers/Sailors/Airmen/Marines/Coast Guardsman managed to defend the country by power projection and thus not have to go to blows?

BTW: This posting brought to you from your friendly retired Petty Officer First Class, US Navy.

3

FTR: Not all overseas absentte ballots are cast by members of the military. There are, of course, the adult family members of said military and there are also civilians who just happen to reside out of the country and get to cast their votes via absentte ballot.

4

Monty asked:

What Stoidela had said was:

(my bolding)

Pardon me, Monty, but I fail to see where she said only those who fought in battle deserve special consideration.

5

The difference between the votes from overseas military personnel and the folks in Palm Beach County is self-evident.

The military members cast their ballots legally and correctly. The reason Democrats are attempting to exclude them has to do with postmarks (and they are misinterpreting the law, BTW). Well, that’s not the real reason they’re trying to exclude them. But it is the stated one.

The Floridians Stoidela references voted improperly. In many cases, it would be an impossible stretch to determine what the intent was on a particular ballot (i.e., if they punched for two candidates). Counting dimpled chads, where they didn’t even punch one corner of the perforation off, is a joke as well, but that’s been sufficiently hashed.

If military ballots are in some way improperly done BY THE VOTER, they should be excluded. Trying to get them thrown out on a technicality outside the voters’ control (and, it turns out, outside of the controlling law) is an outrage.

Particularly given the revelations that a Gore advisor distributed memos to Democratic canvassars essentially giving them instructions on how to go about contesting overseas absentee military ballots and get them thrown out. And, in these heavily Democratic counties we’ve all been focused on, huge numbers of them were excluded.

Things that make you go “hmmm …”

6

:inhaling deep lungfull of clean, fresh air:

Milo, you sure know how to cut through the BS and get to the quick of the matter.

You just went to the top of the list of people I think should go down to Florida, kick some serious legal butt and get this mess resolved.

Military absentee ballots (even those of spouses, dependents and retirees living abroad) are fairly easily identified by either the APO or FPO zip codes, and thusly easier to target by anyone wishing to try to eclude them.

7

So it’s OK to accept fraudulant ballots as long as someone claims that they are from someone who has served in the military ? The absentee ballot count has been a major source of fraud in Florida election for years; hence the new requirement for voter ID numbers with returned ballots. If you don’t enforce the anti-fraud measures you end up vulnerable to fraud. It’s too bad these guys didn’t get there ballots properly witnessed or postmarked, or failed to include their voter ID, but they, like all other voters need to take care to FOLLOW THE LAWS if they want their vote counted.

8

Some Republican think that some Democrats are going to unusual lengths to exclude overseas ballots that would normally be counted. They are using every possibility to call each of them into question, and deliberately discard as many as possible because past elections, and indeed the results of this one have shown the majority of these votes to be Republican.

At the same time, these same people are seeking to use every means; fair and foul to get each and every Palm Beach vote included because the same evidence suggests that they will be predominately Democratic votes.

This strategy makes good sense if your goal is to get Gore into the White House.

Unfortunately, it is horribly unfair, unconstitutional and certainly hypocritical. It may even be illegal.

A vote from overseas, and a vote from Palm Beach should have exactly the same value, and should be evaluated for inclusion or exclusion in the final count based on clearly defined and nonsubjective criteria.

I hope it’s not true, but my wise and evil side says that it almost certainly is.

9

As has been exhaustively explored on other threads, I don’t think anyone is outraged that an improperly filled-out military ballot be accepted. If the person didn’t do it right, didn’t follow the directions, well, too bad.

What has happened, at least in some cases, is that a postmark was not present on an otherwise perfectly and properly filled-out, signed and dated, ballot. Because sometimes, in the military, they don’t put a postmark on the mail. There are plenty of people who can explain why this happens in the military.

10

And if there is a law in Florida that requires a postmark for it to be considered a valid vote, what, exactly, would you propose? That the law be ignored 'cus the military sometimes doesn’t postmark? How do you justify that?

11

This thread (scroll down a little) explores this issue in better detail.

12

I’ll just summarize what I put into another thread on this very issue:

If we are going o go by the letter of the law, then yes, military ballots w/o postmarks must be excluded. Even the very properly filled out ones. Even though that postmark issue is beyond the individual voter’s control, and from no fault of their own.

It sucks, I personally hate the idea, but the House Rules say that’s the way it is, and them’s the cards as they’ve been dealt.

The time to address the issue isn’t now, during the hotly contested counting process. I’m e-mailing my federal legislators tomorrow to light a fire under the military leadership’s collective asses to correct this travesty ASAP.

I am, after all, a veteran, a card-carrying member of the VFW, and a registered voter ;).

But I also feel the other side of this coin holds true for the peopel who complain about the butterfly ballot. Now is not the time; correct it for the next election.

13

I dunno, Ex; it seems you’re arguing two sides of the coin here.

I agree that if there are overseas/military ballots that do not make the legal cut, they should not be counted. However, if the ballot in Palm Beach did not make the legal cut, then we have a different situation. If it was simply the people screwing up, well, then they’re screwed. But if the ballot was illegal, then we have bigger problems. (I’m not judging whether it was or was not – an actual judge, or panel of 'em, may have to decide that.)

So, it seems to me that we should stick to the law in both cases (and, as you noted, make any changes to those laws before the next election, as necessary).

Mind you, if that ballot is determined to have been illegal, I’m not entirely sure what should be done about it. I’m not really in favor of a re-vote at this point. It may be that, as you indicated, nothing should be done. But, again, that’s why the judges get paid the big bucks.

14

Okay, David, a clarification is in order.

If the butterfly ballot format is somehow found to be illegal/improper (though I’m unsure as how that may be so; wasn’t it approved by both Rep./Dem. Election Board Members for that district? Or am I missing something?), then perhaps a revote is in order. Are Board members elected? Or appointed by local Party Headquarters? Or does it vary by District/State?

If you’re arguing that the ballot format is beyond the voter’s control, then, maybe; but I’m swimming into deeper waters here, and overall feel that what should be a fairly straightforward-as-humanly-possible proccess is getting fairly subjective.

(I know; “If “should” were “wood” we’d all have fireplaces.”)

Anybody know of a tropical island with beutiful nekkid women with no concept of monogamy? I might be changing my address if this keeps up.

15

Please cite the exact text where anybody made such a claim.
THE EXACT TEXT, please.

What some people have said is that overseas military ballots should be accepted if they are valid and were filed in a timely fashion. Nobody has said that it is sufficient to merely “claim that they are from someone who has served in the military.” NOBODY.

Military ballots can be identified. Just look at the Democratic Party’s own instructions, wherein they urged their people to be on the alert for military ballots, which they were to discredit. Obviously, the Democratic Party believes that these ballots are identifiable.

16

What a perfect explanation of the military ballot situation. I will be using that as my explanation from now on. It is simple and accurate.

17

I don’t see how you could propose remedying through a re-vote an illegal ballot format, but not care about remedying the illegal (I presume) non-postmarking of absentee ballots.

Similarly, if someone is going to whine about the “intent of the voter”, I don’t see how they could ignore a case where the intent of the voter is clearly known, and the voter obviously intended to get it postmarked on time. Personally, I believe the law is pretty clear that whatever laws that existed prior to the election must be followed.

18

Can anyone imagine the outrage if the Republicans tried something like this and targeted only areas with a high percentage of black voters?

We know that blacks voted 90% for the democrats, so would it be acceptable for Republicans to go into black areas and try to disqualify as many votes as possible?
Of course not. If you are feeling outrage about this, then you can begin to understand why so many of us are outraged by targeting the military ballots.

19

Waterj2: I don’t know if your last post was directed at me or not, but I’ll address it anyway.

I assumed that DavidB and anyone else reading it would understand that the revote might be done on an improved, more concise ballot format. My apologies for not making that clear.

But as to non-postmarked military ballots: APOs and FPOs (Army and Fleet Post offices, respectively) are not required by military regs. to postmark mail, as they operate under different regulations than the U.S. Postal Service. They can and will, as time permits, but as I explained in the “We want EVERY ballot counted” thread, it’s not always possible for the APOs/FPOs to do so.

That this oversight is a travesty, and could disallow thousands of military votes, is besides the point that the letter of the law in FL says all overseas/absentee ballots must be postmarked (by a certain date, no less) to be valid.

I am personally, deeply troubled by this, but the letter of the law is clear, if flawed, and should be corrected in time for the next election.

I personally would like to see VP Gore call for the inclusion of the military votes, if the will of the servicemember/voter is manifestly evident by a correctly filled out ballot, military mail peculiairities notwithstanding.

But in observing the letter of the law, I cannot, in good conscience, bitch about their not being included for lack of postmarks.

20

I don’t have any strong feelings about the military ballot thing, but here’s where I am on the whole situation.

  1. That the law supports recounts by hand.

  2. The law supports accepting absentee ballots that do not perfectly conform under certain circumstances.

  3. Gore wants the law that supports recounts to be followed to the letter because he wants to win and believes he is the true winner, not only because of the national popular vote, but because of the screwed ballot issues in Florida.

  4. Bush wants the law regarding military ballots followed to the letter because he wants to win and he believes he is the true winner. I think he thinks he is the true winner because he came out on top in the first and second counts.

  5. Gore says every vote should be counted and fights to exclude votes that don’t conform and that would probably not go his way.

  6. Bush signs laws that support hand counts and says he thinks the states should take care of themselves, then fights hand counts when they don’t work to his advantage and runs to the Federal courts to try and get the counts stopped, because they probably won’t go his way.

I think, in the end, we see loads of hypocrisy and bad behavior going on, and it is undeniable that both sides have very conveeeeenient ways of interpreting the law. Unfortunately, the law in Florida is set up this way, so it DOES make everybody right.

So here’s where we are:

Everybody is right.

Yep.

Both sides.

I have come to the conclusion that overall, and where it counts, everyone involved and all of us who are passionately observing, BELIEVE utterly in our own cause and our own view. I don’t think that there is much in the way of cynical bending of reality going on, I really don’t. I think we all, and Gore and Bush and company, all really, truly believe that we are on the side of truth.

And again, I think we are all right.

So what do we do?

The only thing that we really can at this point, and live with the results: let JUDGES decide. That is what they are there for, that is what they do. And they have an amazing ability to do it in a way that is usually wise, and as fair as is possible. That is why they are judges, right?

So, for me, that’s what I’m willing to live with. Personally, of course, I think the fairest answer is let the hand counts finish. But if the judges say no, I’ll accept that.

How about you guys?

stoid
having an attack of sanity in spite of the fact that I despise and fear Dubya

PS: Of course, I find it amazing that the folks on the other side can believe they have the truth as passionately as I do, because of course I believe I DO have the truth…but hey, that kind of thinking has proved amazingly productive, hasn’t it? I would love to present every detail of this to some foreign professor or other intelligent person who doesn’t give two figs about America or her leaders and hasn’t even heard about what has happened, and get his or her take on what’s right and fair. But I doubt I’ll get the chance.