The Washington Constitution doesn’t require a “residence” as a condition of voting as long as a person meets all other registration requirements. (Article VI Section1)
Voters who lack a traditional residential address can register at the shelter, park, motor home, intersection or other identifiable location they consider their residence. This location will be used to determine which precinct they will vote in. (RCW 29A.08.112 effective 2005)
Along with your residential address, you must also provide a valid mailing address. An accurate, valid mailing address is essential in order to receive ballots and election information on time. This can include a post office box, address of a friend or relative, shelter, or general delivery at a local post office.
Well, at least she balances out the poll worker / Republican cheerleader I encountered this morning also on Long Island. There out to be clear rules against this.
7-eleven is running a promotion called 7-election, where you get to drink your coffee from a cup that’s either red or blue depending on your party affiliation.
There weren’t any blue cups for sale, but tons and tons of red cups. Not sure if that’s a bad sign or a good one.
I realize the reason for this has already been discussed, but I fail to see what the real problem would be if that was the ordering for every single ballot.
Are there really that many people who vote for “The guy whose name is at the top of the list”?
Are there that many people who think “Well, I was going to vote for Obama, but I can’t find his name here, so I guess I’ll vote for Romney instead”?
I’m sure there is a non-zero number of people who will do the former (and knowing people, there’s probably a non-zero number of people who will do the latter as well), but does anyone really claim that it’s statistically significant?
FTR, I am a former Republican, recently re-registered Libertarian.
Which is why states rotate by precinct, to at least diffuse the effect somewhat. I’d be very wary of a state that put one candidate or another at the top statewide, but Ohio at least doesn’t seem to be doing that.
I don’t even think rotating by precinct is that great of an idea. It’d be great if there was a lottery (kind of like the debate coin toss) and the order was determined as a result of the lottery and it was that way on every ballot in the country, and everybody knew it. That would take the suspected shenanigans out of it, I’d think.
2:41 Eastern time - I’m ready to call the first results.
With 0% of precincts reporting, I project that Gary Johnson (L) and Jill Stein (G) have lost New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Massachusetts and New Jersey.
While it’s hours until the polls close on the east coast, and even longer for the rest of the country, the math now gets very difficult for both of them.
Again, Gary Johnson and Jill Stein have lost the following states:
New York
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Florida
Massachusetts
New Jersey
I’m going to be at work until 9 pm PT here; anybody have a link for a site that’s going to be having updated info on counts & numbers & such that I can leave in the background and refresh every once in a while?
A study done while the Texas Voter ID law was being discussed uncovered few actual cases of voter fraud. Nearly all of them involved Absentee ballots; Voter ID would not solve that little problem. The Lege passed Voter ID anyway–to have it tossed out of Federal Court. It’s being appealed but is not in effect today.
The Republicans are behind those laws & have probably given up on Washington as a lost cause. Their worry about Texas heartens me–demographics mean we won’t be solidly red forever…
I did not monitor the poll worker long enough to determine if she was randomizing but I strongly suspect that she was not. All she had to do was roughly gesture how to vote for one party by making a horizontal motion over the ballet. Instead she pointed to each individual Republican circle.
1.It’s in Ohio
2. It’s an electronic voting machine, most likely without a paper trail
3. A computer hack could change the screen display, which would lead to switched votes (see explanation below)
Re: #3:
Suppose the ordering of candidates is supposed to be invariable, and when the machines are sent out to polling places, the internal software counts someone tapping the top rectangle as a vote for Romney, a tap of the second rectangle from the top as a vote for Obama, etc.
Then, what if someone hacked the screen display to be different from what it was supposed to be, i.e., reordered the rectangles, either every time or every once and a while.
Then someone tapping the rectangle displaying “Obama/Biden” may not be actually voting for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
