It's also not very hard to fix the problem of long lines. Waiting more than an hour is a clear sign of incompetence if not actual malice.
Also frustrating: when I called the local elections office to inquire about early voting, I was advised I could do so, but only for president—not for congressman or senator. I then found out (too late) from friends who early voted that candidates for all three offices were on the early ballot. Urgggggggggg.
Are you talking about stories from four years ago? Or have there been lines this year already? I'm confused.
All these lines could be avoided if you could prep-order the next president and have them delivered to your house.
stupid phonetyping autocorrect function.
More polling stations.
Give every school kid the day off, make use of every school gym in the country.
Give every school kid the day off, make use of every school gym in the country.
Works over here.
Paper ballots, not 'voting machines'
votiming machiens are like what happens when the government goes shopping at Sharper Image instead of staples for its supplies.
8 It's not like the US has historically done a good job with paper ballots, either.
Brock, I'm talking about now, not 4 years ago. Many places are seeing multi-hour lines even for early voting that is already underway.
10 In a sane system, this would embarrass the hell out of everyone involved, rather than being a feature for half of them.
Three hours to vote? Hey, that was me on Saturday in Arlington. More like 3.5 hours, actually. Luckily, it was a nice day. If it had been raining or something, I probably would have left and tried my luck on Tuesday. But I'll be working Tuesday, so I figured I should get it over with.
And I'm glad I did, because I talked the McCain voter in line behind me into switching and voting for Obama. I mean, that's exaggerating, but at least partially true: afterwards she told me she had been leaning McCain but ended up voting Obama. She said she changed her mind partially because she was impressed by how well-organized and professional his campaign has been, but I figure talking politics with me might have pushed her over the edge.
More than makes up for feeling guilty for not canvassing the past two weekends. This past Saturday I missed it because I was voting - should have voted earlier in the day, I guess, but I would have made it even if the wait had been only two hours - and the Saturday before that it was pouring rain.
There have been multi-hour lines for early voting? I'm guess I've missed those stories. But holy shit.
At my local polling place I rarely have to wait in line on election day.
Are the early vote lines due to the fact that there are many fewer early vote locations (as far as I know, San Francisco allows early voting only at City Hall, whereas there must be hundreds of election-day polling places) combined with an unusually high early voting turnout this year?
I'm sitting in a waiting room, and one of the magazines is "Garden & Gun". I'm too scared to read it.
14: got to be, right? And now that I think about it more, I guess this doesn't bother me much. As long as no one will have to wait in any long lines on election day.
11: Amen.
I remain surprised by the number of self-proclaimed liberals who are okay with voting having to be some amount of "work." The last few conversations I've had on the topic, we went all the way back to why voter tests are a terrible idea (!), before we inched our way forward to why 7 a.m.-to-8 p.m. might not be enough for someone to get to the polls.
Granted, I myself hate voting by mail, but not because of turnout reasons. And I really, really wish I lived in a state with same-day registration and early voting.
As long as no one will have to wait in any long lines on election day.
You're kidding, right? Would you actually put any money on this, or was that just a hopeful wish on your part?
19: Kidding. Or, serious, I guess, that early-voting lines wouldn't bother me if that were true.
No lines here in the vote-by-mail state.
I'm sitting in a waiting room, and one of the magazines is "Garden & Gun". I'm too scared to read it.
It might have useful advice on skinning rabbits.
This year it has been really surprising how many states have early voting. I don't remember that being mentioned at all in 2004, except for absentee people and the Oregon vote-by-mail paradigm. I would have guessed that maybe four states had early voting at actual physical polling stations, all for reasons of sparsely dispersed populations. Now suddenly it seems that Pennsylvania is the archaic outlier for having elections last only one day instead of for a week or two weeks.
14: got to be, right? And now that I think about it more, I guess this doesn't bother me much. As long as no one will have to wait in any long lines on election day.
However, people will in fact have to wait in long lines on election day. Are you bothered?!?
As I've said, making it difficult to vote, excluding voters, long voting lines, short voting hours, etc., are always signs of some sort of corruption.
Not necessarily Republican corruption, machine politicians might use these methods too. But usually Republicans.
Usually you can figure out the reasons by figuring out who is inconvenienced most.
Exhibit #2999 in the case against the media was the way that long voting lines were taken as heartwarming proof of Americans' faith in democracy. That argument might be good in new democracies like Afghanistan or the Ukraine (not necessarily so even there), but not in a long-established democracy.
The reality is that the bigger the turnout, the better Democrats do. A lot of active Democrats including many in leadership positions are administrative, professional, and academic elitists, though, and this fact is often forgotten, at least in casual conversation. Lots of Republican voters are very stupid, but so are lots of Democratic voters, and some of the voters we need are not very politically motivated.
As I keep saying, Republican populism is fake, but Democratic elitism is real.
Sorry for repeating half of Becks fine post.
I'm stunned and impressed and touched and angry (100% of each, all at once) that so many Americans are willing to queue for hours to make sure they get to vote this year.
But I really, really hope that this never happens again.
23: That argument might be good in new democracies like Afghanistan or the Ukraine (not necessarily so even there), but not in a long-established democracy.
The last two Presidential elections in the US were stolen. Afghanistan and the Ukraine have a better track record of running free and fair elections than the US does. What makes you so snooty, eh?
I just heard on the news that 41 percent of registered voters in NC have voted already. That's huge.
16: I bet there are other fun combinations out there, too. "Home and Gun" "Car and Gun" "Soap Opera Digest and Guns"
Are the early vote lines due to the fact that there are many fewer early vote locations (as far as I know, San Francisco allows early voting only at City Hall, whereas there must be hundreds of election-day polling places) combined with an unusually high early voting turnout this year?
This is the case here in the heart of
"The Heart of It All" -- that is to say, of course, Columbus, Ohio. Because of the 2004 debacle, and because we now have a Democratic Secretary of State there is early voting in Ohio, but only in a few polling places. Here, there is just one early voting location for the whole county, and on weekends and even on weekdays in the last week times there have very long lines -- the Obama campaign hasn't helped any by having various "Vote Early" events with buses taking people to the voting location. I'm lucky to have a smart wife who persuaded me to take off early from work last week, and we were able to vote with no wait at all.
In 2004, we waited for several hours to vote at our local polling place on election day.
After years of voter apathy you expect the most neglected branch of any county government to all of a sudden be able to handle massive turnout? Holy guacamole, Batman!
Seriously, it shouldn't be that hard, but the registrar of voters has a budget of $12.73. And that's for the donuts.
32 states have early voting that runs for weeks before the election and in 32 states there are no lines until the last few days (OK, so maybe that's not true everywhere but Florida does not make a fair counterexample in any way). If you don't want people to stand in line to vote, get them to go sooner.
That said, a lot of precincts are simply too large. There are precincts in this county that have 4,000 voters in them. County boards of elections try to split precincts when they can to reduce waits but they're constrained by a number of factors, namely funding and the fear of confusing voters who've always voted in the same place and go there on election day no matter how many mailings have told them their polling place has moved.
There are a lot of engineering challenges to running an election and a lot of my enthusiasm for working elections comes from being impressed with the solutions to those challenges but some things just are not solved. I have started to think that the vote-anywhere-in-your-county model of early voting needs to be applied to election day as well with everywhere a polling place can be set up thrown open to do so but then there would be massive bottlenecks in whatever corner of a given county is also host to the mill or the plant or the industrial park or the office park warren where huge numbers of people work and in the end fewer people would vote than before.
29: TLL, that's the mechanism by which this becomes a problem. It doesn't make it any less embarrassing.
27: Forgetting "Freedom and Gun" is silly oversight.
TLL: There is nothing sudden about this problem. It may be worse this time, but there have been long lines at many locations since at least 2000.
If only y'all could track traffic at polling booths online or something...
The only time I've ever had to wait in a more-than-nominal line was for a high-profile local issue (stadium funding in '97). The Mayor watched my dog while I voted.
Given that early voting is big and relatively new (my impression is identical to Ned's, although I see that it was big in some states last time), I'm less outraged by long lines - was it some sort of conventional wisdom as of October 1 that 40+% of all registered NCarolinians would vote early? I don't think so.
Basically, early voting was conceived to ease the pressure on Election Day, and to accommodate people who cannot make it to the polls that day. Instead, it's turned into the near-preferred method. Some jurisdictions have already moved to accommodate this unexpected event - I think it was Ohio that extended the hours after the first few days of crazy lines? - and more of them should, but bureaucracies don't work that way. Most polling places can't be made available every day for 2 weeks, and there aren't additional poll workers for them anyway.
Point being, I just can't view long lines for early voting as a conspiracy or corruption - the concept is newish, and the turnout is literally unprecedented. Long lines for early voting next time would be damning.
The niche market of gun and gardening enthusiasts is populated almost exclusively by growers of coca and poppies. What kind of a waiting room was this, zadfrack?
If I show up tomorrow and there is a three hour line, I ain't voting. Fortunately I live in a non-swing state, so my vote doesn't count anyway.
None of 35 should be taken to defend long lines on Election Day. That is pure evidence of corruption, if only corruption by omission (long lines in Precinct X last election, no action taken to remedy). The Kos diary on the situation in St. Louis is sobering - apparently the election planning is 100% controlled by Republicans who aren't elected by St. Louisans (?), and it's SOP to under-equip and under-staff St. Louis polling places.
The only semi-exception is in years of unprecedented turnout - 2006, I believe, was something like 20% more turnout than is typical for midterms, and if this year really maxes out, we could see 40% higher turnout than in any election of my lifetime. But the 2004 election, for instance, had pretty much typical turnout - maybe a few percent higher than average - and yet there were endless lines.
It's bizarre to me that Dems don't push amendments for a positive right to vote and an explicit right of privacy. I understand John's argument, and fundamentally agree with it, but it strikes me as such a political win-win, especially the former. "My opponent doesn't want you to be able to vote. Make him happy, and don't vote... for him. Vote for Me, and I'll make sure your vote counts every time." For people who've been disenfranchised, it's a powerful argument; for comfortable people whose votes always count, it still sounds like a Mom and Apple Pie amendment.
38: But JRoth, everything from polling and registration numbers points to this year having higher than usual turnout. `We didn't expect this' is perhaps somewhat reasonable for early voting, but it's absolute incompetence tomorrow, regardless of the increase. With all the hundreds of millions being spent on television for this race, being overstaffed etc. a bit on election day in most of the country would be an acceptable cost, far more so than people failing to vote due to lines.
Has anyone heard horror stories of people trying to vote but having been purged from the voter lists? Are there early voting states that were also purge-heavy states?
With all the hundreds of millions being spent on television for this race, being overstaffed etc. a bit on election day
But the hundreds of millions are being spent by the candidates. The county governments don't have access to that cash. Are you proposing a funding mechanism? I like it.
41: Yes, that's basically what I'm proposing, I was unclear.
It also really bothers me how accepting people are about voter suppression mechanisms. Is producing misleading media about, say, the *date* of voting not a felony? If not, why they hell not? And if so, why aren't prosecutions highly publicized? This idea generalizes.
39: Agreed, a big turnout this year is to be expected. But let's say that last time your precinct was a little short. So you order a couple more machines. Now you have enough to handle another 2004. But 2008 turns out to be 1.4X 2004. You can't just run out to Staples for new voting machines. Most states are already in the hole because of the mandate to go electronic - there's no pot of money sitting around to purchase, what, tens of thousands of new machines per state? I can't find an exact count, but PA has somewhere between 10,000 and 15,000 polling places - 15,000 new machines wouldn't even cover this year's expected surge.
I'm not trying to be contrarian here, or to defend anti-voting Republicans. I'm just saying that, in our current system (which sux), accommodating a massive turnout isn't merely a matter of will.
42: Something to piss you off.
Some of the dirty tricks are pretty creative, tho.
I'm not trying to be contrarian here, or to defend anti-voting Republicans. I'm just saying that, in our current system (which sux), accommodating a massive turnout isn't merely a matter of will.
Oh, I agree. I just thing that it's something more people ought to be outraged about, not accepting of. This really ought to be made non-partisan. For a country that prides itself so much on being democratic, the US does a lousy job of federal elections (for myriad and complicated reasons) compared to many other democracies. This should really bother people more than it seems to --- hopefully even enough to do something constructive about it.
I just heard on the news that 41 percent of registered voters in NC have voted already. That's huge.
Even more impressive, 73.2% of *NC's total 2004 vote* (not just early) has already voted.
Is producing misleading media about, say, the *date* of voting not a felony? If not, why they hell not?
Because producing misleading media on any topic is a freedom protected by the First Amendment. I'd rather not erode that on the basis of somewhat isolated cases.
Spike, so you're saying fraud is protected speech, and shouldn't be prosecutable?
Oh, and by `somewhat isolated cases' you mean, every federal election, right?
dirty tricks
We could start by renaming them. Let's try criminal felonies. It's redundant, but so what?
I've never seen long lines in Minnesota, or in Oregon when they still had polling places.
There are no difficult technical problems involved either with voting machines or organizing an election, if the will is there. It's totally routine. If there aren't enough volunteers, pay people. In areas di=ominated by a single party, you have the possibility of cheating, but that's not a technical problem.
IANAL, but I think 47 is dead wrong. From the article linked above:
"The Voting Rights Act makes it a crime to misled and intimidate voters," said McDonald. "If you can find out who's doing it, those people should be prosecuted. But sometimes it's just difficult to know who's doing what. Some of it's just anonymous."
47 is stupid. Fraud has never been a protected category of speech. Neither are intimidation, threats or "fighting words."
The longest lines for voting I've seen in MN are before work, about 100 people or so, and mostly due to the lack of a sufficient number of those flimsy privacy stalls they erect. Sometimes people will decide to sit at a table and vote, and not wait for the little stall to free up.
The rest of the process goes very quickly. Sign in, and after marking your ballot slide it into the optical scanner. Very quick. After all the buildup it almost seems like a letdown.
52: Thanks, that was my impression, but I didn't know the details.
`some of it is just anonymous' is just silly though, you're describing essentially all crimes. The problem is, of course, identifying who is doing it. But a lot of that has to do with the will to pursue it even if expensive. I'm certain a few highly publicized cases with stiff jail terms would reduce the amounts. Successfully tying people formally inside party organizations would be especially effective. Clearly they are behind some of this, at least, even if only at a remove or two.
47 - Spike, I'm close to a First Amendment absolutist, but it would be pretty easy to come up with a law with teeth that forbade misleading voters that didn't run afoul of free speech.
I'm fascinated that McCain-Feingold made it through the Supreme Court relatively intact. This business of "I'm so-and-so and I approved this message" is mandated by law. I think that mandates of this sort really ought to be unconstitutional, though I have to admit I like this particular one.
47 is stupid. [...] "fighting words."
Careful, rob.
43,
In the situation I mentioned about, the bottleneck when using paper ballot scanned by an optical scanner is the silly privacy stalls, and allowing people to mark their ballots outside the stalls (but within sight in the same room) is a good solution. They have plenty of the felt pens and ballots. They could run people through three times as fast if they needed to.
Why in the world do some states trust Diebold and then allow them to be a bottleneck? That is SO stupid.
48: I think categorizing any type of political activity as fraud is bad news. If you are going to start putting people in jail for deception and lies around election time, you'd have to lock up just about every single member of congress. Where would you draw the line between acceptable deceptive electioneering, and stuff that should be illegal?
To me this is the flip side of Republican carping about non-existent voter fraud. While there may be isolated cases where a few slow-witted folks are deceived by media telling them to vote on Wednesday, the size of the problem is roughly equivalent to the scope of people who commit voter fraud by voting twice in elections. That is, very small. In both cases, I think efforts to prevent that type of fraud are likely to be far more damaging to the system than simply accepting it as an extraordinarily minor risk factor in the overall system of voting.
60: If you are going to start putting people in jail for deception and lies around election time, you'd have to lock up just about every single member of congress.
...and your problem with this is?
While there may be isolated cases where a few slow-witted folks are deceived by media telling them to vote on Wednesday, the size of the problem is roughly equivalent to the scope of people who commit voter fraud by voting twice in elections. That is, very small.
But there are constant attempts to do the former, and virtually no attempts to do the latter.
Also, there's the fraud of telling people the wrong polling place. I'm visiting a heaviyl Republican area right now and the family got a mailer that says it's from the local Democratic committee, and tells them where their polling place is. My logical response was to think that there's a chance that the Republicans are sending out inaccurate polling place info to people who have voted Democratic in the past.
61 was me. Unfogged unwrote my data. I suspect fraud.
Curiously, voting is down in OR relative to four years ago (43 percent of ballots returned by Nov. 1, compared to 51 percent at the same point then; granted, we had 85 percent total turnout in 2004), but apparently the decrease is overwhelmingly in Republican-dominated areas, so I can't complain.
42: I love the "balance" paragraph at the end of that article - "Not only are Republican activists trying to mislead and intimidate Democratic voters, but during the primaries, Republican candidates were the target for misleading smears - who by? who can tell? We sure can't."
While there may be isolated cases where a few slow-witted folks are deceived by media telling them to vote on Wednesday, the size of the problem is roughly equivalent to the scope of people who commit voter fraud by voting twice in elections. That is, very small.
I don't think this is actually true. The issue isn't just a flyer saying election day is on Wednesday, it's these efforts to convince people that they're ineligible to vote, that they'll be arrested if they vote if they have outstanding child support payments, etc. That sort of stuff really does suppress turnout.
45
... This should really bother people more than it seems to --- hopefully even enough to do something constructive about it.
I have never had to wait in line to vote so why should I be bothered?
62: But there are constant attempts to do the former, and virtually no attempts to do the latter.
Is there any evidence that it works? Especially given the voter backlash caused by the bad PR whenever something like this comes to light?
And as far as "constant attempt".... I can't think of any I've heard about this cycle. I guess I heard Pat Buchanan make some factitious remarks about it. But I don't think we should put Pat Buchanan in jail. Not for that, anyway.
22: Now suddenly it seems that Pennsylvania is the archaic outlier for having elections last only one day instead of for a week or two weeks.
And Maryland. I expect there will be some nasty lines in Baltimore City proper tomorrow. Apparently there have been something on the order of 250,000 new voter registrations in the last couple of months, and 15,000 in the last 2 weeks before the registration deadlines; and this is in a safely Dem state. An election official on the radio this morning said turnout was expected to be 80%.
For what it's worth, just recently a system-wide computer crash (?!) made it impossible to purge the voter rolls here this year.
In pleasing news, a constitutional amendment to establish early voting & absentee voting without actually being out of state will most certainly pass tomorrow.
Where would you draw the line between acceptable deceptive electioneering, and stuff that should be illegal?
Well, regardless of the obvious desirability of reducing the acceptance of lying in politics, I don't you you have to go into any gray areas. The is an obvious and easy bright line to be drawn with the misrepresenting of basic facts.
Your contention about the magnitude of this problem would be pretty hard to support, I think; it's much more difficult to get decent numbers on vote suppression than on voter fraud, particularly in a system with as low a typical turnout as this one has. It isn't just the effect of hoping someone is `stupid' enough to believe they should vote on the 5th. You have false threats of arrests, etc. to deal with as well. Are you really saying that all of this has no actual effect? Have you got real research to back it?
And as far as "constant attempt".... I can't think of any I've heard about this cycle.
Several examples in VA, including in a heavily African-American area (near Harper's Ferry?). No link, because it was mentioned in passing in an NPR piece. But it's definitely happening, same as always.
"Where would you draw the line between acceptable deceptive electioneering, and stuff that should be illegal?"
Well, here's how we draw the line in federal elections, among other means (42 U.S.C. 1971). This is pretty uncontroversial.
No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories or possessions, at any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any such candidate.
I have never had to wait in line to vote so why should I be bothered?
Because believing you live in a democratic state requires that effectively everyone gets to vote. You may not care, of course, but if it's something your pride yourself and/or your country on, it ought to be at least plausibly true. Everything like the described problems that undermines this belief.
You'd think there would be a way to hook the basically non-partisan pro-USA sentiments widely held to a wish to believe the US was plausibly near the top of self-identified democratic countries at implementing something as fundamental to that self-identification as a federal vote. "We're number 18, we're number 18" (or whatever the number plausibly is) just doesn't have much ring to it, does it?
And as far as "constant attempt".... I can't think of any I've heard about this cycle.
Your ignorance of the existence of such really isn't decent evidence of non-existence of same. Particularly in a case where that is part of the the whole game.
The is an obvious and easy bright line to be drawn with the misrepresenting of basic facts.
Facts are contentious things, which change over time, and which are not always clear cut. Moreover, to make it fraud, you would also have to prove intent. So even if you could come out with a clear set of regulations about what can and cannot be said about polling places and election times, the main effect it would have would be to make vote suppressors step up their game to as close to the line as they can while still maintaining plausible deniability. Basically, it would be a reenactment of the same farce that now goes into skirting campaign finance laws.
What it would do, however, is open a new line of attack for political prosecutions. This would be an easy opportunity for Republican DAs to enable Republican politicians to easily flout the law, while going after Democrats for any minor, technical infringement.
Far more trouble than its worth, I think. Better to keep the law out of it, let the media do its job, and expose perpetrators to the voter backlash they richly deserve.
And as far as "constant attempt".... I can't think of any I've heard about this cycle.
Are you being serious, disingenuous, or trolling? If you live in or near a major US metro area, I'm borderline astonished, and trying to understand if this is an information-bubble problem, a social-circle problem, or willful ignorance.
Have you never:
- Been forwarded an e-mail with obviously false information (such as "You'll get arrested if you go to vote and have unpaid parking tickets")?
- Heard others (even strangers on the bus, cleaning people, security guards, etc.) discussing "safeguards" that would be illegal if actually required (e.g. can't vote without a driver's license?)
- Seen anonymous flyers in bathrooms, on telephone poles, etc. that have blatantly wrong and/or illegal information in them?
Better to keep the law out of it, let the media do its job, and expose perpetrators to the voter backlash they richly deserve.
Well that's been awfully effective the last 20 years, hasn't it?
shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other....
Noting that this list does not include "deceive", I think it sounds about right. Saying "vote on Wednesday" doesn't meet the standard. Saying "vote and you could be arrested if you have outstanding warrants" may, although its a stretch.
77: I think it has. But you and I obviously disagree about the scope of the problem.
Facts are contentious things, which change over time, and which are not always clear cut. Moreover, to make it fraud, you would also have to prove intent.
You have to prove that in any case of fraud. So what? Facts can often be "contentious, but the date of the election isn't exactly gray area. First Tuesday in November. If you put out a flyer saying it's the third Thursday, you've misrepresented a material fact. Proving intent isn't going to involve much more than whether you have some sort of credible explanation fo getting it wrong.
Seriously, no First Amendment issue here.
Deception is coercion by other means.
76: Never, on all three.
I also don't base my election information on forwarded emails, overhead conversations, or posters in the bathroom.
81: No, deception is deception. Coercion is "Vote for McCain or you are fired."
I also don't base my election information on forwarded emails, overhead conversations, or posters in the bathroom.
And I never give out my bank account information to help that nice Nigerian prince. But just because you and I are clever enough to not get taken doesn't mean that it's not fraud.
I also don't base my election information on forwarded emails, overhead conversations, or posters in the bathroom.
Presumably you are aware that others do. The question wasn't "Would you, personally, be intimidated or misled by this?" It was "Are you aware that these activities occur around you regularly?"
Given that you report never having witnessed such activities, I can see why you might think the scope of the problem is small.
(And for the record, I was not suggesting that people are obtaining election information from overhead conversations. I was illustrating the fact that many people DO get information from their social circles, and that even a person who is not a part of that social circle might overhear a conversation between two members of it, when they are in public.
If I overhear two people who don't share my socioeconomic characteristics, taking about some election "truth" I've never heard of, I might not believe it, but I might become aware that they believe it, or at least that it is circulating as an idea in their community.)
And I never give out my bank account information to help that nice Nigerian prince.
DiKitomy hates Africans.
I believe that, under current federal law, producing a flier stating that election day is Wednesday, even if produced specifically to mislead people into not voting, is NOT a crime (I'm sure that if you were misled, you could bring a civil suit for fraud whoever put together the flier, but good luck finding the person/organization and collecting damages). Obama tried to introduce legislation that would have criminalized that kind of activity, which I'll try to dig up. State law may criminalize that kind of activity, depending on where you live.
Do new/infrequent voters tend to be slow/careful? Seems to me that if I didn't do it very often and I was concerned about my ballot being invalidated, I'd move pretty slowly...
Presumably you are aware that others do.
I would submit that anyone who does is not living up to their responsibility to be an informed voter. That doesn't justify suppressing their votes, but it also does not make me feel that saving people from their own ignorance merits outlawing classes of speech and engaging in political prosecutions.
I think Spike is seriously underestimating the amount of ignorance about the democratic process among those who feel alienated from the whole system. Things that we think of as common sense, like the fact that they wouldn't have separate election days for Republicans and Democrats, are not widely understood.
Also, how can going to someone's door, announcing that you are a private detective, questioning their citizenship, and implying that they shouldn't vote not count as intimidation and threatening behavior?
Here's the language in the bill that Obama proposed dealing with this issue, which isn't yet law. Looks good to me!
Under the bill, "Whoever,before or during a Federal election knowingly communicates before or during a Federal election knowingly communicates election-related information about that election, knowing that information to be false, with the intent to prevent another person from exercising the right to vote in that election, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
"Election related information" means:
`(A) the time, place, or manner of conducting the election;
`(B) the qualifications for or restrictions on voter eligibility for the election, including--
`(i) any criminal penalties associated with voting in the election; or
`(ii) information regarding a voter's registration status or eligibility;
`(C) with respect to a closed primary election, the political party affiliation of any candidate for office, if the communication of the information also contains false information described in subparagraph (A) or (B); or
`(D) the explicit endorsement by any person or organization of a candidate running for any office voted on in the election.'.
i googled "election fraud in the uk" slightly hoping to find "... is naturally unknown" -- sadly i'd forgotten a local election scandal about three years back where the judge ended up ordering the ballot boxes be unsealed -- however the story linked does go on to say: "Election corruption [ie in the UK] has been so rare in the past 100 years that lawyers have struggled to find examples since the late 19th century, when Britain was adjusting to the novelty of universal male suffrage."
this is not to crow really -- election fraud would probably be quite easy in the uk, esp.given the laxity of the oversight, so more must happen than people know of, and election flyers certainly contain all kinds of pernicious nonsense -- but the sheer hobbesian calvin-ball bonkers-ness of the US set-up is endlessly entertaining fascinating and puzzling to we outlanders
I would submit that anyone who does is not living up to their responsibility to be an informed voter.
Now we have it. You don't think some people *deserve* to vote unless they can pass through certain hoops.
I'm less outraged by long lines - was it some sort of conventional wisdom as of October 1 that 40+% of all registered NCarolinians would vote early? I don't think so.
Not 40%, no. We knew it would be big but not that big. My county, for instance, doubled the number of early voting locations but did so expecting that that would keep them nicely sleepy throughout the early voting period. Everyone expected early voting to be significantly up from 2004 but by the middle of the first week everyone was surprised by how much.
the concept is newish, and the turnout is literally unprecedented
10,000 people voted early in my county in 2000. This time, 100,000. That's just for context. I would bet that expectations were more like 60,000, which would have been about 150% of 2004's early voting turnout. We were never told exact numbers to expect.
or comfortable people whose votes always count, it still sounds like a Mom and Apple Pie amendment
For comfortable people whose votes always count it sounds like ballot-stuffing voter fraud by secret Muslim banditos. I can always tell that someone is registered Republican when the first thing they do is shove their driver's license at me and then purse their lips and mewl when I ignore it and ask them to state their name and street address. Today at work a loud Republican asked, "So how come they aren't checking ID when we vote this time?" I answered, "Because we never check ID. One shows ID when one registers in NC; at that point there's no need to show it again." He didn't like that answer. There are real people who really believe that voter fraud is some enormous issue and that elections are stolen every time as though armies of fraudsters were making use of a revolving door down at the school gym.
As to bottlenecks, the bottleneck in my local precinct and every precinct I've worked is impossible to pin down in one place and is in almost all ways directly related to maintaining the integrity of the election itself, in terms of throttling throughput so that we can make sure there are as many ballots in the ballot box as should be, etc. As always, there is a contentious trade-off between security and convenience and that's in a county that does strictly paper ballots. In states and counties that use dedicated electronic devices to vote the issues are entirely different and, I agree, at least somewhat attributable to malice though not necessarily on the part of local officials. Florida's early voting boondoggle was clearly an attempt to suppress turnout statewide in urban areas.
Spike, quit digging. You've convinced me that you're ignorant, incurious, and indifferent already. It can only get worse.
Facts are contentious things, which change over time, and which are not always clear cut.
This is not true of the time and place of voting. Why did you try to make this argument? It's like you're grabbing things at random and throwing them.
Why in the world do some states trust Diebold and then allow them to be a bottleneck? That is SO stupid.
Never blame stupidity when ill intentions are likely.
I have never had to wait in line to vote so why should I be bothered?
Shearer, if you were mentally, politically, and ethically competent you would be bothered by something like this. But I'm not going to address arguments to an absent part of your brain.
Another way of putting it: You seem to be saying that IQ tests for voting are wrong if the government does them, but ok if they are imposed by freelancers. Perhaps this should also apply to poll taxes as well.
engaging in political prosecutions
OK, we obviously have vastly different ideas of the ways that these laws are likely to be enforced. I don't know you personally and am hesitant to leap to conclusions, but tendentious rephrasings such as "saving people from their own ignorance" are really unpleasant.
Luckily for you and the rest of this thread, I'm back to work now.
Do new/infrequent voters tend to be slow/careful?
Yes, they do; extremely so. I can't blame them, either. The first time I voted it took me forever and I read every word at least five times. (I know that neither were you blaming them; I'm just confirming and agreeing.)
94 gets it right.
What sort of time on Wednesday morning will the result start to become apparent? Wondering whether I need to get up early, and I can't remember last time.
I take forever to vote, even now. We have the scantron/felt tip marker type of ballot, and I get paranoid that I've misaligned the ballot and that it's thrown all of my votes off. And, oh God, I'll have accidentally voted for Bob Barr.
100: Seems to me that in a perfect world, we'd have "practice voting" or something. It's like a double whammy, where the more successful the Obama campaign is at turning out new voters, the more difficult the barriers become for them to actually vote. Talk about an unintended consequence.
103: No one votes anymore: the lines are too long.
What sort of time on Wednesday morning will the result start to become apparent? Wondering whether I need to get up early, and I can't remember last time.
VA polls close at 7 pm EST (so midnight in the UK?). If Obama wins VA - esp. if he wins it big - he will almost certainly have won everything.
In the event of a close-ish election, 10 pm EST should suffice.
Otherwise, early December is a safe bet.
95: Putting words into my mouth. Everybody has a right to vote and I will defend that, and I don't care a lick for voter repression efforts. I also think voters also have an affirmative responsibly that they need to take seriously in excising their vote, and that the first person responsible for protecting that vote should be the voter themself. A voter needs to check his voter registration card to find out where they are going to vote. If they are instead going to rely on a poster in the men's room at a bar for their precinct information, there is really not much I feel that the government should be doing to protect them from that decision.
99: Yeah, I got to go to work too. Cheers.
101: By 9 pm EST (which I think is 3am your time?), I expect it will be over, since that will be at least an hour after North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, and Ohio close.
By 9 pm EST
Oh God, let that be true. I'm totally prepared to be up half the night waiting anxiously.
VA polls close at 7 pm EST (so midnight in the UK?). If Obama wins VA - esp. if he wins it big - he will almost certainly have won everything.
That's what I've been thinking, either that or a clear win in Florida. So maybe by 6:00 or so our time. Freaky. I'm still nervous, but either way it goes there will be drinking and tears.
108, yeah but no results will be announced until polls close in California.
(The reasoning seems to be that it would be wrong to discourage the vote on the west coast by calling the election before polls close, but that Hawaii can fuck itself.)
I'm still nervous, but either way it goes there will be drinking and tears.
Sifu and I have already bought a bottle of champagne, but if things go the wrong way, we may have to pick up some whiskey instead.
108, yeah but no results will be announced until polls close in California.
Not by the networks, but you can see them at Secretary of State (or Commonwealth) sites as they come in.
QUIT DIGGING, SPIKE! You're an ignorant asshole. Screw you.
Witt didn't want to say it, but I'll be a gentleman and help her out. (It's a sexist world in which we're living in).
no results will be announced until polls close in California
Mmm, they call individual states as soon as they are able to do so. Certainly we weren't waiting until 11 to get the first results in 2004.
116: I'm not sure what the current agreement among the networks is. Exit polls won't be reported, but I think you may be right about the actual returns reporting.
3am is fine - I might stay up then. Sounds awfully early compared to our 10pm poll closures (but of course only the one time zone) and then counting all those bits of paper - one advantage of machine voting!
having found out about them earlier today, i am eagerly awaiting faithless elector action: ideally hawaii's 4, who (when obama's landslide is ensured) vote for bill ayers
Pretty sure that they'll report the actual results (not exit polls) as they're coming in.
John,
Well I guess my question is why don't at least some of the citizens in the states that use Diebold raise holy hell about it?
Or do they and nobody hears about it? Cause I'd like to think I would raise a BIG stink if MN said they were switching.
"Six Electors from the Democratic-Republican Party refused to support James Madison, their party's candidate for President.
Instead, all three voted for George Clinton"
122 ".... saying "Free your mind and your ass will follow!"
121: We do raise high holy hell. Here in OH we got the Diebold machines out of Cuyahoga County at least, a Dem stronghold. Still, half the counties in OH are using Diebold machines. The Republicans are very good at paralyzing government action.
Reading about this problem really clued me into the state of Ohio politics. Not only do we elect the Supreme Court justices, but the justices are allowed to then issue rulings that directly effect their campaign donors. Not surprisingly, Ohio's all Republican Supreme Court issues rulings disproportionately in favor of their major campaign donors.
I realize the conversation has kinda moved on, but I just wanted to comment on the whole "efforts to mislead people don't really have much effect" argument. I used to think that while totally despicable, such things weren't a huge deal.
However. In the last month, I have been asked so many questions by my clients (i.e. poor people) about voting that displayed shocking lack of information about voting. And that's without any significant efforts to mislead people going on here in Illinois. People who didn't know they could still vote if they lost their registration card, who had no idea how to find their polling place, thought they couldn't vote without state id (true in some states, but not Illinois) and one sweet young woman who told me "I think I'm gonna go vote on the 4th. Or the 5th or definitely by the 6th."
There's already a huge problem with getting the right information to reach people, much less preventing the wrong info from reaching them as well.
123: Hey, someone has to find Funkadelic and tell them about it. Or maybe he's already worked it up into a song.
we may have to pick up some whiskey instead.
OK, I understand the champagne - I assume you drank it all when the Kennedies came over to celebrate the engagement - but why on earth wouldn't you have whiskey in the house?
Or do you only have whisky?
In case anyone is worried, I have dutifully disabused all these people of their faulty notions, looked up polling places for them, written up directions and instructions, and I've got my "your right to vote" speech down pat.
People who didn't know they could still vote if they lost their registration card
Yes. I ran into this a fair amount among the people I was canvassing in Indianapolis. People were pretty happy to be told that they could vote without it, even if they still need a photo ID (Indiana has one of the more restrictive voting laws, and a federal or state photo ID is required for early voting. One may also be necessary on the day of, and certainly is if you are a first-time voter.).
Also a decent number of people who thought they weren't registered, even though much of our lists were pulled from voter registry data.
In the last month, I have been asked so many questions by my clients (i.e. poor people) about voting that displayed shocking lack of information about voting
Listen to leblanc, people, and don't underestimate the effectiveness of disinformation campaigns. The one time I canvassed to register voters, I had several people tell me that they couldn't vote because they had unpaid parking tickets/had moved in the last six months/had been in prison.
Indiana has one of the more restrictive voting laws
Isn't IN's lawabout showing ID the one that was challenged all the way up to SCOTUS and upheld? (Bastards).
Yeah. The one slight mitigating factor that the Republicans gave in on is that state IDs are now free in Indiana, so at least there's not a direct monetary cost problem. It does add yet another step to getting people eligible to vote though, which can be a pain when we're dealing with such short timelines on the GOTV effot.
Oh shit Spike, I don't even know where my voter registration card is. Am I supposed to get one? I have some bits of paper in a file, but no card.
But I take the franchise very seriously.
Better to keep the law out of it, let the media do its job, and expose perpetrators to the voter backlash they richly deserve.
There might not be a backlash, though, is the thing. Turnout historically isn't all that high. And you get people saying, well, if you can't figure out where your polling place is, you shouldn't vote.
And that just seems like a poorly thought through line of argument. In almost every other aspect of life we expect convenience, and reminders and ways to check information if we're unsure of the source or the facts. My sister misplaced her voter registration card. She IMs me, worried that now she can't vote for President. We looked up where she needed to go and what she needed to bring. That doesn't make her an uninformed voter, or someone who only deserves to vote if she has a big sister to ask. Had there been a misinformation campaign on campus that said 'if you lose your voter ID, you can't vote', she might not have asked.
115: Thank you , John! It's becoming so difficult to remain a lady in this modern world [fanning self and fluttering eyelashes]. Why, I would fair swoon away if I had to think my opinion of Mr Spike, much less voice it. I mean, a lady does not say such things as 'Spike, you're an ignorant ass with a warthog's grasp of what constitutes "free speech", coupled with an astonishing lack of awareness of the extent to which fraudulent election activities are taking place. My late cockatiel had more social conscience [and probably a higher IQ].'
I'm sure I heard on the radio that all the election problems were caused by Clinton having changed the regulations under the Community Reinvestment Act so that banks were required to register all those sub-prime voters.
Are you being facetious or serious Schneider? I mean, the Republicans are so outrageous that really, satire seems impossible. I could imagine Rush Limbaugh saying that.
Sorry. Forgot the /kidding tag
I was trying to draw a parallel between the insane things apparently well educated and informed people will believe about the financial mess with what people might believe about voting - suggesting that while I have no data, I'd believe that voter suppression techniques might well hve important effect.
That bastion of conservatism known as Los Angeles County had but one early voting site, that of the County Offices in Norwalk. Nevertheless, thousands have voted after standing in a line that snaked around the building.
http://www.dailynews.com/ci_10851038
This is not a Republican or Democrat issue. This is a priorities issue, and tell me which department takes the cut to fund the additional machines needed.
As per the article, of the 4.3 million voters registered 1 million requested absentee, and over on third of those are already returned.
My wife voted by mail. I am waiting until tomorrow, because I like the civic pride aspect. I want a purple finger instead of a sticker.
I want a purple finger
Hit it with a hammer.
why on earth wouldn't you have whiskey in the house?
I'm visiting ST right now, so he's gotta answer for that, not me!
Though actually, there's no whiskey in my house in Boston, either. I finished off the last of two bottles last week.
I'm visiting ST right now
Steven Tyler?
This is not a Republican or Democrat issue. This is a priorities issue, and tell me which department takes the cut to fund the additional machines needed.
Fuck you, TLL. Get back to us once you've informed yourself. You never fucking quit, do you?
Everyone here but you and Spike knows about Republican voter suppression. Shut the fuck up until you've educated yourself.
BTW, on the CRA, a pretty interesting piece in the Post-Gazette explaining why Ohio is Foreclosure Central while PA remains in as good shape as could be expected.
Bottom line? The Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment Group worked to make sure that banks covered by the CRA did right:
That's partly because, for the past 21 years, his watchdog group has demanded good loans from banks and has helped define what they should be.Damned community organizers.The PCRG works with banks and community groups to make sure banks make some loans in neighborhoods where they take deposits. That's a requirement of the federal Community Reinvestment Act.
"As far as I know, there is no organization like PCRG in Ohio that held banks' feet to the fire and said they only want good products," Mr. Shivak said.
If a lender isn't accepting deposits in a given neighborhood, it doesn't fall under the Community Reinvestment Act, and these unregulated lenders have been causing the problems. Of more than 700 homeowners threatened with foreclosure who have come to the PCRG for counseling in the past three years, only three had loans from a PCRG banking partner, Mr. Shivak said.
I love getting stickers for voting. I had voted absentee for years. Voting in person is so much more fun. You get a sticker! Elderly poll workers smile at you!
Two bottles in a week? Cutting down, eh?
Hit it with a hammer.
I'm going to turn you in for your blatant attempt at voter suppression and intimidation, Apo. Are you sure you're not secretly a Republican?
Hit it with a hammer.
TLL's finger: Please, Hammer, don't hurt me!
There was the thought that if I went ahead and finished these two and then didn't buy more, that might be a good thing.
You get a sticker! Elderly poll workers smile at you!
Don't put your sticker on bare skin, Cala. That's how the elderly poll workers get you hooked on LSD.
When was the last Republican elected in LA County, Emerson? 1956?
150: I'm just sayin' there aren't any lines to wait in to hit your own fingers with a hammer, and no chance that partisan poll watchers will try to make you smash a provisional finger.
Hit 'em early! Hit 'em often!
154: Has there been one more recent than Richard Riordan in 1997?
This is a priorities issue, and tell me which department takes the cut to fund the additional machines needed.
MAKE THE CAMPAIGNS PAY FOR IT.
i am eagerly awaiting faithless elector action: ideally hawaii's 4
Have I mentioned before that we're just a leetle bit parochial out here? The local boy doesn't have much to worry about.
OT, a follow-up thought for Brock on the libertarian spouse problem: viewed charitably, libertarianism is basically the fantasy that people don't suck and can deal with their own shit. Not well-founded empirically, but it could be attractive when one is feeling too overwhelmed by one's own issues to worry about anyone else's.
This is a priorities issue, and tell me which department takes the cut to fund the additional machines needed.
The solution is not to use machines. Hand marked paper ballots are simple, robust, fraud resistant, voter verifiable, recountable, and ecologically sound. Machines "fix" a non-problem, and in doing so introduce a host of new problems. The only reason to have machines in the first place is because the manufacturers will donate money to the politicians who make the decision to buy the machines in the first place.
With paper ballots adding a new polling booth is as simple as setting up a little cardboard screen.
154: I'm sure this varies from state to state, but the governor might have a little input in voting policies and budgeting too. When was the last time California elected a Republican governor, I wonder?
Though actually, there's no whiskey in my house in Boston, either. I finished off the last of two bottles last week.
Well, that explains why you left the house. Still, a cross-country flight seems extreme - you know that duty-free is a scam, right?
160. I agree. The issue about machines is in the speed of the count. We want to know what the result is right away. Hand counting would take either an army of poll workers or days to complete, and then runs into reliability issues of ballot box stuffing, etc.
There are plenty of dirty tricks, mind. almost impossible to stop all of them, even if anticipated. Oh, and fuck you Emerson. Don't let Scarlet go to your head.
You do realize that lots of paper ballot states use scantron machines, don't you?
Still, a cross-country flight seems extreme
Hard as it is to believe, there are things that motivate me even more than bourbon.
How has no one yet linked to Rachel Maddow's superb evisceration of long voting lines as a new poll tax?
TLL, a systematic Republican voter suppression scheme is a national problem, as everyone else knows. But I tell you what. Why don't you spend the rest of the week gathering examples of Democratic voter suppression, write up a full report about it, and then shove it up your butt so we know where it is if we ever need it?
Or you could put together a non-anecdotal argument that it's not a partisan problem. Or you could put together an argument that Democrats are systematically suppressing or trying to suppress the Republican vote the same way that Republicans are suppressing and trying to suppress the Democratic vote.
"The Democrats are just as bad" is the foundation of Republican political ethics. It's not true, and it's not even aspirational. It's just what Republicans say whenever they get caught.
Note my 23: Not necessarily Republican corruption, machine politicians might use these methods too. But usually Republicans.
Hard as it is to believe, there are things that motivate me even more than bourbon.
I'm drawing a complete blank.
164. Sure. After the fiasco of hanging chads in 2000 the big push was to go to state of the art video touch screen, but then there was pushback for a paper trail. Emerson wants to make this a partisan issue, but I don't see it that way. Voting equipment is such a low priority that it just doesn't register (oh, the humanity).
Federal block grant? I have no idea how much that would cost, but that's the way I would go.
154 - 2/5 of the current LA County board of supervisors are Republican. I would also be surprised if LA County (not the city) didn't vote for Reagan in 1980 and 1984, but I don't know where to look for data.
The fact that you can only vote early in person if you're willing to wait for hours in Norwalk is just incompetence, but that doesn't mean that real Republican vote-suppression efforts aren't out there.
I was goign to ask whether TLL read the newspapers, and then I realized that the biased liberal press doesn't cover voter suppression. So the problem is that he does read the newspapers.
I will not make any attempt to deny systematic voter suppression efforts by agents of the Republican party. I just don't think that not enough voting machines are one of them, especially in counties where the Democrats are in charge.
The mistake here is to think that it only counts as voter suppression if someone is twirling his mustache (or hers, I suppose.) It's a bad result if people are turned away from voting because they had to wait in line for hours, and it suppresses turn out even if people didn't mean it.
The only thing I don't like about scantron ballots is that it feels lke I'm taking a test. Otherwise paper trail + fast counting seems ideal to me.
Emerson, was it a Republican or Democrat the designed the infamous butterfly ballot for Palm Beach County in 2000? Was that dastardly voter suppression, or an honest if incompetent attempt to keep ballot to one page, in order to help the old ladies?
I know no one here cares except maybe TLL, but according to uselectionatlas.org, LA county voted Republican in 1984, 1980, 1972, 1968, and 1956. For favorite sons Reagan and Nixon, but still.
Voting is a mess everywhere, but there are at least some instances -- like Indiana, right now, and Missouri -- where an effort to make either early or election day voting difficult in poor neighborhoods is being undertaken deliberately by the local Republicans.
There's always been a pretty strong bipartisan lack of interest in poor folks in this country, including the right of poor people to vote. I truly believe that the netroots and Obama ought to (and will) push for change on this. It's low-hanging fruit, politically beneficial, and it's easy to tie this narrative in with the bogus voter fraud narrative that the Republicans are pushing.
You can pile up the anecdotes as high as you want to, Leach.
LaPore was not a Democratic official or political appointee; she was a civil servant who was registered Democratic until 2000, when she changed registration.
OK, she was elected.
The most interesting thing in her resume is a connection to Adnan Kashoggi.
Is Terry a Democrat? It depends on what the definition of "Democrat" is. She was a registered Republican in her youth, switched to Independent, then entered politics as a Democrat. You might say that Terry was a Democrat in the same way that Bill O'Reilly is an Independent. She has since changed registration back to Independent.
"When I ran, I chose Democrat because the incumbent was Democrat and the county registration is predominantly Democrat."
Given current realities, I just don't see county election officials spending billions of dollars they don't have to get the additional machines needed once every twelve years. GOTV efforts by the Republicans have emphasized absentee and vote by mail. Perhaps this is part and parcel of keeping lines long for Democrats, but I doubt it.
Obama's grandma has died. How incredibly sad she couldn't live two more days.
Oh, gods, that is so sad.
I didn't say anything about voting machines, TLL. I was talking about running elections without long lines. When you have a goal, you figure out a way to meet the goal.
I'm not worried about one-time problems. But this is something that happens over and over again, in some places but not others. It doesn't have to.
Voting is not a frill. It's not even a public service. It's pretty integral to our political life.
I don't claim that every single case is caused by Republicans, or is even culpable, but that has to be your first thought. Lots of people in government, including Democrats, put a low value on voter participation, but with the Republicans it's an aggressive, organized plan.
When I argued with DLC people way back in 2002, they were pretty negative to voter registration and GOTV. But that's one of the reasons why they were called Republican Lite.
Up yours, Emerson. I make a civilized argument, you call me an asshole because you don't agree? We have different experiences, priorities and perspectives, and therefor we have different opinions. That's fine. But blowing your stack about it is jackassery.
Obama is going to win tomorrow, dastardly voter suppression efforts be damned. Democracy will have prevailed and thats something we can all be happy about. This is a time to celebrate, not a time to get needlessly pissed off about pedantic web arguments.
The fucking attitudes towards proven lines at polling places with proven connection to the party officials in question--Ohio 2004 anyone?--compared to nonexistent voter "fraud" say it all. And remain infuriating whether the Democrats win, lose, or whether it provides the margin of victory.
Spike, you lack information and have a harmful attitude toward voting and voters, yet you shoot your mouth off and keep coming ignorantly back again and again. There's nothing pedantic about this. It's a real, major issue.
Some people need to be insulted. It might even do you good, but regardless.
OMG, my sisters are low-information voters. Another one with the do-i-need-my-voter-reg-card nonsense.
Some people need to be insulted.
And Emerson is happy to fulfill that duty!
"Its is not a frill. It's not even a public service. It's pretty integral to our political life."
Don't tell the Republican sister, Cala.
My sister is a low-information voter. Her job takes at least 55-60 hours out of her week (counting driving, lunch, and work at home), she's remodeling the house, and she spends as much time as she can with her grandsons. And her job is draining.
188 is making me laugh. Aren't they lucky they have you to turn to, Cala? Social capital in action!
Now, off to make NONPARTISAN calls to voters who may be confused about their polling places. I bet you 50 cents I am the only registered independent there.
Hey Cala! Tell your Pittsister to ride her bike (right?) to 2Red Lounge for the mini-meetup. We'll be the dorky-looking ones, she'll be the lovely one. We promise not to mention Matumbo.
Cala's sister's are adorable low-information voters.
Oh look, an e-mail from the ACLU. And what is item #2, right below the 800 number to call for voter problems?
I have heard that police will arrest people with outstanding warrants, traffic tickets, or unpaid bills when they show up to vote. Is this correct?
NO. The law is clear. Pennsylvania law forbids police from coming within 100 feet of a polling place during an election. The only exceptions are when officers are there to cast their own votes and when police are called in by the Judge of Elections to restore order at a polling place. Don't be afraid to go to the polls and cast your vote!
These folks are well-known rabble-rousers, it's true, but I don't think they'd bother debunking a myth that isn't widely believed.
Okay, end of the grouchy sarcasm. Happy voice on! People respond better to voter-education phone calls when they can hear you smiling.
181: Oh fuck. I was afraid of that when I saw trucks outside her building a few minutes ago, but I was hoping it was a film project at the church.
Last year the head of the independent elections commission in Mexico came to the local law school to discuss, basically, how Mexico went from corrupt one-party rule to free-and-fair elections in basically a decade, when the USA actually backslid. It was interesting and depressing as hell hearing how pathetic our system is compared to that of our much-poorer neighbor.
||
If the goddamn Democrats don't quit spamming me I'm going to return to the Socialist Labor Party. They do not spam.
|>
The Republican sister is a VA voter now.
Pittsister is headed out to Smallville since her polling place is still out there. My mom has promised her dinner after she votes.
Aren't they lucky they have you to turn to, Cala?
This is my life. At some point they will learn to Google on their own.
197: Could be worse. I managed to get on the Republican spam list.
I am pretty sure the lines at my voting place in the ghetto are going to be pretty damn long. My poor honey has a seriously long workday tomorrow, so he's going to go vote at about 6am. The conclusion of our electoral precinct is completely foregone, of course: the only question is whether Obama's support is higher or lower than 95%. Even if the wait is three+ hours, I sort of doubt anyone (besides those of us in line) are going to care much.
In addition to Halford's 2 Supes, there are two Repub Congressmen in LA County: Rep. David Dreier (incl parts of San Bernardino County) and Rep. Buck McKeon (extends to Inyo, Mono Counties). There are also 2 Repubs on the LA City Council. Like the county supes, the council is non-partisan.
As a blogger who's done a recent inspiring/heartwarming piece about voting lines, I don't think that it has to be an either/or scenario. It's possible to be inspired and find peoples' commitment to vote heartwarming *and* think that yes, we damn well do need to make voting easier and have a lot more polling places so that they don't have to.
In fact, I'll go so far as to say that the inspiring/heartwarming "omg, look how long people are willing to wait to vote" stories go a long way to remind us not to take voting for granted--which historically, we Americans are far too willing to do.
That said, this--
Given current realities, I just don't see county election officials spending billions of dollars they don't have to get the additional machines needed once every twelve years.
--is dumb. If we as a nation give a shit about the fucking basis of democracy, then we'll spend the money to make sure people can vote. Even if that means *gasp* raising taxes by a few pennies or undermining Productivity by making election day a fucking holiday.
B, you're so ... reasonable.
Now I must call my mom to see what kind of scenario she might be looking at in NH in terms of waiting lines. No way she can stand waiting for longer than, say, an hour, if that. Tangentially, it would be remarkable if my 93-year-old great aunt intends to vote, but I'm doubting that, and she'd go Republican anyway.
202. Thin pickins.
205. As I said above- Federal Block Grant. Left to their own devices county officials will always find higher priorities.
I am with Stanley, way back there. The R's sent me an absentee ballot application, but I distrusted it; then the canvassers gave me a more complete one (with instructions, and mailing addresses!). In no event could I work up a legitimate excuse and I didn't see that it would be worth doing 1-10 felony time to make something up. I did not know I could get the federal elections ballot with no excuse. But I'd like to vote D in state elections, eh?
So, at any rate, I have not been surpressed, according to the official VA site, unlike 2000. Interestingly enough, after Robocall Barry got me today (without the 'HELLO!!!' that made me jump on Saturday), I got an automated robocall from (apparently) Obama VA that directed me to the wrong precinct. I suspect this is because various orgs in general still think my landline is controlled by the person who had this number before. (That is, fucking Sh\aun and fucking Ang\ela fucking Ha\yes, who apprently skipped on their Direct\TV bills and some of their credit cards over a year ago!) Or maybe that was a dirty trick.
max
['So no supression here, yet.']
Max, I hear you. Our phone number was apparently owned by someone who never, ever returned his Blockbuster videos. So tiresome. (Not as bad as bill collectors, though, I admit.)
It was a modem line from August last year until March this year, and when I shut that down, I started getting the automated dialers. DTV went through spurts of calling 10-12 times per day & etc. Meanwhile the various R primary campaigns were trading these really nasty robocalls. ("Congressman Wolf personally took several days out of his vacation every year to visit Iraq and personally blow Saddam Hussein!")
Then I started getting hits from the Caribbean basin bill collectors (or at least they routed the calls through the Caribbean) six or seven times a day. They finally started to give up after August or so, since it had been a year. (And also, because I was starting to utter every response in the 'No, fuck YOU' tone of voice everytime they called.)
Then the robocalls started. Funnily enough, it's been mostly once every coupla days D robocalls, telling me that Wolf hates social security. The last three days though, it's been robocall city, and they all want to talk to that Hay\es fucker. Well, today, they've called from Georgia, Cali, and VA trying to reach An\gela, so I assume that that is the NOW (or whatever) crew dialing in at the last minute. They're much nicer than the bill collectors, although they really don't want to make a pitch to me instead while they've got me on the phone.
max
['So, teh suxxor.']
Heh. My cel phone number used to belong to a woman who was apparently involved in a drawn out civil case suing for damanges for injuries done to her in a car accident. From several VMs I got, it sounded like the case had gone her way, so I don't know why she wouldn't have updated the important players with her new number.
Meanest neighbor ever? She denied candy to any trick or treater who affirmed support for Obama.
||
Hey, Los Angeles, how about a post-election wrap-up meetup Friday night?
Email me.
|>
210: Geez, Max, all I've gotten is one lousy robocall (on the answering machine today) telling me that they're sorry to inform me that this line is now monitored by the federal government ... something something ... Dutch Ruppersberger (Dem, MD, up for re-election) voted for the Patriot Act ... something something.
Why anyone would bother with robocalling in this state is beyond me.
I have no objection to _long_ lines; I do so mind _slow_ lines, though.
Move voting throughput paid for by a tax on robocalls and windfall campaign contributions seems logical.
Damn. The Obama campaign just sent me an e-mail telling me my specific polling place. I know that's not that impressive a use of data, but my reaction is still: damn, that's pretty good.
Teehee! The GOP is running ads of the OMG have you heard Obama had a scary preacher?! variety here but they ran during fucking Olbermann. What an amusing waste of last-minute air time.
Now to bed, as I must be at the BoE in 7 hours.
73
Because believing you live in a democratic state requires that effectively everyone gets to vote. You may not care, of course, but if it's something your pride yourself and/or your country on, it ought to be at least plausibly true. Everything like the described problems that undermines this belief.
Since my support for democracy is practical rather than idealistic I don't care if the system falls short of some ideal. And I doubt making it easier for the clueless to vote will improve the quality of governance.
Since my support for democracy is practical rather than idealistic
So, what *is* your ideal form of governance?
Shearer is a very bright, sporadically well-informed, mad-dog rationalist whose rationality is built an a solid foundation of deeply ingrained prejudices/principles of unknown origin. Argue with him if you will.
220: Yeah, and I think your previously observation that he likes to identify an tangential about which to argue is salient. I thought it might be helpful if Shearer identified his own Political Theory vision of the world.
On a different note, I'm angry at my one roommate who thinks she won't vote, and her husband's endorsing of this position, as he notes, because really they're all the same party.
Oh, never mind. 221 is possibly readable notwithstanding all angry typos.
big ups to john emerson in this thread.
And I doubt making it easier for the clueless to vote will improve the quality of governance.
Rarely is the question asked, 'Are stupid white people with high IQ scores effectively retarded, or actually retarded?'
Geez, Max, all I've gotten is one lousy robocall
Friday: mailer from the R's. Wolf is a problem-solving centrist who is so lefty his party label is an accident. Second mailer: Further, responsible government is provided by Republicans. BAHAHAHAHA.
Robocall: Some pro-Social Security group wants me to call Wolf and complain about his plan to screw SS.
Robocall: Feder is way way out there sez somebody who isn't exactly Wolfie.
Robocall: Feder says Wolf loves Bush! Actually, so do I and probably Feder too, but not with a George attached!
Saturday:
Robocall: Barry with the big HELLO!!! ('Hello? ...5...4...3...2...1 HELLO!!!' Damn, ow!)
Mailer: D's rule, R's drool! Feder for Congress!
Mailer: What'shisname for Senate is reasonable, won't raise taxes and isn't a Republican.
Canvassed! (Second time)
Robocall: the social security group.
Robocall: Americans for Change or whatever it is.
Human call: Somebody looking the Hayes'. I suspect now that that was political. I thought it was the credit card people.
Sunday:
Robocall: Feder is a COMMUNIST!
Robocall: Uh, there's an election on Tuesday, if we ain't heard.
Live call: Somebody looking for the Hayes'.
Robocall: Wolf loves George Bush! His last name might as well be Bush!
I'm forgetting some.
Today:
Robocall: Barry says it's the most important election of our lifetime (Me: 'What if I was like 85, Barry? Wouldn't '32 or '36 or maybe '64 or '68 count?') and we gotta get out and vote (Me: 'I'm already voting for you Barry!').
Robocall: Some dude for Obama directing me to the wrong precinct.
Doorhanger directing me the right precinct!
Robocall: Those social security people hating on Wolf again.
Robocall: Judy! Just hates Wolf! I know, Judy! I hate him too! He looks like a weasel!
Live call: Atlanta for Angela again. NOW?
Robocall: St. Louis says Wolf will RAISE TAXES. I'm not exactly sure on what, I couldn't understand it. But they were definitive on the RAISE TAXES part.
Human call: California lady with a thick Spanish accent wants Shaun. Or Angela. I thought she said John. That's got to be political.
Robocall: Somebody hates Wolf, I forget who.
Human call: Actual D woman from this actual state and county. She seemed so discouraged that Angela wasn't home. I didn't have the chance to ask for the pitch just to cheer her up.
I'm sure I've missed a couple.
max
['Yes, I'm talking back to the robocalls now. Might as well!']
how times have changed. here in ohio i haven't gotten a single call
Maddow is apparently calling long voting queues a poll tax, and she's right. If you're not interested in the rights of the dumb to vote, how about the rights of the working class?
I'm going to wish everybody lots of good luck now, and then I'm going to go away from the internet, radio and television until tomorrow, because there's nothing to enjoy about this part of the process unless you get off on sticking hot needles in your eyes.
Stanley, I'm sure your roommates are nice and all, but the sum total of the evidence you have provided leads me to the conclusion that they must be stabbed to death.
Line-length anecdata: Evanston, fairly white neighborhood, took about 45 minutes to vote after arriving ten minutes before opening.
Park Slope, in line at 7:40 out slightly less than an hour later.
Not even a five minute wait here in Central Virginia. They did request an ID, but apparently it didn't have to be state-issued, nor did it have to reflect your current address. The BOE folks were using it to corroborate name-in-database with name-on-ID. The Obama campaign's lawyer outside confirmed that this requirement was legit, if not always asked for. It was a first for me, though, and I've voted here since 2000.
Seeing the McCain/Palin card table prepped but un-staffed was hopeful.
228: I'm coming around to that view, too.
On a different note, I'm angry at my one roommate who thinks she won't vote, and her husband's endorsing of this position, as he notes, because really they're all the same party.
I certainly don't have to live with my students, but it made my eyes roll out of my head when one girl asserted, "I mean, Joe Biden and McCain are practically the same person."
(And then another kid said, "Did you see Dr. Geebie's face when you said that?" and she looked at me, and I said, "Because they're old white men?" and she said yes. I said they had different voting records.)
219
So, what *is* your ideal form of governance?
My point is I don't have an ideal form, I will go with whatever works best. Democracy seems to work as well as anything. Also it is traditional here and I have some respect for tradition.
My kid's day care provider didn't vote in PA this morning because the line was 1/2 hour and she needed to get to work.