I am just shocked that there are problems with this voting machines. I mean seriously... there aren't many options to choose from, why are the machines stuffing up. It's so ridiculous I can't even fathom it. How many options are there, 8? My word... someone needs to lose their job.
Secondly, I know that in the US the states have lots of power, but here in Australia, elections are run by the Federal government agency the AEC (Australian Electoral Commission), and despite it being the law that every citizen must vote, it's always a smooth process and doesn't take long at all to vote. No breaking down of machines and consistency in every state. No ridiculous voter ID laws? We also have state and local council election that seem to work despite having a the AEC. I definetely think the US needs a federally run electoral agency, especially for presidential elections!
Thirdly, I get why back in the 1800s why Tuesday was chosen as the day for voting, but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote? Sersiously... ridiculous again.
I like Obama, and he talks about change a lot, perhaps he should start with how elections are run.
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 4788 posts, RR: 9 Reply 2, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1136 times:
Well there are many choices since you vote for the president but also the representative, sometimes the senator, the prosecutor, the sheriff, etc. Actually I think that alone is a problem, I'm sure it discourages and confuses many people.
BTW, is it possible to just chose the president and skip the rest ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
GrahamHill From France, joined Mar 2007, 2513 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1135 times:
I agree. For a modern and rich country like the US, it gives a bad impression. Especially when all eyes of the world are watching.
In France we still use the good old ballot paper. An old-fashioned but good way to avoid problems. I would always have a small doubt when voting via an electronic device. But that's my paranoia talking.
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): Thirdly, I get why back in the 1800s why Tuesday was chosen as the day for voting, but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote? Sersiously... ridiculous again.
American people can vote in advance. But I agree that voting on a weekday is not relevant anymore. Saturday would indeed be a good pick.
"A learned fool is more foolish than an ignorant one" - Moliere
Braniff747SP From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 2627 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1137 times:
Quoting GrahamHill (Reply 4): In France we still use the good old ballot paper. An old-fashioned but good way to avoid problems. I would always have a small doubt when voting via an electronic device. But that's my paranoia talking.
Read up on what happened in 2000 in Florida. They had paper ballots.
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
Stratofish From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1011 posts, RR: 6 Reply 5, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1140 times:
Quoting GrahamHill (Reply 4): In France we still use the good old ballot paper. An old-fashioned but good way to avoid problems. I would always have a small doubt when voting via an electronic device.
Same thing here.
What's even more troubling is that voter turnout is always a factor and always in the same one direction. Also, it is more than troubling that IF voter turnout was to other "western standards" many simply couldn't vote.
Polls show that Americans don't want a large government that gets involved.
I wonder if Americans really care about an organized and capable election process that one way or the other would have to have been organized by "the government"? I think that's the main problem.
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2346 posts, RR: 7 Reply 9, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1135 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): I'm outraged. For the world's most advanced and largest economy I find the ENTIRE presidential election voting process primitive.
You left out, the worlds greatest democracy.
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): but here in Australia, elections are run by the Federal government agency the AEC (Australian Electoral Commission), and despite it being the law that every citizen must vote, it's always a smooth process and doesn't take long at all to vote.
A very good system indeed.
And as you say, I've never had to wait longer than a few minutes in line.
Braniff747SP From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 2627 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1133 times:
Quoting GrahamHill (Reply 8): As far as I remember, Florida used ballot-punching machines. Am I wrong?
I see what you mean now; I thought you were refering to merely the use of electronic machines in general.
Yes, most were manually-operated punching machines. I'm not sure about the efficency of doing it by hand, but it would keep the highest standards.
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4631 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1132 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 2): Why is the concept of getting carded at the polling station so hard for people to grasp?
How else do you ensure one person one vote
Because it is not a problem. Vote fraud problems are primarily behind the scenes and not with people individually voting. It is in "mail in ballots" and the count, and ballot box stuffing, vote rigging, "pay for votes", all of which ID at the polls does nothing to address but yet that is where the real problems have been throughout history.
Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4254 posts, RR: 12 Reply 12, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1133 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): Thirdly, I get why back in the 1800s why Tuesday was chosen as the day for voting, but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote? Sersiously... ridiculous again.
The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November is not a Constitutional date. Any senator or representative can sponsor a bill to get it changed. But, nobody does. Oh well. If there were enough of a popular outcry, maybe something would happen. But, if you move to Saturday, don't you disenfranchise Orthodox Jews?
Quoting Aesma (Reply 3): BTW, is it possible to just chose the president and skip the rest ?
Yup, you just mark the presidential part of the ballot. Leave the rest blank.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 13, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1133 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): For the world's most advanced and largest economy I find the ENTIRE presidential election voting process primitive.
I just came back from voting. I stuffed my ballot into the drive-thru box where there were probably three cars ahead of me. All very efficient here in Oregon. I could have mailed my ballot in instead, but didn't decide upon how I was going to vote on a couple of issues until this past weekend.
N.B. In Oregon, we may only vote either by mail or drop box. There are no longer any voting booths/precincts.
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined exactly 12 years ago today! , 6203 posts, RR: 43 Reply 14, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1134 times:
I just finished voting and as I have every election since 1976 I marked boxes on the piece of paper with a pen and dropped it into a box.
And as for the original poster stating voting is mandatory. This is a good thing?
What is it with all the "is there a possibilty airline X will.." threads? The answer it'll is possible.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4631 posts, RR: 7 Reply 15, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1137 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 14): N.B. In Oregon, we may only vote either by mail or drop box. There are no longer any voting booths/precincts.
Its funny, because its sounds nice and all but I so very much disagree with the idea of that. I just find it a total anathema to free and fair voting to not have public voting with private booths. It is the simplest way to demonstrate that everyone is voting freely and of their own volition and choices.
Quoting IMissPiedmont (Reply 15): I just finished voting and as I have every election since 1976 I marked boxes on the piece of paper with a pen and dropped it into a box.
To me this is the very best way to do it. Simple and easy.
Tugg
[Edited 2012-11-06 17:55:42]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29350 posts, RR: 62 Reply 16, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1134 times:
Well if I was to change the way elections are ru. In this country.
1. Paper ballots, not electronic, not punch card
2, no early voting......that is what an absentee ballot is for
3. Id required......you need to prove you are eligible to buy a beer in a store, you should need to prove you are eligible to vote. Alaska has a good system. When you register to vote you are sent a registration card which is a valid id for going to the polls. Because of that there is no reason a registered voter should not have an I'd.
4. No open primaries. They are meant for parties to nominate their candidate. I almost would say they should run their own primaries, not the state but I don't trust them for corruption.
5. All primaries on on date. Enough with this rolling total over several months. It disenfranchises voters as totals come In And candidates do good or bad.
6. All candidates are allowed to debate. None of this two candidates when there are really five or six running. This will break up the monopoly of the two part system which was never intended by the founding fathers.
7. Returns can't be released until all polls in the country close. This was very bad earlier but still happens, I am seeing returns now and we still have two and a half hours until ours close...again disenfranchises. Maybe no announcement until 24 hours after the last poll closes
8. Standard poll hours, so everybody in every state has the same opportunity to vote, say 12 hours eight to eight.
9. Seperate primary, elections for president and vice president. Party members should have a say in the choice of their nomine
10, the anchient greeks had a system where they could in a normal election cycle vote out a senator. I propose the same thing. A nationwide vote on which senator and which congressman has made enough of an arse of themselves. Nationwide vote and the one that gets the most no votes cant run for reelection next cycle. It would impose term limits on the most offensive members and stopolitical grandstanding
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
usairways787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 290 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1133 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): I'm outraged. For the world's most advanced and largest economy I find the ENTIRE presidential election voting process primitive.
I agree, and think it should all be done by popular vote, not electoral.
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): Thirdly, I get why back in the 1800s why Tuesday was chosen as the day for voting, but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote? Sersiously... ridiculous again.
This has been brought up, especially after hearing about the horrendous lines to vote. Some were 6 hours long, absolutely asinine.
Quoting GrahamHill (Reply 4): I agree. For a modern and rich country like the US, it gives a bad impression. Especially when all eyes of the world are watching.
Modern yes, however rich...LoL, I guess if you count 16 trillion in debt as rich sure :p With all eyes watching on us, I hope they at least are getting a good laugh, personally I find the whole thing pretty embarrassing.
US787
"Pre departure walk around complete, all doors closed, ready for pushback"
qantas077 From China, joined Jan 2004, 5745 posts, RR: 49 Reply 20, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1135 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 1): How else do you ensure one person one vote
we have a system which has every eligible voters name recorded and printed at the polling station in your area, you go there, give your name, they mark it off and you get your card and vote.
if you're found to have voted twice it's going to cost you a fair chunk of change..then again why would you bother?
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 9): You left out, the worlds greatest democracy.
according to Lord Downer, yes. but it's really representative democracy.
a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 21, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1137 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): I am just shocked that there are problems with this voting machines. I mean seriously... there aren't many options to choose from, why are the machines stuffing up.
Basically, because voting is done at a municipal level, which means each municipality has their own style of voting machines and their own budget for acquiring and maintaining those machines.
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): Thirdly, I get why back in the 1800s why Tuesday was chosen as the day for voting, but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote? Sersiously... ridiculous again.
I like Obama, and he talks about change a lot, perhaps he should start with how elections are run.
As we found out with voter ID, this is a hugely sensitive subject. There should be a bi-partisan effort to improve this situation, but it's filled with political land mines.
Quoting L-188 (Reply 1): Why is the concept of getting carded at the polling station so hard for people to grasp?
Sigh, not again...
Quoting GrahamHill (Reply 3): In France we still use the good old ballot paper.
Actually we do in my municipality too. To me it's the only thing that makes sense. Computer touch screens are an incredibly poor idea. Whomever was in favor obviously was computer illiterate or worse. In my town we make marks on a ballot using black ink, and that paper is then optically scanned. If there's ever an issue, the ballots can be re-scanned. How can you get computers to be re-touched? It's much cheaper too: one scanner per polling location instead of one computer per voting booth.
Quoting Braniff747SP (Reply 4): Read up on what happened in 2000 in Florida. They had paper ballots.
Actually they had pre-punched cards, which are indeed paper, but not the same as what France uses.
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 12): The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November is not a Constitutional date. Any senator or representative can sponsor a bill to get it changed. But, nobody does.
And they can make election day be a mandatory holiday like it used to be in the past, but they chose not to.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 13): I just came back from voting. I stuffed my ballot into the drive-thru box where there were probably three cars ahead of me. All very efficient here in Oregon. I could have mailed my ballot in instead, but didn't decide upon how I was going to vote on a couple of issues until this past weekend.
N.B. In Oregon, we may only vote either by mail or drop box. There are no longer any voting booths/precincts.
That is so sensible. Get the ballots out early enough so that people can read through and make their mind up at their leisure, and vote when they are ready.
Quoting L-188 (Reply 16): no early voting......that is what an absentee ballot is for
I disagree. Voting day should be a deadline, not an event.
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, RR: 8 Reply 22, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1136 times:
Quoting Aesma (Reply 2): BTW, is it possible to just chose the president and skip the rest ?
Why, the most important thing the American people were voting for was not the President, to the rest of the world it was but to them they were voting for a lot of other things. A good suggesstion is to take a look at a sample of the ballots in a number of counties, municipalities etc. local and state issues dominate the ballots for things such as schools, roads, police and fire departments, bond issues, local politicians and on and on it goes. As the majority of issues were state and local it stands to reason that the local would control the voting process from start to finish, hence teh comment below by another poster.
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 12): Not all. Some states have early voting. Some have mail in ballots. Others adhere to a strict 'absentee ballot' rule.
Obama mentioned the delays in his acceptance speech, but the Feds power to change and or mandate a country wide solution is limited by the constitution, the state when the USA was created did not give up all their rights, they actually retained a whole lot.
It would be interesting to see the turnout of voters if the presidential election was held by itself, all bets are off on the turnout.
Birdwatching From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3573 posts, RR: 52 Reply 24, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1135 times:
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 9): You left out, the worlds greatest democracy.
The USA is a republic, not a democracy. In a democracy, the leader is determined by who has the highest number of votes, and each vote is worth the same. Both are not true in the USA, so it is not a democracy.
Soren
All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
Braniff747SP From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 2627 posts, RR: 1 Reply 25, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1250 times:
Quoting Aesma (Reply 18): You just can't do simpler.
Obiously you can, because the wrong one was elected.
But in all seriousness, I already clarifed what I meant above---I was reffering to the use of electronics in general.
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 2479 posts, RR: 35 Reply 26, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1248 times:
Quoting par13del (Reply 22): It would be interesting to see the turnout of voters if the presidential election was held by itself, all bets are off on the turnout.
InsideMan From Vatican City, joined Aug 2011, 193 posts, RR: 0 Reply 27, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1275 times:
as per equal protection clause (see Gore vs Bush 2000) all votes should count equal, why there is no majority to remove the electoral college system is beyond me....
Also, vote on a Sunday and with seperate ballots for each vote. That way the one for the presidential race is the same in all 50 states and should be much faster.
Where I live I never waited more than 5 minutes to vote. I don't know if it is because of lower capita per poll station ratios or just better organisation. If I had to wait in line for 3 hours or more I wouldn't vote, especially in non competitive states....
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 28, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1272 times:
Quoting InsideMan (Reply 27):
as per equal protection clause (see Gore vs Bush 2000) all votes should count equal, why there is no majority to remove the electoral college system is beyond me.
All votes do count equally. We don't have national elections in the U.S. My vote counted just as equally here in my local election here in Oregon as everyone else's.
bueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 537 posts, RR: 0 Reply 29, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1259 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 28): All votes do count equally. We don't have national elections in the U.S. My vote counted just as equally here in my local election here in Oregon as everyone else's.
Posture all you want but the fact is that for electing the President, your vote means almost nothing unless you're in a swing state. The guys in Ohio, Florida etc - their votes meant a million times more than those in Alabama, New York, California etc.
eatmybologna From France, joined Apr 2005, 412 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1269 times:
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 9): You left out, the worlds greatest democracy.
Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 24): The USA is a republic, not a democracy. In a democracy, the leader is determined by who has the highest number of votes, and each vote is worth the same. Both are not true in the USA, so it is not a democracy.
Soren
The US of A is a constitutional Republic where it has some similarities to a democracy in that it uses a democratic process to elect representatives and pass new laws.
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): I definetely think the US needs a federally run electoral agency, especially for presidential elections!
When creating the U.S. Constitutional, the forefathers designed a system to avoid the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. In a republic, the federal government serves the people, not the other way around. Limiting federal powers, and giving it to the individual states (representing individuals) is one way to achieve balance.
Quoting InsideMan (Reply 27): as per equal protection clause (see Gore vs Bush 2000) all votes should count equal, why there is no majority to remove the electoral college system is beyond me....
A national campaign would lead to a national outreach with much greater emphasis on large metropolitan areas such as Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Houston, and Atlanta, for example, There would be little incentive for campaigns to account to the needs and desires of citizens in differing states and regions that lay in between.
Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 31, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1262 times:
Quoting bueb0g (Reply 29): The guys in Ohio, Florida etc - their votes meant a million times more than those in Alabama, New York, California etc.
You could give Ohio and Florida to Romney, and he still wouldn't have won. You could even give Virginia to Romney, and he still wouldn't have won.
Your argument is invalid. The "Midwest Firewall" supporting the coasts is where Obama won this election. That's a broad base of support regardless of what happened in OH, FL or VA.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 32, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1255 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 31): The "Midwest Firewall" supporting the coasts is where Obama won this election. That's a broad base of support regardless of what happened in OH, FL or VA.
And he probably would have won NC too if he did the "politically correct" thing and not speak out in favor of gay marriage, which pissed off all the bible thumpers down there. I'm sure it'll be a non-issue four years from now.
Seriously, my #1 pet peeve is foreigners meddling in the domestic affairs of my country. I can imagine how annoyed Americans get when foreigners start hooting and hollering like a bunch of 2-bit backbenchers during every federal election.
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote?
Less people would show up on a day-off, instead of taking an extra paid break from work to vote.
No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9823 posts, RR: 17 Reply 34, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1243 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 1): Why is the concept of getting carded at the polling station so hard for people to grasp?
It's not. What the right does not get is: THERE IS NO VOTER FRAUD AT ALL!!! Also, what the right does not get is: they tried to ram through those laws so close to a presidential election that is looked very, very shady. Those laws should be passed within the next six months.
Quoting L-188 (Reply 1): How else do you ensure one person one vote
Since there already exists one person, one vote, that point is moot.
My question is: how do we ensure that people who fill out voter registration cards actually will get to vote? Remember that all over Colorado and Florida, the only voter registration cards filled out correctly and turned in belonged to Republican voters. Those who registered as third party or Democrat either had their card thrown away or had their address altered.
But, that is not important, I guess. Just make sure ID is shown for all those Republican voters!
Quoting L-188 (Reply 16): . When you register to vote you are sent a registration card which is a valid id for going to the polls. Because of that there is no reason a registered voter should not have an I'd.
Yep. That is how every state in the West does it. But, apparently, there is still voter fraud.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 35, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1237 times:
LOL, perhaps the voting process IS ridiculous in America:
Birdwatching From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3573 posts, RR: 52 Reply 36, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1246 times:
Quoting TheCol (Reply 33): Why do you care? Are you a US citizen?
Seriously, my #1 pet peeve is foreigners meddling in the domestic affairs of my country.
Domestic affairs? The elections in the USA are very relevant for the whole world, presidential elections in the US are not really a "domestic affair". It is everybody's right to be interested in the US elections as it will seriously shape world politics.
It's as relevant for AA7295 in Australia as it is to you in Canada.
Soren
All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
eatmybologna From France, joined Apr 2005, 412 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1242 times:
Quoting seb146 (Reply 34): THERE IS NO VOTER FRAUD AT ALL!!!
If this is true, why do poll workers go through such a great extent to prevent it from occurring in the first place?
Quoting seb146 (Reply 34): Also, what the right does not get is: they tried to ram through those laws so close to a presidential election that is looked very, very shady.
The first state adopting a voter ID law was Indiana in 2006. Since then 27 more sates have added voter ID requirements, for a total of 28 states. That's 28 states over a period of six + years...not exactly close to a presidential election.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 34): But, apparently, there is still voter fraud.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4631 posts, RR: 7 Reply 38, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1243 times:
Quoting eatmybologna (Reply 37): Quoting seb146 (Reply 34):
Also, what the right does not get is: they tried to ram through those laws so close to a presidential election that is looked very, very shady.
The first state adopting a voter ID law was Indiana in 2006. Since then 27 more sates have added voter ID requirements, for a total of 28 states. That's 28 states over a period of six + years...not exactly close to a presidential election.
One of my biggest issue with the voter ID laws was that they were brought out too near an important election. While I don't particularly support "voter ID at the polls" it doesn't bother me much at all provided it is instituted in an appropriate manner (well before an election, clear assistance to all to ensure people have access and no disenfranchisement occurs, alternatives to allow people to vote with confirmation later if needed).
To me the biggest farce about it all was the idea that requiring voter ID at the polls would truly have any kind of real effect on the validity of the votes and prevent vote fraud. As I have mentioned many times before, the real problem of vote fraud occurs in many other channels in the voting process and ID'ing someone at the polls is mostly window dressing.
Vote fraud is serious and must be prevented but attention and money and effort should be in the areas that have the biggest effect first, then go down the threat list from there. Voter ID requirements is OK as a low effort part of that but it can't be implemented in a manner that disrupts legitimate persons right to vote.
Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 39, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1243 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 38): To me the biggest farce about it all was the idea that requiring voter ID at the polls would truly have any kind of real effect on the validity of the votes and prevent vote fraud. As I have mentioned many times before, the real problem of vote fraud occurs in many other channels in the voting process and ID'ing someone at the polls is mostly window dressing.
I have a modest proposal:
Death penalty for voter fraud INCLUDING voter intimidation, harassment, or intentionally trying to mislead voters (i.e. telling them the wrong polling station or wrong voting time or saying there is a Voter ID law when there isn't).
Death penalty by defining it as sedition. Which it is, really. An attempt to overthrow or undermine the legitimately elected government.
Seriously, the Right thinks voter fraud is such a big deal? OK, let's play ball. Because almost every case of voter fraud that actually happened in this election was done by the Right. Right-wing politicians doing robocalls to left-leaning precincts claiming that the polling station was other than it was. Thugs standing outside traditionally liberal polling stations pretending to check people off on a list and telling them that they were ineligible. The list goes on.
Try them and execute them if found guilty. You want to be tough on crime? Let's be tough on crime. I don't see how the GOP could be opposed to it; they favor the death penalty in general and they seem very concerned about voter fraud. Yet somehow, I suspect they would not like this plan.
eatmybologna From France, joined Apr 2005, 412 posts, RR: 0 Reply 40, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1241 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 38): As I have mentioned many times before, the real problem of vote fraud occurs in many other channels in the voting process and ID'ing someone at the polls is mostly window dressing.
Yes, I agree - vote fraud comes in many forms. ID'ing at the polls, combined with a national database from which pollers can cross reference voters would be helpful to reduce some fraud.
Here's an excerpt from the link I provided....
Fraud can affect entire elections and starts at the point of registration. A 2004 study by the New York Daily News found that 46,000 people were registered to vote in both Florida and New York City, and that between 400 and 1,000 of them had voted in both places in the same election. The 2000 presidential election was decided by 537 votes. A recent Pew Center study found that approximately 2.8 million people are registered to vote in more than one state. As many as 1.8 million registered voters are dead.There is no national database to enable states to cross-reference registration and voter records. In the 20 states where officials match records, thousands of people turned up as possibly double voting in the 2010 general election. Elections are often tight races, a few hundred or thousand votes could affect the outcome. Twenty states cross-checking found 7,600 potential voter fraud cases in Illinois alone!
Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
I'm a registered republican, but do not favor the death penalty. Nor do a majority of my republican, democratic, and independent friends and family.
But yes, I would would favor a punishment fit to those who are caught guilty of voter fraud. Perhaps community service and a fine, along with voting privileges revoked for ten years. Otherwise, a simple slap on the wrist advocates more fraud for the future.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 39): Death penalty by defining it as sedition. Which it is, really. An attempt to overthrow or undermine the legitimately elected government.
I don't think so. In the USA, voting and an absolute, unadulterated electoral process belongs to the people - one that must be protected by the government. A manipulation of this right in any form is against the legitimacy of the people, not specifically, an elected government.
Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 42, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1232 times:
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2346 posts, RR: 7 Reply 43, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1224 times:
Quoting TheCol (Reply 33): Seriously, my #1 pet peeve is foreigners meddling in the domestic affairs of my country. I can imagine how annoyed Americans get when foreigners start hooting and hollering like a bunch of 2-bit backbenchers during every federal election.
Really ?
The US election effects the entire world (unfortunately), and because of that little fact, everyone feels as though they can have a say on the matter, and I agree with that. Americas election was widely broadcast here on the TV for months bringing it into everyone lounge rooms.
Quoting TheCol (Reply 33): instead of taking an extra paid break from work to vote.
You get paid to vote ?
How bizarre.
Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 36): It is everybody's right to be interested in the US elections as it will seriously shape world politics.
Well said !
Mystifying isn't it, that others here feel that its only US citizens who can have an opinion
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, RR: 8 Reply 44, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1215 times:
Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 43): Quoting TheCol (Reply 33):
instead of taking an extra paid break from work to vote.
You get paid to vote ?
How bizarre.
I think he meant you are paid to work, and when there are elections, your employer is obligated to give you time to go to the polls, so you get a paid break from work.
Unfortunately, with some of the long lines in Miami - Dade in Florada, one might have been better off staying at work
I was referring to the electoral process in the US. There is really nothing to warrant any special concern from the rest of the free world. It's doubtful most Americans care what we think about it, nor should they.
No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 47, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1219 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 42): Death penalty for completing two ballots? Hmm. Don't think so
Was it intentional? If so, why not? d
Imagine if there were a death penalty; I doubt he would have done it.
See, the issue with using the death penalty for murder is that it doesn't deter the crime for one of two reasons:
1) First-degree: the murderer thinks he can get away with it and thus is not deterred by the consequences.
2) Second-degree: the murderer isn't thinking about the consequences at the time of the crime.
With voter fraud, it's very likely you'll get caught and the price of life would be awesomely high. I bet it would deter all but the most die-hard fraudsters.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 48, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1206 times:
Punishment is supposed to be appropriate for the crime. You're as far out in Looney Tunes land with this as you were with the Libertarians to win the vote for President in West Virginia. SMH
sebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3667 posts, RR: 5 Reply 50, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1213 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): Thirdly, I get why back in the 1800s why Tuesday was chosen as the day for voting, but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote? Sersiously... ridiculous again.
I really wondered about that ...
In France, all elections take place a Sunday, that's for a reason. But I suppose religion has something to say in the US. Saturday is forbidden for jews, and I guess Sunday is not popular among extremist christians.
If you want to please all religions, you can say goodbye to democracy ...
sebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3667 posts, RR: 5 Reply 51, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1212 times:
Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 24): The USA is a republic, not a democracy. In a democracy, the leader is determined by who has the highest number of votes, and each vote is worth the same. Both are not true in the USA, so it is not a democracy.
Ouch. One more time ?
No, I'm sorry guy, but it's wrong. I don't know why so many Americans believe that. I think it's a real problem.
Democracy (invented in ancient Greece) means literally "power to the people". It just means that the people chose its leaders.
Of course the US are a democracy !!!
Some people say "The US are not a democracy but a republic". ????!!!!!
It's a total nonsense. The 2 words are not on the same level.
France is a democracy and a republic like the US.
Great Britain is a democracy and a monarchy.
China is not a democracy but is a republic, like many African countries.
Republic just means that the head of state is "chosen" among normal citizens (no king or special people).
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3122 posts, RR: 1 Reply 52, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1190 times:
Setting asides New York and New Jersey for their obvious logistical nightmares, most of the places with the longest lines happen to also be the places favoring Democratic candidates but where elections are run by elected Republican officials. Coincidence?
If there was one thing I would change, it would be to hand over the organization of elections at every level to state agencies staffed with professional civil servants, not elected or appointed officials. No more monkeying around with poll opening hours or limiting early voting opportunities to make it harder for people with a job to vote... Elections should be about giving the highest number of eligible people the widest opportunity to express themselves.
Quoting InsideMan (Reply 27): If I had to wait in line for 3 hours or more I wouldn't vote, especially in non competitive states....
Elections are usually about more than one level of government. In my home state, the presidential election was not a contest, but Democrats and Republicans fought viciously and expensively over a state election in which turnout was a factor.
Quoting eatmybologna (Reply 37): That's 28 states over a period of six + years...not exactly close to a presidential election.
The issue is not only the very last-minute efforts of some of the remaining states to impose a form of voter ID, so late as to, in some cases, giving individuals who didn't have the right document already a mere few weeks to get it. It is also the fact that some were undoubtedly partisan.
In one state, the governor was caught on tape boasting that the new voter ID law he was pushing would guarantee Romney victory.
In several other states, voter ID laws mandated the use of documents that poor and minorities (aka Democrats) were disproportionately less likely to already hold, or because of their more precarious financial position would find more onerous to acquire, or would find more difficult to obtain because only a limited number of offices were handing them out and many would have to take a day or half a day off to go get that document (yes, some states are that big). In every case, complying with voter ID requirements would be disproportionally more difficult for people more inclined to vote for Democratic candidates. Again, I ask, coincidence?
I'm absolutely not against voter ID, I think requiring a picture ID to vote is a reasonable request, but it must be implemented in a non-partisan way. Acceptable forms of ID must be cheap and easy to obtain, and with plenty of time ahead of the next election, not a few weeks. Some states managed to do that. Probably prompted by this year's election, they passed a voter ID law, but made it effective in 2014...
And the best proof you have is an opinion letter to a local newspaper that includes vague allegations, no actual facts (that people were registered in two locations is no proof they voted twice) and actual falsehood (you don't need to know English to vote). Convincing proof indeed.
Instead, here is an article from no less than Fox News saying voter ID is a solution in search of a problem: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...rget-rarely-occurring-voter-fraud/
Quoting sebolino (Reply 51): Republic just means that the head of state is "chosen" among normal citizens (no king or special people).
The head of the Chinese government is chosen among normal citizens?
To put it more simply, or accurately, a republic is a country where the head of state isn't a monarch, where the position is gained through election or appointment, not inheritance.
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 52): The head of the Chinese government is chosen among normal citizens?
Well, I think that any child in China might become leader of the communist party. Of course, it's more difficult for some of them, but I think there's no rules about it. Anyway, I'm not a specialist of China ...
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12333 posts, RR: 12 Reply 54, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1178 times:
There is no doubt we need more reforms and Federal standardization of the elections process in the USA. Some of the suggested reforms have issues and conflicts that limit them from happening.
ID requirements - Most countries require you to show your National ID card to vote. The USA is one of the few countries that doesn't have a national ID card and registration system. Many don't want it for reasons for privacy from government intrusion in their lives any more than they have or have to go through the hassles to get such documents.
The date for major general elections on a Tuesday in November - this is something that evolved in an agrarian society in the early to mid 1800's, especially with major states like NY having such a date. Having them in November was after the crops were in, but before winter sets in, enough time before the 1st of the soon new year when many elected posts take hold. As to the President, until FDR, they didn't take power until April of the following year, that changed due to improved communications. Federal laws regulate the minimum number of days between the election, the meeting of Presidential 'electoral college' to formally choose the President and VP, to allow a minimum number of days for any vote collections, challenges and recounts. I doubt we would see Saturday or Sunday voting due to religious conflicts, the costs of overtime for police and elections officials for weekend work and to allow a last weekend of campaigning.
Primary elections - we do need a Federal limit as to when the earliest primary elections and other processes (like the cacuses used in Iowa) can take place. Once again, the original dates were set by an agrarian society, to do it before the planting of crops in early spring. We should standardize the primary for national posts from not earlier than April 15th and not later than June 15. In some states and localities, they have municipal elections in April or May as their officials take office on July 1st to match the fiscal year they follow.
We also need to repeal 'Citizens United', which allows unlimited and unregulated independent expenditures by PAC's but not conflict with our First Amendment Freedom of Speech.
InsideMan From Vatican City, joined Aug 2011, 193 posts, RR: 0 Reply 55, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1178 times:
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 54): I doubt we would see Saturday or Sunday voting due to religious conflicts, the costs of overtime for police and elections officials for weekend work and to allow a last weekend of campaigning.
In all western civilizations Sunday is the standard day for elections. Also, police is hardly ever present, as it is not needed. You campaign too much as it is already, people would be glad to have one weekend less of lies and smears.
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 54): We also need to repeal 'Citizens United', which allows unlimited and unregulated independent expenditures by PAC's but not conflict with our First Amendment Freedom of Speech.
Indeed. I heard 6 billion USD were spend in total this election! Imagine what good could be done with the money instead. Campaign finance reform is due too!
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 57, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1175 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 48): Punishment is supposed to be appropriate for the crime.
Actually, punishment is supposed to prevent the crime. And given that voter fraud is tantamount to sedition, which does carry a death penalty, I'm not sure I'm out in looney-tunes land.
But, as predicted, the right doesn't like the idea because they don't wanna die.
Fines are OK for speeding and parking tickets, but not for crimes that attack our very democracy. I'd call for some hefty jail time at least.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 58, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1175 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 57): And given that voter fraud is tantamount to sedition, which does carry a death penalty, I'm not sure I'm out in looney-tunes land.
So for the lady who filled in a couple of spots on two ballots here in my county that I linked to above, just for the record, you advocate the death penalty for her crime? Or is there some dividing line you would apply somewhere in there?
And let's be clear about the punishment for treason and sedition:
Title 18 says: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 59, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1175 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 58): So for the lady who filled in a couple of spots on two ballots here in my county that I linked to above, just for the record, you advocate the death penalty for her crime? Or is there some dividing line you would apply somewhere in there?
Did she do it on purpose for the express motive of altering the outcome of the election?
Do I think she personally should be put to death? No. Because there was no such law in place at the time. However, if it is made loud and clear that voter fraud (and remember, to be a crime there must be criminal intent) is a capital offense before an election and someone does it anyway, then yes. Capital punishment. Or at least a hefty prison term.
The reason she did it is because she figured that even if she didn't get away with it, she'd get away with a slap on the wrist. If the stakes were higher, we'd see less of it.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 60, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1174 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 59): Did she do it on purpose for the express motive of altering the outcome of the election?
We don't know, the investigation is still ongoing.
My question to you is how broad a stroke you're making with your brush, which seems pretty wide.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 59): Do I think she personally should be put to death? No. Because there was no such law in place at the time.
Just a couple of posts up you said that voter fraud = sedition, for which the punishment is death. That's codified in Title 18 and is the law of the land.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 61, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1174 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 60): My question to you is how broad a stroke you're making with your brush, which seems pretty wide.
My brush is wide. Very wide indeed. I have absolutely no use for those who think they know better than democracy.
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 60): Just a couple of posts up you said that voter fraud = sedition, for which the punishment is death. That's codified in Title 18 and is the law of the land.
I am pointing out that I do not believe in ex-post-facto laws. If she knew going into it that she could be put to death for voter fraud and decided to go ahead with it, then yes, death.
In this case there was no such law. So no death this time. Next time, put the law in place, make it very well-known, insist on a proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt that the act was intentional, and then bust out the pentobarbital and potassium chloride.
Generally, I oppose the death penalty, but for election fraud I think it would be a spectacular deterrent.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18840 posts, RR: 64 Reply 62, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1175 times:
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 63, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1178 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 62): If voter fraud = sedition, as you claimed, why wouldn't the punishment in Title 18 apply?
I'm saying it should. However the present law doesn't allow it. I'm saying it should.
Are you suggesting that I should support an ex-post-facto policy?
I promise you that if the Democrats suggest to the GOP that we define voter fraud as sedition to cut down on all this voter fraud they're worried about, the GOP will balk. Why? Because guess who is doing most of the fraud...
And no, I haven't gone off the deep end. I am simply carrying the GOP argument to its logical conclusion. Because I know (and they know) that it's a load of horsepiss. They want to accuse the left of fraud so that they can legally commit fraud.
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2346 posts, RR: 7 Reply 64, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1174 times:
Quoting InsideMan (Reply 55):
In all western civilizations Sunday is the standard day for elections.
Just for future reference. Elections are held on Saturdays in Australia
Quoting InsideMan (Reply 55): I heard 6 billion USD were spend in total this election! Imagine what good could be done with the money instead. Campaign finance reform is due too!
I think that figure, excludes union monies going into election campaigns, so overall its much more than 6 billion
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 59): Did she do it on purpose for the express motive of altering the outcome of the election?
Doc, really, I wouldn't worry about an election.
You guys in the US, have for many years enjoyed the death penalty (in some states)
Has it altered criminals behavior any ?
The graph below, show's, that despite having the death penalty, the rate of executions has generally gone up.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19708 posts, RR: 56 Reply 66, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1173 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 1): How else do you ensure one person one vote
Having IDs doesn't ensure one person one vote. People who want to vote twice can just get a fake ID.
Quoting eatmybologna (Reply 30): When creating the U.S. Constitutional, the forefathers designed a system to avoid the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. In a republic, the federal government serves the people, not the other way around. Limiting federal powers, and giving it to the individual states (representing individuals) is one way to achieve balance.
There should not be 50 state standards for a federal election. States can run elections for state offices however they want. But when it comes to Congress and the president, there needs to be a federal standard.
Quoting eatmybologna (Reply 30): A national campaign would lead to a national outreach with much greater emphasis on large metropolitan areas such as Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Houston, and Atlanta, for example, There would be little incentive for campaigns to account to the needs and desires of citizens in differing states and regions that lay in between.
The present campaigns avoid those cities as well, except for fundraising purposes.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
FrankAMS From Netherlands, joined Nov 2012, 4 posts, RR: 0 Reply 67, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1165 times:
Issues with voter ID are something I'll never fully understand. One person, one vote. And if you're registered to vote, there's almost a statistical certainty that you have some form of government ID (driving license...). I really don't understand why the American people are so obstinate in adding a safeguard for voter fraud which is really not hurting anyone. Like one post said, you have to show your ID for alcohol, tobacco, firearms, travelling, etc. so why not extend ID requirements to something as integral to the US as their elections? The Dutch have a strict ID policy: no official Dutch ID, no vote. Period. Prove you're eligible before you take that red pencil and make that mark.
garnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5244 posts, RR: 55 Reply 68, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1165 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 66):
There should not be 50 state standards for a federal election. States can run elections for state offices however they want. But when it comes to Congress and the president, there needs to be a federal standard.
And actually there can be even more than that when you get into election equpment. Growing up in South Carolina, there were multiple voting methods used within the state. In Richland County, where I grew up, we had the lever style machines. Other counties used the Votmatic punch cards, other counties used bubble-in ballots that were optically scanned, other counties used electronic machines. If my memory serves me correctly, if we had moved from, say, Richland to neighboring Kershaw County, we would have gone from lever to a optically scanned ballot. That's since changed, as I believe all 46 counties now use electronic machines. Living in North Carolina now, Wake County uses optically scanned ballot. If I lived in Mecklenburg County, though...electronic machine. Johnston County, right next door, uses both optically scanned ballots AND electronic machines, depending on your precinct.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 69, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1163 times:
Quoting FrankAMS (Reply 67): Issues with voter ID are something I'll never fully understand. One person, one vote. And if you're registered to vote, there's almost a statistical certainty that you have some form of government ID (driving license...).
Actually not. Lots of urban voters don't drive. Lots of rural voters don't drive.
Quoting FrankAMS (Reply 67): I really don't understand why the American people are so obstinate in adding a safeguard for voter fraud which is really not hurting anyone.
Because if it isn't done correctly, it does hurt people. Data shows ID laws statistically disenfranchise minorities disproportionally. I personally wouldn't have a problem if the government started a program to distribute IDs for free and then measured that they were able to do so to solve the issue, then changed the law. Others of course feel Americans should not have to carry ID cards. I was opposed to what we saw a few months ago where certain parties were trying to change the law months before the election, before they could prove that requiring ID did not disenfranchise any particular group disproportionately.
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3122 posts, RR: 1 Reply 70, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1166 times:
Quoting FrankAMS (Reply 67): The Dutch have a strict ID policy: no official Dutch ID, no vote. Period. Prove you're eligible before you take that red pencil and make that mark.
But the Dutch, and citizens of many other countries, already have an ID no matter what because it is required of them at 18. I have lived for years in a country similar and close to the Netherlands, so I do understand how resistance to voter ID seems bizarre.
There is no national ID card in the US. The list of documents accepted as proof of age to buy alcohol sometimes includes documents that are not accepted for voting requirements, a minority of the population travels by air, other forms of domestic travel do not require ID... Just a few of the reasons why someone can fully function in the US without having the proper ID to vote.
Do realize, however, that it is generally not the requirement for voter ID that is being opposed, but how it is implemented.
What if the Dutch population was told a month before the next election, they'd need a special ID, that the only place it can be issued is in Amsterdam, between 8 am and 4 pm Monday through Friday and it'll cost €40.
Oh and by the way, voting is not mandatory. Ask yourself honestly, how many people from Maastricht and Groningen are going to take the day off to get that special ID they've never carried before?
Now put yourself in the shoes of someone living off minimum wage two hours away from the nearest County office somewhere in the US? Would they bother?
Make it cheap, make it easy to get, give people plenty of notice, and I think most, if not all, of the resistance will go away.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 71, posted (6 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1164 times:
Quoting scbriml (Reply 65): Hmm, because the death penalty has totally stopped murder and rape. Oh wait...
This is very different. Violent crime involves a certain irrational mindset to start with, but:
The death penalty does not deter murder because in first-degree murder, the murderer thinks he will get away with it and in second-degree murder the murderer is not thinking about consequences.
When it comes to voter fraud, it's shockingly easy to get caught. First of all, there are always witnesses; you have to pull a magic trick and commit a crime in front of all of them without them noticing that you're doing it. So in this case, it might actually work well as a deterrent. I promise you that if there was a death penalty, people would not intentionally "vote early and often." Candidates would not call likely voters for opponents and and give them the wrong time/place for the polls. Those guys in black in Redwood City wouldn't have even thought about pulling the stunt they did.
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 70): There is no national ID card in the US. The list of documents accepted as proof of age to buy alcohol sometimes includes documents that are not accepted for voting requirements, a minority of the population travels by air, other forms of domestic travel do not require ID... Just a few of the reasons why someone can fully function in the US without having the proper ID to vote.
Also, there are a lot of African Americans in the South who were born at home during the Jim Crow days. They don't have birth certificates. So they can't get a photo ID.
flyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 621 posts, RR: 0 Reply 72, posted (6 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1164 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter): Thirdly, I get why back in the 1800s why Tuesday was chosen as the day for voting, but why not change it to Saturday. That way more people can vote? Sersiously... ridiculous again.
Saturday or Sunday elections during football season? You've got to be kidding. Saturday is when college football games are played with the exception of a handful of games played on Thursday and Friday nights televised nationwide on ESPN and Thanksgiving and the Friday after. November is when the most important college rivalries are played.
flyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 621 posts, RR: 0 Reply 73, posted (6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1163 times:
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 54): Primary elections - we do need a Federal limit as to when the earliest primary elections and other processes (like the cacuses used in Iowa) can take place. Once again, the original dates were set by an agrarian society, to do it before the planting of crops in early spring. We should standardize the primary for national posts from not earlier than April 15th and not later than June 15. In some states and localities, they have municipal elections in April or May as their officials take office on July 1st to match the fiscal year they follow.
I really resent the primary season being moved up to early January. They even held the Iowa Caucus during the college bowl season in 2008. Since it is required to attend the caucuses in person, I'd love to see the Iowa Caucus be scheduled for the same day as the University of Iowa is scheduled to play in a bowl game.
BoeEngr From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 312 posts, RR: 33 Reply 74, posted (6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1162 times:
I know not everyone is for it, but here in Washington State, where voting by mail is mandatory, I love it. When it's time to vote, my wife and I make a night of it. We get our ballots, voters pamphlets, and computer, and sit down at the table together, discuss and research each one, make decisions, and vote. We're more likely to vote this way than when we had to go to polling places, though I do miss the patriotic feeling I always had going in to the polling locations.
However, when we did go to a polling location to vote, I was never once given a paid break to go there. I had to go in the evening, after work, or on a non-paid break (like lunch) while at work.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 75, posted (6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1163 times:
Quoting BoeEngr (Reply 74): I know not everyone is for it, but here in Washington State, where voting by mail is mandatory, I love it. When it's time to vote, my wife and I make a night of it. We get our ballots, voters pamphlets, and computer, and sit down at the table together, discuss and research each one, make decisions, and vote. We're more likely to vote this way than when we had to go to polling places, though I do miss the patriotic feeling I always had going in to the polling locations.
You guys in WA are just too sensible: vote by mail, and now legalized recreational marijuana.
Damn, I hate to have to sell my house and move, but people around here just don't get it.
BTW did votership go up when WA went to vote-by-mail?
Did the vote shift in any particular definition?
Did that voting session with the wife result in any major arguments?
BoeEngr From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 312 posts, RR: 33 Reply 76, posted (6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1159 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 75): You guys in WA are just too sensible: vote by mail, and now legalized recreational marijuana.
Well, for the next vote, we can sit in our living room and vote while we get high...
Quoting Revelation (Reply 75): BTW did votership go up when WA went to vote-by-mail?
Not sure. I'll do some digging and check the numbers. I would suspect yes. I know I've voted more since then.
Quoting Revelation (Reply 75): Did the vote shift in any particular definition?
Another good one. Although in this state (the western half, anyway), it's like asking if we changed our shade of blue.
Quoting Revelation (Reply 75): Did that voting session with the wife result in any major arguments?
I'm not at liberty to say.
It's actually been pretty interesting. She grew up in a pretty conservative, mid-west household, while I grew up in a more liberal, pnw household. We definitely don't agree on everything, but we agree on all the major stuff.
flyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 621 posts, RR: 0 Reply 77, posted (6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1160 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 75): You guys in WA are just too sensible: vote by mail, and now legalized recreational marijuana.Damn, I hate to have to sell my house and move, but people around here just don't get it.BTW did votership go up when WA went to vote-by-mail?
I'm not a fan of voting by mail for able-bodied people inside the borders of their county. It has too much potential for fraud. I can understand why Washington and Oregon do this. It prevents early election returns from the east coast from depressing voter turnout when there are still 3 hours of voting left on the west coast.
BoeEngr From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 312 posts, RR: 33 Reply 78, posted (6 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1163 times:
Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 77): I'm not a fan of voting by mail for able-bodied people inside the borders of their county. It has too much potential for fraud. I can understand why Washington and Oregon do this. It prevents early election returns from the east coast from depressing voter turnout when there are still 3 hours of voting left on the west coast.
I actually feel less intimidated by voting at home. And I'm yet to see any indications that there is more voter fraud in states with mail in ballots than states without. I would suspect the opposite.
flyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 621 posts, RR: 0 Reply 80, posted (6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1165 times:
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 70): What if the Dutch population was told a month before the next election, they'd need a special ID, that the only place it can be issued is in Amsterdam, between 8 am and 4 pm Monday through Friday and it'll cost €40.
The Texas voter ID law was passed in 2011 with plenty of time for people to get a photo ID. The Texas law is pretty flexible about which government issued ID's are allowed. The law allows Drivers licenses, military ID's, Government worker ID's, Texas ID cards, US passports, and Texas Concealed Handgun Licenses. Anyone who can't afford to get an ID card can get a free card issued by the DPS (Texas Department of Public Safety). The Department of Justice blocked the implementation of the Texas Voter ID law for the 2012 elections even though it is almost identical to the law passed by Iowa and held up by the US Supreme Court. It was just announced today that the US Supreme Court will hear Texas' lawsuit against the Justice Department in June.
flyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 621 posts, RR: 0 Reply 81, posted (6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1161 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 79): The downside of increased potential for fraud seems to me to be offset by the increased potential for participation.
In Texas and other states there is early voting in which voters vote in person. In Texas it lasts 12 days and includes 1 weekend. In other states it lasts even longer. It has much better safeguards against fraud and electioneering, and it allows people who have work conflicts numerous opportunities to vote. It's just as easy to gather information about all the candidates and propositions and deciding who and what to vote for and against for in person voting as for mail in voting. I found all the information I needed on the web and made a decision for every item on the ballot. It took me just 3 or 4 minutes in front of the voting machine to input my choices.
One thing I found out by working the elections on election day is that the voters who turn up on election day are the least prepared voters. During early voting most of the voters seemed to know which candidates and propositions they wanted to vote for, while many of the voters on election day were clueless. Even though I had a longer line in early voting, it went fairly quickly. Some of the election day voters were taking 30 minutes to vote, because they had to read the propositions on the voting machines.
flyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 621 posts, RR: 0 Reply 82, posted (6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1159 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 21): Basically, because voting is done at a municipal level, which means each municipality has their own style of voting machines and their own budget for acquiring and maintaining those machines.
The laws are set at the state level. The counties have their choice of a few systems approved by the state government.
In Texas, all the punch card systems were gotten rid of years ago. Most counties now use electronic voting machines, while some still use optically scanned paper ballots. Absentee mail-in ballots are optically scanned paper ballots. The laws for voting and counting votes are uniform throughout the state.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 83, posted (6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1163 times:
Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 82): The laws are set at the state level. The counties have their choice of a few systems approved by the state government.
Not exactly sure where our posts intersect or not. I think you are in general correct, but it is my recollection where I grew up in CT that the budget to maintain and upgrade our voting machines, and the cost for the elections themselves, came out of the town budget, not county or state, and thus the decision to upgrade was made at the town level. I'm sure the state had the approval of what types of machines could be used, but at that time they certainly did not pay for any of them, nor did our county government.
I've noticed that in certain states the counties are pretty significant entities with significant budgets and the ability to levy significant taxes, and in other states, counties are mostly units of organization for the court system and are funded by the state. Most of the states I've lived in like CT and NH are the later. One exception was NY, where the county I lived in had its own sales tax and did god-knows-what with it.
flyingclrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 621 posts, RR: 0 Reply 84, posted (6 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1158 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 83): Not exactly sure where our posts intersect or not. I think you are in general correct, but it is my recollection where I grew up in CT that the budget to maintain and upgrade our voting machines, and the cost for the elections themselves, came out of the town budget, not county or state, and thus the decision to upgrade was made at the town level. I'm sure the state had the approval of what types of machines could be used, but at that time they certainly did not pay for any of them, nor did our county government.
After the 2000 election there was lots of federal money given to state and local governments to allow them to upgrade their systems. In the 1990's Texas modernized it's election laws and wrote explicit state-wide instructions about how voter intent was to be determined using the various voting technologies in use around the state. After 2000, all counties in Texas that still had them, were required to get rid of punched cards. My county had scanned paper ballots in 2000 but now has electronic voting machines. I still prefer the scanned ballots. They are machine readable but also human readable, so it possible to verify that the vote counting is not rigged.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 85, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1155 times:
Quoting flyingclrs727 (Reply 84): My county had scanned paper ballots in 2000 but now has electronic voting machines. I still prefer the scanned ballots. They are machine readable but also human readable, so it possible to verify that the vote counting is not rigged.
I too prefer the scanned ballots, for the same reason. Thanks for the update!
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4631 posts, RR: 7 Reply 86, posted (6 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
Quoting BoeEngr (Reply 74): We get our ballots, voters pamphlets, and computer, and sit down at the table together, discuss and research each one, make decisions, and vote.
And this is exactly why I disagree with this type of voting. Quite frankly a "matriarch" or "patriarch" or some domineering person could control how the other person votes as your vote is not private and not yours alone. I think that is a bad situation. I think mandatory privacy while voting is a must. Mail in voting does not provide for that. I understand there are some situations where it is needed and beneficial, but freedom to vote must be balanced against the freedom OF the vote being cast.
My wife and I also sit down together and discuss things and research things, but when it comes time to vote we have our privacy in a booth in a polling station where no one else can influence our vote.
Quoting BoeEngr (Reply 78): I actually feel less intimidated by voting at home. And I'm yet to see any indications that there is more voter fraud in states with mail in ballots than states without. I would suspect the opposite.
What if if your wife were rabidly passionate about a certain topic that you were voting on and you felt totally opposite about it? How would you handle that? Also for the how does your state manage those people in between addresses or without an address?
Tugg
[Edited 2012-11-10 09:15:27]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 87, posted (6 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1148 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 86): And this is exactly why I disagree with this type of voting. Quite frankly a "matriarch" or "patriarch" or some domineering person could control how the other person votes as your vote is not private and not yours alone.
Yes, and so there is some select group of people who are influenced if not intimidated by a strong figure who are not strong enough to vote for themselves via mail but are strong enough to defy the intimidation when in a private booth. I feel that's a small number compared to those who would vote if voting was a lot simpler and didn't involve a trip and a long queue where people around you are doing their best to influence you to vote for the candidate of their choice.
I also think it encourages more thought about the candidates and the issues before the vote.
And, all in all, the data from WA suggests that it's a lot cheaper for the taxpayers.
But what do I know, it could be that mailed ballots get tossed in the trash at the same rate by the same people who don't vote now.
On the other hand, there could be a bunch of people who fear that vote by mail might cause an unwanted group of non-voters to become voters.
Wolbo From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 453 posts, RR: 1 Reply 88, posted (6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1152 times:
Four days after the election Florida is just about done with counting the votes and has declared Obama the winner. There must be third world countries who take even longer to count the votes so I guess some kind of congratulations are in order for Florida.
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3122 posts, RR: 1 Reply 89, posted (6 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
Quoting Wolbo (Reply 88): There must be third world countries who take even longer to count the votes
Really? Which one? Usually, it takes them but 5 minutes to declare the incumbent winner with 98% of the votes...
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16819 posts, RR: 57 Reply 90, posted (6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
Quoting BoeEngr (Reply 76): Well, for the next vote, we can sit in our living room and vote while we get high...
I want to see a news anchor holding a straight face while announcing that Cheetos just got elected Governor of Washington.
Anyway, I think there needs to be some national standards set. Like: if the average wait time at the ballot box in your state exceeds 60 minutes, you lose all of your federal highway funding. Or something.
We cannot have 8-hour lines anymore. That's not how democracy is going to work well.
zippyjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 4724 posts, RR: 13 Reply 91, posted (6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1147 times:
Do you have a choice in which drive through to vote or is it assigned by where you live?
Here in Maryland they've had drive up flu shots, never heard of the drive through system sounds good.
A lot of good ideas to improve voting. Certain things should be standardized.
1. Hours for polling places should be uniform nationwide.
2. Early voting all 50 states same time, same hours. 14 days straight ending on the First Tuesday in November.
3. Several satellite locations where one can vote 24/7 during the voting period.
4. Ability to cast your vote anywhere in the nation. Just like you can use a Bank of America whether you are in Minot, ND. or Miami Beach even if you live in Baltimore.
5. One type of voting machine/booth/kiosk. Standardized. This way you can have drive ups, and conventional walk up/walk in polling. This may take a while but have it set up where you can input your name, social security number or finger print/eye scan. So, if I'm on company business training (WN in DAL) and I live in Baltimore my ballott would have the POTUS race and the local elections (state, municipal etc.) If you can do automatic banking anywhere and if police can check your driving record almost anywhere why can't this happen in the voting booth/arena? This would minimize the cumbersome old school present an ID where someone has to check and cross reference. Eventually we could have Internet Voting. If not from an individual PC you'd come to a polling place and do it online. Again standardized
At a central location, a paper ballott would print or there would be the ability to print one's vote. Also, on the standardized voting machine/system there would be the option and capability for one to get a printed receipt of your votes.
6. Again something for the tech people to figure out: When it comes to broadcasting results, black out the later time zones. Heck, the ISP's could black out election results in the later time zones. This way we on the East Coast could get our results and not have to stay up all night because CAliforinia is three hours earlier. The TV and RAdio networks would be responsible for their time management and not let the cat out of the bag in those later time zones. Have some severe consequences if there's an information breach.
6. One Nationwide Presidential Primary: Standardized like the General Election. This could be the first two weeks in April, May or June. See above for my two week voting period.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 92, posted (6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 1148 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 90): We cannot have 8-hour lines anymore. That's not how democracy is going to work well.
Indeed, one thing vote-by-mail fixes.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): Early voting all 50 states same time, same hours. 14 days straight ending on the First Tuesday in November.
Sounds great to me.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): Several satellite locations where one can vote 24/7 during the voting period.
Costly.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): One type of voting machine/booth/kiosk. Standardized.
Costly. There are tens of thousands of voting districts in the US, with the need for multiple machines per district depending on how you do it.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): One Nationwide Presidential Primary: Standardized like the General Election. This could be the first two weeks in April, May or June. See above for my two week voting period.
I like the idea that the process takes some time and the field narrows as time goes on, but the process is too long right now, and there's too big a gap between the primaries and the conventions (which was a big part of Romney's downfall, according to insiders). I also feel the small states will be ignored if the big states go too early.
Maybe have six primary sessions, two weeks apart, starting with smallest states and moving to the biggest states? It'd cut the process down to 12 weeks or three months, yet still have enough time to show which candidates have the organizational skill and popular interest to sustain a campaign.
MadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, RR: 40 Reply 93, posted (6 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1149 times:
I have a question regarding the voting process in the U.S. I was told that people don't need to show an official ID to vote in the elections. This applied to the latest Presidential election - at least that they didin't ask for any official proof of ID in certain voting places. How is this possible?
What would be considered an official proof of ID to vote in the U.S. Driver's license? Passport? Social Security number? Any or all of these can be faked but asking for no proof of identity?...
There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9823 posts, RR: 17 Reply 94, posted (6 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1147 times:
Quoting Wolbo (Reply 88): There must be third world countries who take even longer to count the votes so I guess some kind of congratulations are in order for Florida.
Yet, in Canada with national elections, it takes one day to count every single vote. Here, they just sample. I honestly don't know if my vote, that was turned in three weeks before the election, was counted.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): 4. Ability to cast your vote anywhere in the nation. Just like you can use a Bank of America whether you are in Minot, ND. or Miami Beach even if you live in Baltimore.
No, that will not work. Even though it is a federal position, each state elects members to the Electoral College to cast votes for president. So, if there are 100,000 more votes in Orlando, that would skew the state numbers higher and, in subsequent elections, give them more electoral college votes and more seats in the House.
Good idea, but that would not work.
Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 93): I was told that people don't need to show an official ID to vote in the elections. This applied to the latest Presidential election - at least that they didin't ask for any official proof of ID in certain voting places. How is this possible?
If there is any question as to the voter's identity, the officials at the polling place can ask for ID. It does not happen because of the whole "one person, one vote" thing. In Pennsylvania, for example, they found no instances of voter fruad. At all. This was just a talking point by the right wing to scare everyone.
If an official does ask that ID be shown, it must be state issued. Drivers' liscence or state issued ID (which most states charge for and could be argued that is a poll tax). I suppose a passport could work if it has the current information on it. Mine has my middle name spelled wrong. Thanks, State Department!
Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 93): What would be considered an official proof of ID to vote in the U.S. Driver's license? Passport? Social Security number? Any or all of these can be faked but asking for no proof of identity?...
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3122 posts, RR: 1 Reply 95, posted (6 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1145 times:
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): Ability to cast your vote anywhere in the nation.
For that to be doable, you'd need one of two things:
a) a national ID card (or at least national voter ID card);
b) a secure network to verify everyone's right to vote either with a central database fed by every state, or directly with each state.
As things stand, police officers in some states are unable to verify in real time the authenticity of a driver's license issued in another state, so while your idea has merits, it would be very expensive to implement. In addition, I'm sure you know you can count on massive opposition against any form of national ID, even if it is just to vote.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): One Nationwide Presidential Primary:
You just declared war on Iowa. How would it work in principle though? Not another version of the electoral college, I hope, that is a mess in its own right.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 91): Again something for the tech people to figure out: When it comes to broadcasting results, black out the later time zones
I suppose the technology does exist to do that on tv, thanks to sports blackouts, but I don't feel comfortable having the government asking ISPs to block access to certain web sites, and then the question becomes how widespread do you want it to be? Presidential elections gather huge interest outside the United States. Will you ask cable companies and ISPs to block access to the CBC and the BBC as well?
France has a law severely limiting the amount of information that can be released on polling day until the last poll location has closed. All that it does is encourage curious French citizens to check out the web sites of Francophone news organizations outside the country, such as Switzerland or Belgium, that are more than happy to satisfy them.
BoeEngr From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 312 posts, RR: 33 Reply 97, posted (6 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1143 times:
Quoting tugger (Reply 86): What if if your wife were rabidly passionate about a certain topic that you were voting on and you felt totally opposite about it? How would you handle that?
She would vote how she wants and I would vote how I want. Simple as that. It's happened before, it'll happen again.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 98, posted (6 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1145 times:
Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 93): I have a question regarding the voting process in the U.S. I was told that people don't need to show an official ID to vote in the elections. This applied to the latest Presidential election - at least that they didin't ask for any official proof of ID in certain voting places. How is this possible?
The US doesn't have an official national ID, and Americans in general do not favor having one, in particular those who do not want the role of the federal government to grow.
The state driver's license is being abused as a national ID to a great extent, and even coming up with a standard for the content and format of the state driver's license is controvercial:
Quote:
The Department of Homeland Security has the power through the Real ID Act of 2005 to set standards relating to identification of applicants and license design for state-issued driver licenses and identification cards. States are not required to comply with RealID, but if a state does not comply, any driver licenses or ID cards issued by that state will not be valid for any official purpose with the Federal government, meaning they will not be accepted for entering federal buildings or boarding airplanes.
zippyjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 4724 posts, RR: 13 Reply 99, posted (6 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1143 times:
Quoting seb146 (Reply 94): No, that will not work. Even though it is a federal position, each state elects members to the Electoral College to cast votes for president. So, if there are 100,000 more votes in Orlando, that would skew the state numbers higher and, in subsequent elections, give them more electoral college votes and more seats in the House.
But, when you input your social security number or other ID form, your customized ballot would come up. So, if I'm in South Beach on Election day and I vote, my Baltimore, Maryland ballot would come up and register the vote to my locality.
Again if you put some technical heads together they could come up with a viable economical system to do this. It may take a while but is doable.
20 AUD?? Wow, the state earns quite some dollars when there's some kind of election. According to Wikipedia, about 95 percent of the Aussie's vote, wich leaves the rest 5 percent to pay 20 AUD. Again according to Wikipedia the population of australia is 22,813,438 milion. Let's say that 2 percent can't vote for some reason, that leaves 3% voters who doesn't vote and without some excuse for not doing it.
3% of 22.813.438 = 684 403 million voters.
684 403 times 20 AUD = 13,688 million AUD dollars! Maybe we should do this in Denmark, that would get the state an income of approx. 13,637 million AUD Dollars - equvilant to 68,517 million Danish Kroners...
-Maybe that's the way to go, instead of all those darn tax-raises we get! (although Denmark have a voting turnout between 86-88%)
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10463 posts, RR: 20 Reply 103, posted (6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1141 times:
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Aug 2007, 533 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29350 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2009, 4788 posts, 
From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1011 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2007, 972 posts, 
, 6203 posts, 
From China, joined Jan 2004, 5745 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5901 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Aug 2011, 193 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2010 posts, 
From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 2776 posts, 
Our elections are always held on Thursdays.
From Netherlands, joined Nov 2012, 4 posts, 
From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Apr 2010, 263 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
