User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 7790
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 6:48 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 12):

This would probably require a Contitutional Amendment, that's not going to happen for several reasons.

Im not sure it would need an amendment. Legislation should suffice. But, i think it would need to be state-by-state, since it is the states that regulate elections. Now, that would be a mess. I guess the federal government could legislate mandatory appearance for presidential elections.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 23):
Rather than making voting mandatory, the US should fix the electoral college system, it should be the popular vote that decides the election.

Nope, the current system allows those states (remember, we reside in a federal system) with smaller populations to have the ability to affect the outcome. Moving to a strictly popular vote would concentrate power in the large cities and simplify the task of the candidate. He can simply ignore the smaller (population wise) cities, states and regions and tailor his platform to the larger areas.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 27):
I think making voting mandatory would be a violation of free speech.

I'm not convinced of that. Assuming a law such as this passes, the government may be able to compel my presence at the polling place, but can they, while maintaining electoral secrecy, compel me to cast a vote for a candidate? That's where my freedom of speech resides: in the decision I make.

This is not to say I can't be swayed into the constitutional, freedom of speech argument; just that I don't see it yet.

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 40):
i really do have to laugh at that type of comment, it always comes from an American, who I would bet got it from Rush or the like and who has never, not for a single hour, lived or worked in a dictatorship, they just come across as.....Oh heck, to abide by forum rules, let's say uninformed.

1) I never implied I live in a dictatorship
2) President Obama has established a track record of attempting to get what he wants through executive action and/or regulation when congress refuses to do his bidding
3) Rush is an entertainer. You really do put way too much stock into his ability to sway thinking, rational people. That's not to say there aren't folks out there, on both sides, but I believe the numbers are way too overstated.
4) I prefer Michael Medved, much more intelligent and thoughtful.
5) Even if I wanted to listen to Rush, he is on during my sleep period.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
Unless it's expressly prohibited, it's allowed.
You are not entitled to a public safe space.
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4712
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 7:21 pm

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 50):
Im not sure it would need an amendment.

It would. Such a regulation would violate first amendment rights to free speech and free association.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 13193
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 7:35 pm

I do not support mandatory voting, another loss of personal freedom. You want to vote ,vote. Your choice. Get rid of the corruption in our election process, that is the cure. Control special interests. Control the lobbyists, control the money. The people may once again feel they control the country, not feel controlled by the politicians and the corrupters of the process.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12330
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 7:45 pm

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 42):

And surrender the entire course of a nation to a handful of heavily populated cities? That should work out swimingly.

Right now a few states decide the outcome and the rest just making up the numbers. At least with everybody voting, everybody's vote actually counts, right now it doesn't.
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 8:42 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 53):


Right now a few states decide the outcome and the rest just making up the numbers. At least with everybody voting, everybody's vote actually counts, right now it doesn't.

No, they don't decide the outcome. Everybody that chooses to vote does vote, within their state, using the system we have established for electing our officials. Every country has different ways of electing their politicians, you may not like the way it's done here, but you aren't from here so forgive me for considering you persona non grata on the matter.

Elimination of the college would lead to the failure of this country because politicians would only focus on where the money comes from and nowhere else. Talk about corruption.

[Edited 2015-03-22 13:47:02]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 8:48 pm

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 43):

But interesting fact, if the US went by a popular vote, there would have only been one different outcome over the electoral college, that would have been in 2000 when Gore got more votes than George W Bush, but ended up with 5 less electoral votes.

Proof that the electoral college works. The States of the Republic elected their President, state by state.

[Edited 2015-03-22 13:50:25]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 7644
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 9:16 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 27):
Remaining silent is a right, and I directly interpret that as a right of free speech.

Except that, as I mentioned to you elsewhere, a blank/spoiled vote carries the same message. You know why I'd like mandatory voting? Because many out there don't bother to show up to the polls and then are complaining about how the country is going in the wrong direction. It's easier to complain than to take the time to get out and vote. But what else can I expect from a country where many are used to the cushy life?

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 40):
PHX787 is correct, the supreme court would strike this down in a second.

It would if they forced you to choose between A or B, yet the only thing they're forcing you to do is go up to the booth. What you do with the ballot is still up to you. The government isn't telling you that you HAVE to vote. Submitting a blank/spoiled vote is still a rejection of the process. But your opinion was effectively made known. Tell me what's so different from staying home?

You know what baffles me? People in this country have the right to vote and they don't want to exercise it, and at the same time, make great strides that those who want are not allowed (minorities).

Very simple: staying home effectively means you agree with the outcome of the election. Those whole "I'm moving to Canada because the other person won" or "I don't like how X is handling the country" whines are out of place if you didn't make your voice heard.

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 42):
And surrender the entire course of a nation to a handful of heavily populated cities?

This excuse is pure BS, especially the claim that because the cities trend Democrat, a popular vote would ensure Democrat dominance. Texas has 3 of the top 10 US cities by population and the state is as red as they come. What's your excuse there?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 9:25 pm

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 56):

This excuse is pure BS, especially the claim that because the cities trend Democrat, a popular vote would ensure Democrat dominance. Texas has 3 of the top 10 US cities by population and the state is as red as they come. What's your excuse there?

Is that so? How do the other seven vote? Talk about BS. The top three outpopulate the bottom seven. Want to guess how they vote?

[Edited 2015-03-22 14:28:29]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21587
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 9:26 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 45):

I wish people would vote more but I don't think we should force them.

The idea behind mandatory ballots is that if citizens are required to submit a ballot (which, I will note, is different from being forced to "vote"), then the government must facilitate this.

Currently, the GOP's strategy is to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters. This is done with photo ID laws, elimination of early/extended/absentee voting, and lack of funding to likely Democratic precincts meaning hours-long lines to vote. North Carolina passed a serious of onerous voting restrictions that make it very difficult for college students to vote.

The GOP claims that "fraud" necessitates this yet fraud is very rare. In fact, most of the fraud committed in recent years has been by Republicans.

If ballot submission were mandatory, then the government would have to provide a means to submit ballots with minimal inconvenience.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 9:34 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 58):

The GOP claims that "fraud" necessitates this yet fraud is very rare. In fact, most of the fraud committed in recent years has been by Republicans.

Is that so?

http://www.redstate.com/2014/09/29/d...ive-busted-19-charges-voter-fraud/

http://www.virginiavotersalliance.co...d-and-or-convicted-of-voter-fraud/

https://www.rnla.org/votefraud.asp


God I love unsubstantiated bogus claims on the interwebs. It's like snowflakes in a blizzard. Guaranteed to be seen and in mass quantities.

[Edited 2015-03-22 14:43:17]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 10:38 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Thread starter):
Personally, I have no problem with mandatory voting, in part because it would force the states to know and record exactly who voted, where and when, and keep records. Which is exactly what the Democratic Party does not want because it would negate a lot of the fraud they get into.

Ah yes, they would really miss that 0.00001% of the vote    . Trust me though, you of all people don't want mandatory voting, as it will negate the GOPs far more significant efforts to exclude Democratic voters from the polling booth.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 27):
2016 is ours.....but really.....stop being so stupid about LGBT issues....that is what's gonna lose us 2016. I guarantee it.

I can guarantee you that LGBT issues will have absolutely no bearing on our next president, whether they be Republican or Democrat.

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 42):
And surrender the entire course of a nation to a handful of heavily populated cities? That should work out swimingly.  

Maybe they can later make everyone outside of the cities slaves to their eternal consumption of resources.

As others have said, it would make practically no difference at least to the presidential vote. Look up the figures- you'll see it's true.

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 50):
Nope, the current system allows those states (remember, we reside in a federal system) with smaller populations to have the ability to affect the outcome. Moving to a strictly popular vote would concentrate power in the large cities and simplify the task of the candidate. He can simply ignore the smaller (population wise) cities, states and regions and tailor his platform to the larger areas.

I agree somewhat, but the concern there is that some voters count for more than others. The vote of somebody in Wyoming affects the country more than the vote of somebody from California, for example.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 1):
If someone doesn't want to vote, is he really going to be an informed voter?

Bit of a stretch I think. I don't think there's any evidence that people who vote are better or worse informed than people who don't. You'd be surprised about how dumb a lot of voters are, on both sides of the aisle. You seem like a smart guy- can you honestly tell me you read this thread (and others) and don't despair at some of the stupidity on display from some conservative posters? Replace conservative with liberal, and I sure as hell can't. And all those people profess to vote.

Of course sometimes I'm inclined to think the lowest information voters are the ones who are most sure about everything, but maybe that's being overly cynical. If that's true though, the lowest information voters are definitely the ones who hang out on internet forums....
Four Granavox Turbines!
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 7644
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 11:01 pm

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 57):
How do the other seven vote?

I'm sorry. Didn't Illinois elect a Republican for governor?

Did Schwarzenegger engage in fraud to become governor of California?

When was the last time Democrats carried Arizona (at the state or federal level)?

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 57):
The top three outpopulate the bottom seven.

Why should each of the citizens' vote there count for less than citizens in other cities? Why should a San Franciscan's vote count way less than a resident of Cheyenne, Wyoming?

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 57):
Want to guess how they vote?

As I mentioned, it has no bearing and hasn't stopped those states from electing Republicans to office. How do you explain Bush's presidency? If all cities trend heavily Democrat, then the voter turnout in ColumbusCleveland, Richmond, Miami, Raleigh/Charlotte, Denver, Santa Fe, et. al. should have been enough to ensure that Al Gore and Kerry won those elections, yet in 2004 FL, OH, CO, NC, VA, and NM went for Bush.

Heck, over 40% of Alaskans live in Anchorage and with the native regions being Democrat you'd think the state would also be Democrat overall. How do you explain the state going red for all of its elections?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
User avatar
fr8mech
Posts: 7790
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Sun Mar 22, 2015 11:56 pm

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 56):
and at the same time, make great strides that those who want are not allowed (minorities).

Horseshit.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 56):
Very simple: staying home effectively means you agree with the outcome of the election.

Agreed. If you can't be bothered to vote, you apparently agree and are comfortable with any outcome.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 51):
It would. Such a regulation would violate first amendment rights to free speech and free association.

Convince me. How does requiring someone to submit a ballot:

a) violate their right to free speech
b) violate their right to free association

I just don't see it.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 58):
Currently, the GOP's strategy is to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters.

Again, horseshit.

Trying to eliminate voter fraud and verifying someone is who he says he is is not voter suppression.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
Unless it's expressly prohibited, it's allowed.
You are not entitled to a public safe space.
Ego Bibere Capulus, Ut Aliis Sit Vivere
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:40 am

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 50):
I'm not convinced of that. Assuming a law such as this passes, the government may be able to compel my presence at the polling place, but can they, while maintaining electoral secrecy, compel me to cast a vote for a candidate? That's where my freedom of speech resides: in the decision I make.
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 56):
Except that, as I mentioned to you elsewhere, a blank/spoiled vote carries the same message.

It depends on the legalese of the law. would the law mandate a voter to fill out the ballot completely? Would they have penalties for incomplete ballots?

Lets also focus on the logistics of such legislation-- What about ex pats like me and Larry that have to vote absentee? I might not vote in 2016 if there is no viable candidate because the cost of sending ballots back to the USA is onorous.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 51):
It would. Such a regulation would violate first amendment rights to free speech and free association.

As I said.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 52):
I do not support mandatory voting, another loss of personal freedom. You want to vote ,vote. Your choice. Get rid of the corruption in our election process, that is the cure. Control special interests. Control the lobbyists, control the money. The people may once again feel they control the country, not feel controlled by the politicians and the corrupters of the process.

For once you and I are in agreement completely.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 60):
I can guarantee you that LGBT issues will have absolutely no bearing on our next president, whether they be Republican or Democrat.

Im hoping the courts can decide on this issue and subsequently have mandates that protect the lives of LGBT Americans before 2016. I'm afraid of a libertarian leaning candidate (Paul) becoming a bit overwashed by the Religious Right.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11932
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 1:00 am

There is the same debate in France, actually a law has officially been submitted by a Green MP the other day.

In principle I also want more people to vote, especially in the "intermediary" elections we have in France (mayoral elections, European elections, departmental elections, regional elections, senatorial elections, all at various dates during the 5 years mandate of a president and legislature, themselves elected apart).

A first step has been taken recently in recognizing the "white vote", when you don't put anything in the envelope. Now you can have : candidate A 48%, candidate B 46%, white 6%. Before it would have been candidate A 51%, candidate B 49%.

Personally I'm in favor of inciting people to vote instead. I heard that in the US some companies do that, however it's not egalitarian thus bad. In France voting is on Sundays so people are most likely not working. My idea of an incitation would be money, a small reduction/credit in taxes for example. Or even checks directly given at the voting place, that way youth still on their parent's fiscal household are included.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20926
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 1:07 am

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 62):
Trying to eliminate voter fraud and verifying someone is who he says he is is not voter suppression.

I'm sorry... Remind us again which party purges voter rolls but does not let anyone know until they actually go to vote? Which party is taking away early voting and which party is taking away conditional voting?

Tell me again how Republicans are the saviors when they are trying everything (including buying seats) to keep voting out of the hands of us who want to vote?

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 50):
when congress refuses to work

changed that for you....

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 47):
If it removes the span of control from nut bags like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and puts a check on Obama, then by all means, bring it on.

I'm sorry... Remind us again which party is screaming about less government but, at the same time, legislating who we can and can not sign state issued contracts with? Which party wants states rights but tells states what to do at the federal level? Which party passes federal law that all states must follow or else?

Also, which president has seen the stock market rise the most and seen a decrease in unemployment: Bush or Obama? I'll wait...

EDIT: I live in a conservative area of California. Yes, because of low information voters, it is conservative Democrat. I get reminders from the county that an election is coming up and please review your information to make sure it is correct. I realize that Alabama and Mississippi and so forth have no money to do this, but why not? Why is a civic duty like this such a horrible thing? If we in center-right world can do it, why not the rest of the country?

[Edited 2015-03-22 18:13:02]
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8518
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:34 am

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 62):
Trying to eliminate voter fraud and verifying someone is who he says he is is not voter suppression.

I'm not against trying to strengthen the integrity of the voting system (I don't know or care which "side" does it more) as long as it doesn't put a burden on anyone.

I do have one question however. Why are people against early / absentee voting? Opposition to that is where it really starts to look partisan (I assume these benefit Democrats which is why the GOP is against it)
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20926
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:54 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 66):
(I assume these benefit Democrats which is why the GOP is against it)

States set voting. This is what I don't get about the "states rights" (read: Republican) crowd: They love to go on and on about how they hate the federal government and the federal government needs to be shrank or done away with entirely but, when it comes to voting, as much law needs to be put out there, no matter what and no matter who does not get to vote.

In my district in Sonoma County, we have vote by mail for minor elections. Off year and small elections. If we want to vote by mail for presidential years, we can and that is the one and only vote we get. One vote, one person. Just like state law prescribes. If we are not registered, we do not get a ballot. The county says "you have until X day to register, and, after that, forget it." I don't see why this is such a big deal in eastern and southern states. If a person can prove who they are and are registered, let them vote. And let it count. No fuss, no muss. No partisanship involved. Let votes count.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:00 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 63):
Im hoping the courts can decide on this issue and subsequently have mandates that protect the lives of LGBT Americans before 2016.

Yes, that would be nice. I don't think it will be a huge issue either way though. Those who are on the right side of history will have no issue. Those that are living in the past at least generally know that they need to keep their mouth shut to have a chance of winning.

I don't think an otherwise sensible candidate is likely to throw away the election by being anti-gay. It's possible that some more local GOP politicians will make the news with some anti-gay comments, but I reckon the likability of the candidate will in the end be far more important.

If there were a social issue that could potentially have a significant effect on the election, I'd say it's more likely to be birth control/abortion etc. Although the party seems to have given up their recent "rape is awesome" slogan, thank goodness.

Quote:
I'm afraid of a libertarian leaning candidate (Paul) becoming a bit overwashed by the Religious Right.

Paul has far worse issues to worry about in just convincing the USA that libertarianism is a credible philosophy. The religious right are the least of his problems.
Four Granavox Turbines!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8518
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:10 am

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 68):
Paul has far worse issues to worry about in just convincing the USA that libertarianism is a credible philosophy. The religious right are the least of his problems.

   While I welcome more libertarianism, libertarians are just too libertarian and I doubt it will ever catch on, I just see a lot of it as a pipedream. We will never have the super small government society that is so free and functions, but I do hope we will see many libertarian ideas implemented such as gay marriage, soft drug legalization/hard drug decriminalization, etc
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21587
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:25 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 63):
Im hoping the courts can decide on this issue and subsequently have mandates that protect the lives of LGBT Americans before 2016. I'm afraid of a libertarian leaning candidate (Paul) becoming a bit overwashed by the Religious Right.

Dr. Paul has made it clear that he is happy to sacrifice LGBT lives in return for favor within the GOP. He is anti-gay marriage, anti-discrimination laws, and anti-abortion. Do you think that an EMT should have a right to let a gay man die because homosexuality "violates his religious belief?" Should a cop be permitted to walk away from a gay man being beaten in the streets because his religion tells him it's OK? Rand Paul seems to think so. He's opposed every anti-discrimination law and has not said anything to suggest he feels that the "religious freedom" bills going ahead in states like Michigan should be stopped.

He also said that gay marriage "should be up to the states to decide," which means that my marriage would just flip on and off as we drove across state boundaries.

Dr. Paul is happy to do whatever it takes to make the LGBT community a whipping boy as long as it helps him politically.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 5678
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 6:52 am

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 61):
Why should each of the citizens' vote there count for less than citizens in other cities? Why should a San Franciscan's vote count way less than a resident of Cheyenne, Wyoming?

Well, the Swiss House and Senate were both modeled after the US Congress. We have two senators per Canton (and one senator each for a Canton that was formed by splitting an old Canton, e.g. both Cantons of Basel). The senators from the mountain Cantons have very much power, and pork barrel projects is not unknown to us. Why was that done?

To maintain a balance of power between the Protestant, industrialized low-land Cantons, and the Catholic mountain Cantons. We had a secession war in 1847, where the Catholics tried to secede. After some twenty dead, peace was brokered, and in the new federal state of 1848, the balance was instituted...

We have gripes with that too, einsteinboricua. In the case of BSL, about 300'000 people have one senator, while in one of the both Appenzells, about 8000 share one. Good luck with ever changing that system... the mountain cantons will defend their power base.


David
Reading accident reports is what calms me down
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15457
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:09 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 70):
He also said that gay marriage "should be up to the states to decide," which means that my marriage would just flip on and off as we drove across state boundaries.

Isn't this already a moot point? The full faith and credit clause of the Constitution should mean that a legal marriage performed in any state is valid in any other.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:50 am

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 72):
Isn't this already a moot point? The full faith and credit clause of the Constitution should mean that a legal marriage performed in any state is valid in any other.

You'd think so, wouldn't you? But a married gay couple trying to file a married state tax return in Louisiana is going to be in hot water quickly. Nor would they necessarily have the right (like participating in medical decisions) that they would in a state recognizing their marriage.
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 7644
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:00 pm

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 72):
The full faith and credit clause of the Constitution should mean that a legal marriage performed in any state is valid in any other.

But that's not the current situation on the ground at the moment. Go to Georgia and they won't recognize a marriage.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 71):
We have two senators per Canton

Oh, I have no qualms about our Legislative branch. I think it's perfect that people are represented in one chamber and states are represented in the other with equal footing. What I do have concerns with is the Electoral College. Again: why does the vote for the POTUS carry different weight depending on where you live? You live in California, your vote is worth less than a vote from Wyoming. And because your state is considered safe for either camp, your vote is not even worth pursuing. So in the end, only the vote of swing states such as PA, VA, OH, FL, NH, CO, MI, WI, NC, NV, MN, and IA are worth pursuing. It's the President of the United Swing States.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
sccutler
Posts: 5828
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:23 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 23):
Rather than making voting mandatory, the US should fix the electoral college system, it should be the popular vote that decides the election.

Egregiously wrong; no rational way to do this without completely marginalizing every less-populated state. Bear in mind that the states are, in our constitutional system, supposed to be the dominant force. No way, no how, 2/3 of the states would ever ratify this change.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 29):
That is being taken away from minority neighborhoods as well.

Certainly not in Texas - early voting is available to every neighborhood, and is extremely simple.

If there is a place where minority neighborhoods are being targeted for reduced voting availability, it should be heavily publicized.

* Hint: requiring proof of identity is not disenfranchisement.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9413
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:45 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Thread starter):

I bet you the administration backpedals on these comments pretty quickly.

I don't see why. They are just floating and idea to solve a very real problem. We gave candidates that win , not because of politics or likeability to the whole electorate, but rather because they impress folks with the money bags. In some cases, that likeability or policy may represent some of the electorate, but definitely not all. Whether democrat or republican at the end of the day everyone is voting for the folks that the raised enough money to run.


Mandatory voting would bring some chaos for sure. In fact I think it would bring about a few new parties. However I still feel that the right not to vote is a right everyone should have.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
jetwet1
Posts: 2936
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:42 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 12:49 pm

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 47):
You yap on about the irrelevant "Tea Party Faction" ignoring the fact that you're a member of the equivalent faction onn the left, whatever that may be.

The Tea Party is the worst thing to happen to any political party in decades.

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 49):
The steady increase of illegal immigrants in the United States did actually come to a grinding stop since a Obama is in office? As opposed to exploding under the Bush administration? And the right wing has been playing opposite day ever since?

No, they have been pandering to the fears of a section of the population, ignoring facts.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 60):
I can guarantee you that LGBT issues will have absolutely no bearing on our next president, whether they be Republican or Democrat.

I think you're wrong on that.

At my last company, I had a rule, I would eat with the employees at least 3 times a week, meaning I didn't have meetings during the normal lunch time. During that time we would go over many things, the majority of which were work related (Rule #1 : Listen to your employees that actually have to do the job, they may know more about it than you) but, much to the horror of the HR manager at one lunch we got on to politics.

We had roughly 1200 employees, every race, gender, age group and sexual orientation was covered, in talking to them I discovered something the vast majority had in common, from a financial point of view, they wanted a Republican in office, from a personal point of view, the current Republican stance scares the hell out of them, this was right after Todd Akin opened his mouth and stuck both feet in it. Throw in the anti abortion stance, the fight against gay marriage, oh hell the list goes on, the simple fact was, unless you were a white male age 40-65, at least one Republican had managed to say something offensive about your group.

Anyways, next year will be interesting, i'm wondering if I should start a thread documenting all the factually incorrect statements made by members of both parties....
 
sccutler
Posts: 5828
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 1:11 pm

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 77):
The Tea Party is the worst thing to happen to any political party in decades.

Without agreeing or disagreeing, why do you say this?

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 77):
Quoting zckls04 (Reply 60):
I can guarantee you that LGBT issues will have absolutely no bearing on our next president, whether they be Republican or Democrat.

I think you're wrong on that.

You are correct here; anyone who dismisses a swath of the population this large, does so at their extreme peril. The fact that one disagrees with (or, indeed, disputes the existence of) the "lifestyle" of others (in quotes, because the science on "lifestyle choice" vs. genetic predisposition is fairly settled) is not just cause to marginalize those anyone.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
skyservice_330
Posts: 1366
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 6:50 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 3:03 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 1):
I have the right to vote and I have the right not to vote.

Generally agree - a right to vote includes the right not to vote. HOWEVER...if you can' be bothered to show up and have your voice heard (even if you spoil your ballot or write 'f*ck all of you - you are all corrupt' across it) then you lose any right/privilege to complain about the outcome or what your government is doing - you had the opportunity to have input, and consciously chose not to, so you can't complain about the results.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 3:19 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 19):
Internet voting must be bomb-proof. The servers hosting the election must be certified, and any kind of attack shouldn't alter the voting result. A

I agree but servers such as Amazon.com or Delta.com are already both more accessible than voting, and more secure than voting.

Nothing is perfect. I am just saying "BETTER."

Does voter data security pose profound challenges, yes. But so does internet banking.
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 5678
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 5:37 pm

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 74):
You live in California, your vote is worth less than a vote from Wyoming. And because your state is considered safe for either camp, your vote is not even worth pursuing. So in the end, only the vote of swing states such as PA, VA, OH, FL, NH, CO, MI, WI, NC, NV, MN, and IA are worth pursuing. It's the President of the United Swing States.

Ah. Yes, now I get your point. We have no such electoral system. There is a French named Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas Caritat, Marquis de Condorcet (google just "Condorcet"  ) who researched much about fair voting and election systems. One of the criteria of "fair" elections is that if you vote for person A, you *must* hereby improve the changes of A getting elected. If your vote doesn't change anything - or if your vote for A even hurts the changes of A being elected, then the system is not fair and needs to be improved.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 80):
I agree but servers such as Amazon.com or Delta.com are already both more accessible than voting, and more secure than voting.

Sadly, voting doesn't make the government money. Is there a real incentive to make electronic voting secure? Or does the government tolerate some faults?


David
Reading accident reports is what calms me down
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4712
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 6:48 pm

Quoting sccutler (Reply 75):

* Hint: requiring proof of identity is not disenfranchisement.

By itself, you are correct.

However, there are ways to make it disenfranchising, such as making the proving documents unreasonably difficult or even impossible to obtain. At a bare minimum, such documents must be free to obtain, and not cause undue hardship to obtain. The pennyless old lady living in the middle of nowhere must have free, reasonable access to such proving documents, or you are disenfranchising her based on her income and area of residence.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20926
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 6:52 pm

Quoting sccutler (Reply 75):
Hint: requiring proof of identity is not disenfranchisement.

No, but when people have to pay to get proof of identity, that would be seen as a poll tax. It is especially wrong when right wing states pass these rules just days before deadlines to register.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 69):
While I welcome more libertarianism

And they should be given every equal opportunity to participate. The problem I see is they pander so they can get a piece of the right wing pie.

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 47):
You yap on about the irrelevant "Tea Party Faction" ignoring the fact that you're a member of the equivalent faction onn the left, whatever that may be.

But "my faction" did not co-opt a party nor did "my faction" hold an entire nation hostage. "My faction" works within the Democratic party and compromises.

BTW, "my faction" is center-left. Main stream Democrat. I routinely play Devil's advocate to the tea faction and Fox misinformed on here. After a few months of reading my posts, you will (hopefully) catch on. Some don't and I need to keep reminding them. Time will tell how well you pay attention.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 29):
Did anyone bother to listen or read Obama's statements? Where does it say he wants mandatory voting? Where does it say he wants a law passed to force everyone to vote? Where?

Still waiting for an answer to this. 80-some posts later.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8518
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:31 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 70):
He is anti-gay marriage, anti-discrimination laws, and anti-abortion.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 70):
He's opposed every anti-discrimination law and has not said anything to suggest he feels that the "religious freedom" bills going ahead in states like Michigan should be stopped.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 70):
Dr. Paul is happy to do whatever it takes to make the LGBT community a whipping boy as long as it helps him politically.

I don't really see him as really anti-gay... definitely not pro-gay by any stretch, but he is far from frothing like many of the GOP candidates. I even think his libertarian side would be in favor of it federally vs against it federally.

The problem is his ideology... it's so rigid and consistent, too consistent which I used to value when I loved Ron Paul but I learned that adhering 100& to any ideology leads to crazy results. His ideology (and more so with his father) is so pro-individual it leads to the conclusion that it's everyone's right to be able to do things such as deny black people to your business (or in today's case, gay individuals.) While very consistent to his ideology, let's just step back and look at the result... is this acceptable, even if it is very consistent?

I don't think so, which is why I'm not a Ron Paul fan anymore. Rand Paul is better in being more reasonable but it's still a tough sell. I am very glad the Pauls are around... they are doing a good job at energizing the libertarians. We need more libertarian-ness for both parties. Let gays marry, legalize the soft drugs, legalize prostitution, etc. The Dems aren't as socially liberal as they say...

Quoting sccutler (Reply 75):
Egregiously wrong; no rational way to do this without completely marginalizing every less-populated state. Bear in mind that the states are, in our constitutional system, supposed to be the dominant force. No way, no how, 2/3 of the states would ever ratify this change.

We have the US Senate, I think that is fair enough. Small states have less people and most of the time these people have a more powerful vote than people in CA or TX. I see the electoral college as a great way to have a democracy in the 1700s, but we have the technology now to be more direct and balanced. I say chuck it away (I'd actually love to see many parties and coalitions despite some of their flaws.) Again, there will always be the Senate, an arena where small states wield equal power

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 77):
The Tea Party is the worst thing to happen to any political party in decades.

It's too bad, the original message was a good one I think. Against government waste... hard to argue against that. Even if one disagrees with what would be cut and how big/small the government should be, trying to control the deficit was a noble idea (should be a common sense idea.) Now it's pretty whacky with the good message buried deep under the heap

Quoting seb146 (Reply 83):
And they should be given every equal opportunity to participate. The problem I see is they pander so they can get a piece of the right wing pie.

I think they're actually very consistent, too consistent as I said above. It just so happens the personal freedom part of libertarianism suits the religious right very well since they're able to use that to discriminate against LGBT. Could be wrong/anecdotal, but I think a good chunk of libertarians are non religious so I doubt they are trying to pander to the religious right
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:32 pm

Internet voting is a horrifyingly bad idea. Widespread voting by mail is almost as bad. Both throw open the door to coercion and vote buying. The whole point of a secret ballot is lost. The concerns about identity are minor by comparison. And mind you the actual issues with identity are far, far worse with mail-in ballots (and would be as well for Internet voting). In-person voting has trivial levels of identity problems.

In person electronic voting is nothing at all like banking at an ATM either, despite some superficial resemblances. Any attempt to compare the two, other than to say there's no relationship at all, shows fundamentally misunderstanding of the requirements. ATMs are fundamentally *non* anonymous devices, and have well understood loss models, and any bank will expect, and live with, a certain amount of losses. An ATM can, and does, trivially provide a verifiable paper trail (a receipt, both handed to the customer, and often another stored in the machine), and in many place a video of the transaction. Voting is inherently anonymous. No voting device can produce a receipt (typically by law), precisely because a receipt that indicates your ballot choices immediately opens up the possibilities of coercion and voting buying. No voting device can take a picture of the voter voting.

Internet voting combines the worst features of in-person electronic voting with the problems of by-mail voting, plus adds all the internet security and trust issues.

Voting needs to be trivially seen to be trustworthy. Complex mechanisms simply cannot do that. Even a perfect security protocol cannot do that, because no plausible security protocol is going to be comprehensible to more than a handful of people. OTOH, we can all understand a box full of papers with marks on them. Yes those can be tampered with, but only in obvious ways. Votes must also be re-countable in a reasonable way. Internet banking is trivial by comparison.

There are reasonable justifications to allow a limited amount of voting by mail for people unable to get to their polling place, although in many cases it would be possible to provide a private voting experience for the voter (for example, you could print send the local ballots for each soldier in a unit to that unit, have each soldier fill out their ballots in private, drop it in a common box, and then send the sealed box back to the US for distribution to the individual precincts, you could do the same thing at various embassies and consulates). Likewise having a number of electronic voting machines is a reasonable compromise for people with certain types of disabilities.

Other than that, all voting should happen on some sort of a piece of paper. Optically scanning that for a count is fine, but it needs to be hand countable as well. Also crucially, regular, and random, audits of the electronic counting of those ballots must be conducted (this is almost completely ignored as a requirement today).

OTOH, early voting is a lovely idea, and should be more widespread. But it needs to happen in a private voting booth.

That's my rant for the day...
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 20926
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 12:26 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 84):
the original message was a good one I think.

Yes, actually. The original Tea Party, before it was bought by corporations to be the mash up it is today, actually had good and broad based ideas that all Americans could get behind.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 84):
I doubt they are trying to pander to the religious right

Like many other factions on the right, they have been bought or co-opted by money. Both major parties have.

Quoting rwessel (Reply 85):
Internet voting is a horrifyingly bad idea.

Agree.

Quoting rwessel (Reply 85):
Widespread voting by mail is almost as bad.

Disagree. I have lived in three states where I voted by mail and one of those three where I had to go someplace to vote. I hated going someplace to vote. It was either a church or school. I prefer sitting in front of Google seeing which candidates support what and are owned by whom and arguments for and against ballot measure. I feel much more informed voting by mail. Plus, I know that ballots can be thrown out by the district. And, one person one vote. If I have already turned in my ballot, the county already knows this and will not for any reason, hand out another ballot in my name.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8518
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 12:44 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 86):
Like many other factions on the right, they have been bought or co-opted by money. Both major parties have.

You say "on the right" ... I wouldn't necessarily place them on the right. They are not left either, they are libertarian. If we want to get detailed we could say socially left and fiscally right.

But I don't really think they have been bought out. What is there to buy out? I have little doubt money will corrupt them to an extent IF they get big enough. It's really a catch 22... need money to get big but once money gets involved, it will become more corrupt. Come to think of it, that's not really a catch 22, but you get what I'm saying. I hope we get money out of politics, and that is probably going to have to take an amendment, but I digress...
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4694
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:05 am

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 8):

Wow... so much misinformation in such little text, it is like a liberal bingo.

Quoting bmacleod (Reply 13):

If this ever sees light-of-day, who would benefit..Democrats or Republicans?

That depends on whether the mandatory voting would extend to dead people, as it currently does in some districts, or not.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 58):
Currently, the GOP's strategy is to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters. This is done with photo ID laws

What a ridiculous, BS argument... try complaining to most of the world that someone is disenfranchising you by forcing you to present a photo ID to vote and more often than not you will get blank stares followed by a "what, you mean to tell me you currently DON'T require a photo ID to vote?". That is the practice in most of the world, and nobody bats an eye to it because it is so obviously a necessity that the only reason someone could possibly be against it is because they want people who should not be voting to vote. The Carter Center (you know, named after that notorious conservative vote-suppresser Jimmy Carter) monitors potentially suspicious or groundbreaking polls in dozens of countries around the world, and their reports are available online. I have read through a sample of maybe about 10 or so of those and never have I found a reference to photo ID requirements putting into question the validity of the poll (in fact, quite the opposite - have seen mentions of improper voter registration and identification procedures potentially putting the vote into question). If a third-world, war-torn country can do it, so can the U.S.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 82):
However, there are ways to make it disenfranchising, such as making the proving documents unreasonably difficult or even impossible to obtain.

I have been to a DMV in the U.S. (where you can also get a non-driving photo ID) and I would be willing to bet a decent amount of money that not a single Republican worked in there. The lady standing in line behind me, when asked to name the color (red, green or yellow) on the joke that passes as an eye-exam, just started yelling out Blue in French (she did not speak a word of English, or understand colors, apparently) until someone finally managed to coax her into saying something that resembled green close enough so they could send her on her way. If she could get a driver's license anyone should be able to get a photo ID.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8518
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:11 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 88):
What a ridiculous, BS argument... try complaining to most of the world that someone is disenfranchising you by forcing you to present a photo ID to vote and more often than not you will get blank stares followed by a "what, you mean to tell me you currently DON'T require a photo ID to vote?".

I don't think the issue is necessarily showing IDs but how the laws are implemented. Your mileage may vary from person to person, but it's important to establish the actual arguments so we aren't arguing past each other
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:43 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 88):
What a ridiculous, BS argument... try complaining to most of the world that someone is disenfranchising you by forcing you to present a photo ID to vote and more often than not you will get blank stares followed by a "what, you mean to tell me you currently DON'T require a photo ID to vote?".

Most of us have no objection to requiring an ID to vote. The government just needs to make sure everyone eligible has one. At no cost, and very little inconvenience to the voter. And that means the state had darn well better figure out how to get one to the elderly black lady who was born at home in rural Mississippi in the 20s, and who has never had anything like a birth certificate, promptly and in time for the next election.

Or maybe, given the almost complete lack of actual in-person voter identity fraud, the cost to do the above, and the hysteria about universal IDs, we just keep doing what’s worked for decades?

And how does this ID help with not-in-person voting? Where actual voter ID fraud is fairly easy to pull off.
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4694
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:48 am

Quoting rwessel (Reply 90):
And that means the state had darn well better figure out how to get one to the elderly black lady who was born at home in rural Mississippi in the 20s, and who has never had anything like a birth certificate, promptly and in time for the next election.

How does she get her Social Security checks?

Quoting rwessel (Reply 90):
And how does this ID help with not-in-person voting? Where actual voter ID fraud is fairly easy to pull off.

That is a different problem that also needs addressing.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:50 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 86):
Disagree. I have lived in three states where I voted by mail and one of those three where I had to go someplace to vote. I hated going someplace to vote. It was either a church or school. I prefer sitting in front of Google seeing which candidates support what and are owned by whom and arguments for and against ballot measure. I feel much more informed voting by mail.

So prove to me that you didn't sell your vote. Or that you weren't coerced by someone. Both of which can happen when someone is looking over your shoulder at the ballot.

People seem very concerned about vote fraud. This is much more serious than in person voter ID fraud.

As for Googling the candidates, you're hardly prevented from doing that. Your county should have your local ballot available online (disgracefully many still don't, or not well). Just print it out, mark it up while surfing the net, then head to your polling place and in the privacy of your voting booth, copy your marks to the official ballot. If your local polling place is too far away, or has too long a line, that's a different problem, to be fixed by having more polling places and more voting stations.
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:57 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 91):
How does she get her Social Security checks?

She didn't need a birth certificate to collect social security. You don't need to be a citizen either.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 91):
That is a different problem that also needs addressing.

It's a bigger problem, not fix that one first? Rather than applying fixes to the trivial one that just so happen to disenfranchise a fair number of poor, elderly and minority voters who are likely to vote for the other party? Or maybe, like PA House Majority Leader Mike Turzai said, "(...)Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done."
 
sccutler
Posts: 5828
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:05 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 82):
However, there are ways to make it disenfranchising, such as making the proving documents unreasonably difficult or even impossible to obtain. At a bare minimum, such documents must be free to obtain, and not cause undue hardship to obtain.
Quoting seb146 (Reply 83):
No, but when people have to pay to get proof of identity, that would be seen as a poll tax. It is especially wrong when right wing states pass these rules just days before deadlines to register.

In which states is a prospective voter required to pay to get a lawful identification card? Certainly not in Texas, where the requisite ID is free to obtain, with ID offices in every county, and extended hours in the periods leading up to elections. The idea is, make it easy for legitimate voters to vote, and much less likely for illegitimate voters to cast fraudulent ballots.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 84):
We have the US Senate, I think that is fair enough.

No, the Senate exists as a part of the legislative branch.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 84):
I see the electoral college as a great way to have a democracy in the 1700s, but we have the technology now to be more direct and balanced.

Technology is irrelevant to the process; if anything, with the much greater disparity in the population centers, the Electoral College may be even more important.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:52 am

Quoting sccutler (Reply 75):
Egregiously wrong; no rational way to do this without completely marginalizing every less-populated state.

Uhm, "marginalizing every less-populated state" sounds like the real problem you have is with the concept of democracy, i.e. one person, one vote.
You call it "marginalizing" when a greater population has more power than a lesser population? What's the difference between democracy and marginalizing?




Pu.
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:54 am

Quoting rwessel (Reply 93):

She didn't need a birth certificate to collect social security. You don't need to be a citizen either.

Which explains this colossal mess, abuse and waste of taxpayer dollars:

http://m.ibtimes.com/social-security...65m-us-least-112-years-old-1848020

[Edited 2015-03-23 19:56:23]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
User avatar
Boeing717200
Posts: 1926
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:26 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 3:04 am

Quoting pu (Reply 95):

Let me help you. The United States is not a Democracy, it is a Republic. This helps explain it:

http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/demrep.html

In a nutshell, the electoral college protects the rights of the minority from an omnipotent majority found in a Democracy. In this case "minority" refers to smaller states.

This table helps as well:

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democracy_vs_Republic

[Edited 2015-03-23 20:09:01]

[Edited 2015-03-23 20:10:26]
240 years and the top two candidates are named Dumb and Dumber. Stay classy!
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 3:47 am

Quoting Boeing717200 (Reply 97):
rights of the minority

How long are you hoping this will last? I mean how small will the minority have to get before the tens of millions are tired of being ruled by a few thousand?

Right now 40 million Californians have exactly equal say in the Senate as 600k Wyoming-folk.

When Wyoming is down to one person will you still be telling us about Republic v. Democracy?





Pu
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8518
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Obama Wants Voting To Become Mandatory

Tue Mar 24, 2015 3:54 am

Quoting sccutler (Reply 94):
Technology is irrelevant to the process;

Had the Founding Fathers had the technology we have today, I doubt they'd create the electoral college.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 94):
if anything, with the much greater disparity in the population centers, the Electoral College may be even more important.

Probably will have to agree to disagree. I can appreciate the need for the Senate for keeping the needs of small states relevant, but for the Presidency, 1 person, 1 vote. Why should the cities have more power than rural areas? It's obvious, because there are more people in the cities. Some random guy in SFO should have as much vote as the guy in rural ND

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alias1024, JJJ, TheF15Ace, TSS and 20 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos