So, there's a real mess down here in Florida...
- Thread starter NoleSoup4U
- Start date
You assume the law was used to target certain voters......see what I did there?
That’s not an assumption. It’s a fact. It’s literally the mechanism of the law. It eliminates people who would be turned out to vote for the new candidates
Donald J. Trump
22 mins ·
"As soon as Democrats sent their best Election stealing lawyer, Marc Elias, to Broward County they miraculously started finding Democrat votes. Don’t worry, Florida - I am sending much better lawyers to expose the FRAUD!"
Our President is on it...BIGLY!
22 mins ·
"As soon as Democrats sent their best Election stealing lawyer, Marc Elias, to Broward County they miraculously started finding Democrat votes. Don’t worry, Florida - I am sending much better lawyers to expose the FRAUD!"
Our President is on it...BIGLY!
He's not your pal, guy.
Getting rid of paper ballots would solve a lot of issues.
Candidates should arm or Indian wrestle for it.
Actually, I'm pretty sure getting rid of Democrats would solve the vast majority of our problems.
I keed.
Kinda.
This is a weird issue. Some people swear that paper ballots are the only way to have election integrity. Some people swear we need to eliminate them.
I think being able to vote from your phone using your social security number and a fingerprint/retina scanner would help. As voter participation rises it would get harder to steal votes. If someone goes to vote, but and their ssn has already been used to vote them they would find out and report it, and the fraudulent vote could be cancelled. The way it stands now, almost half of the country could have their votes stolen and they’d never know.
If I can take an exam from my bedroom without being able to cheat then I think we can figure out a modern voting system.
Last edited:
Then consider this an education. Sorry those folks had to learn the hard way. I bet they’ll know the “exact match” law next time.
But electronic ballots would be racist because minorities can't afford electronic devices or know how the internet works. /s
I have no problem with what you suggest here but, many feel voter ID would suppress minority voters. If people can't afford or get somewhere they can get an ID how in the hell can we expect them to own a smart phone?
Amazing how the story just falls apart when the facts are actually laid out there.
It wouldn’t be the only way to vote. Just an easy way to raise voter participation which should in theory cut down on voter fraud.
Making Election Day a federal holiday would also help. With the digital model, schools and libraries could also be used to help people vote that can’t afford devices. Simplifying the absentee process would also help.
I'm like @tarheel0910 I'm not sure I want increased voter participation.
Well, it wouldn’t be good for republicans. They would win far fewer elections. Just based on the fact that conservatives are far more likely to vote than liberals.
To be fair, the Arizona counting is more legit. They at least know how many ballots have been submitted, and are opening and counting ones in their possession BEFORE polls closed.
In contrast, it sounds like in FL they are just cooking up as many votes as they need, from wherever they can create them, in some secret, unsupervised back room, car trunk, etc. Shady. They have the big-time professional lawyers who ensured Bush legally prevailed in 2000, on the case in FL now. This garbage isn't going to fly.
Also - Snopes needs to be handcuffed and perp walked to the Big House for a very long time. What a corrupt crook!
I would also imagine that informed voters are much more likely to vote than uninformed voters (why would you take the time to learn about the issues/candidates with no intention of voting?).
By just striving to have more people vote, you'll be pulling from a less and less informed group of people. Which will in turn produce a less informed outcome to the election.
The goal should be to increase the amount of potential voters that are informed, and then to strive for having those informed voters vote.
You could just as easily flip that and say that people have prohibitive costs preventing them from voting, will be less likely to get informed.
I’m all for getting the electorate more informed. The best way to do that is to make it easy for them to vote so their incentivized to care about being informed
And I don’t believe it’s more informed voters being selected for. It’s more likely to be the passionately ideological voters who show up. Just think about how many informed centrists didn’t vote in 2016 because they hated both candidates...
Your (or anybody's) opinion of who is and isn't "informed" has no bearing on the fact that they're American citizens and thus have the constitutional right to vote.
Count me among the fans of paper ballots. There needs to be some kind of paper trail.
I'm ok with increased voter participation if those voters are informed. Unfortunately the vast majority of people aren't, so increased participation would most likely result in uninformed voters. That is a bad thing for republicans and democrats.
What really needs to happen is that the whole system needs to be overhauled so that names and party affiliation are taken off the ballot.
Last edited:
That’s silly. The costs aren’t just travel time. They include taking time to get registered, and going to the dmv to get an ID if they don’t already have one. And most people certainly can’t walk to their local dmv. And they lose wages by taking the time off on Election Day to actually vote. Just because it’s easy for you to vote doesn’t mean it’s easy for everyone. Especially in underserved communities.
Nobody here has said they want that right taken away. What has been said is people should be informed when they vote and people who aren't shouldn't be encouraged to vote.
That's fine with me. I have no problem with an informed person voting.
Just take the names and party affiliations off the ballot. Replace them with each candidate's position on certain issues. You "check" the positions you agree with. Whoever has the most "checks" at the end wins. That way you at least have to know where your candidate stands on each issue.
It certainly doesn't. And if they show up at the polls, they certainly get to vote.
The discussion here is whether getting more people to the polls, even if they're uninformed, is a good thing (not a constitutionally allowed thing).
What's your opinion? If 5 million more people voted in the recent election, but none of them had ever looked into the issues and candidates, would that be better, or worse?
Few things. They don't need to go to the DMV to get an ID. Fortunately, ID isn't required to vote! As for the lost wages, my polls were open from 7am to 9pm. If there are people out there working 14+ hour days, maybe they can do the early voting or absentee voting or something. As for me, I had a nice 10 hour work day on Tuesday, but I spent the 10 minutes in the morning to go to the polls before work, and didn't need to take the day off.
As for the underserved communities. I imagine you're referring to the inner-city. Cities have polling places all over the place due to the increased population. Hell, you can probably be anywhere in a city and hit a golf ball to the nearest polling station.
