T1B

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:16 am**

Moving Sale wrote:
ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:I voted at 7 o'clock this morning and there were no lines. Took all of 2 minutes to cast my ballot. Fuck all the jobless losers voting for Odowngrade who slept in and now have to wait.
How about the ones who were in line at 7 and still had to wait?
How about the jobless loser that are voting for Mitten$?

Why are you so angry all of the time? There has to be a reason.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:26 am**

Why are you wearing panties all the time?

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:36 am**

Moving Sale wrote:Why are you wearing panties all the time?

That's offensive and mean. Nobody has ever said something like that to me before. IKYABWAI is not a shocking reply, BTW.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:09 pm**

KC Scott wrote:why is it so difficult to provide an ID if you plan to vote?

My grandmother would have been a perfect example why.

Never got a driver's license in her life. Getting a state-issued ID would have been problematic, in that she changed her last name when she got married and her birth certificate would have showed her maiden name.

Fortunately for her, she died in 1995, so she never would have had to deal with this mess. But you're kidding yourself if you don't think there are elderly women alive today in a similar situation. Not to mention the fact that the Constitution prohibits the imposition of a poll tax, so if a state charges for state-issued ID, you can't require a citizen to show it as a condition of voting. And the only type of voter fraud that showing an ID would prohibit is among the least common types of voter fraud. There's far more voter fraud associated with absentee ballots, and I would submit, voting by mail as well.

As to Screwy's original topic, absolutely no wait whatsoever for me, and I voted at perhaps the peak voting time (around 6:00 p.m.). Of course, I live in the sticks, so there is that. The most difficult thing about it was trying to figure out what Election District I lived in. For some reason, my small town has nine of them.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:20 pm**

smackaholic wrote:
Jsc810 wrote:More Republican voter fraud.

What else is new?

Oregon election worker fired for altering ballots to Republican straight ticket

An election worker in Oregon is facing a criminal investigation for allegedly altering multiple ballots to benefit Republican candidates.

In a press release on Monday, Clackamas County spokesperson Tim Heider said that 55-year-old Deanna Swenson had been “relieved of duty immediately after the alleged ballot tampering was discovered.”

Swenson, who was registered as a Republican, was accused of filling in a Republican straight ticket on ballots where voters did not specify a choice.

Contacted by Willamette Week, Swenson tearfully insisted that it was “only the two” ballots that had been altered.

The Oregon Department of Justice began an investigation last week after an elections official reportedly observed ballots being altered.

“At this point, it is unclear how many ballots the employee at issue had access to, or what will be done with those ballots,” the sheriff’s office said on Monday.

At a Monday emergency meeting, officials in Clackamas County announced that the altered ballots would not be counted. Since ballots were anonymous, disenfranchised voters would not be given a chance to re-cast their votes.

Swenson has worked in elections since at least 2000, according to the Clackamas County spokesperson.

Blue Oregon’s Kari Chisholm reported that the Oregon City woman’s Facebook page indicated she “liked” various conservative personalities, candidates and organizations including the Republican National Committee, The Tea Party, Paul Ryan VP, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), Ann Romney and Fox News.

If convicted of a Class C felony for ballot tampering, Swenson could face five years in prison and a fine of up to $125,000.
According to the "no ID needed" crowd, there is no voter fraud.

Okay, so if you needed an ID to vote, how would that have eliminated this particular problem?

Take your time.

If this bitch is guilty, she needs to go up the river for a spell.

Agreed.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:45 pm**

It wouldn't have.

My point which obviously sailed over your head ('sup TiVO) is that there are people out there that will commit voter fraud. And the primary way to combat this is to require a valid photo ID. This isn't fukking rocket surgery and there ways, even for your granny to get such an ID.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 2:08 pm**

smackaholic wrote:It wouldn't have.

My point which obviously sailed over your head ('sup TiVO) is that there are people out there that will commit voter fraud. And the primary way to combat this is to require a valid photo ID. This isn't fukking rocket surgery and there ways, even for your granny to get such an ID.

The only type of voter fraud that is stopped by requiring a photo ID is in-person fraud as to identity. And that is one of the rarest types of voter fraud that exists. There's much more fraud associated with absentee ballots, for example.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 2:19 pm**

The rarity of in person fraud is debatable. Even if it is rare, efforts should be taken to stop it.

I agree with you completely on the absentee ballot problem, which is why they should be limited to those that can show need, primarily military personnel. Everyone else should be told to show up at your voting place on the first tuesday in november.

I would be OK with making it a two or three day event, but, the current system we have does nothing but promote fraud.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 2:27 pm**

I voted after work, and it was a long line, but only took about 30 minutes. I live in a neighborhood of mostly young people who understand how to form lines, push buttons on machines and fill out ballots. If I had to vote at a conservative blue hair precinct I would probably shoot myself.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:52 pm**

smackaholic wrote:

I agree with you completely on the absentee ballot problem, which is why they should be limited to those that can show need, primarily military personnel. Everyone else should be told to show up at your voting place on the first tuesday in november.

Isn't that a matter for the states to decide?

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:49 pm**

88 wrote:
Mikey wrote:
smackaholic wrote:

I agree with you completely on the absentee ballot problem, which is why they should be limited to those that can show need, primarily military personnel. Everyone else should be told to show up at your voting place on the first tuesday in november.

Isn't that a matter for the states to decide?
Absolutely, except for federal offices (President, Senator and US Congressional representatives).

Actually, I believe that it's entirely up to the states except that suffrage cannot be denied on grounds of race or color, sex or age for citizens eighteen years or older.

Can you imagine the mess if they handled voting for federal offices and state ballots differently in the same election?

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 5:01 pm**

Yes, I can. It wouldn't be anything compared to the fukking dog and pony show we have currently.

I think there are two things that should be done.

First off, do away with this abortion of a system we have with the electoral college. A housewife in Cuyahoga county'svote should count the same as yours or mine. But, with this joke of a system we have, that is not the case.

Imagine a system where all our votes carried the same weight and the politicians campaigning efforts were actually directed at everyone.

Second, I think we should require a majority for a win. No majority, have a runoff between the top two vote getters. A number of countries are smart enough to do it this way already. We should to. of course it won't happen as it might break the republicrat stranglehold that has been in place for nearly 200 years

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 5:30 pm**

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Maybe we should have a parliamentary democracy, just like jolly old England?

I'm sort of (actually very) glad the candidates didn't direct much of their campaigning efforts in my direction.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 5:45 pm**

I haven't a problem with the constitution. If the pols in charge would actually follow the fukking thing, I wouldn't much care which side was in control.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 6:12 pm**

Atomic Punk wrote:
Moving Sale wrote:Why are you wearing panties all the time?
That's offensive and mean. Nobody has ever said something like that to me before. IKYABWAI is not a shocking reply, BTW.

You asked him why he's angry. He asked you why you wear panties. To most people, these are not the same thing.

This is NOT I know you are but what am I. Get fucked, you horrid tranny.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 6:17 pm**

smackaholic wrote:I haven't a problem with the constitution. If the pols in charge would actually follow the fukking thing, I wouldn't much care which side was in control.

You'd have to change the Constitution to get rid of the EC.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 6:23 pm**

Mikey wrote:I'm sort of (actually very) glad the candidates didn't direct much of their campaigning efforts in my direction.

You should be. It was brutal. Living in a major battleground state, we were bombarded with poli ads. Making it worse, living near DC, we were privileged enough to not only get the ads for VA, but also for MD. Every commercial break on every station included multiple campaign ads for the past several months. Absolutely horrible. Was in NOLA over the weekend, and even though we didn't watch a lot of TV while there, what we did watch was gloriously bereft of such ads.

On another note, when I went to vote yesterday, a tour bus pulled up. Thought it might've been a bus bringing voters to the polls, but it seemed to be a bunch of foreigners (mostly slopes) on what appeared to be some sort of field trip to watch American democracy in action. The group just stood around at the back of the high school gym where the voting booths were set up and watched people move through the line. Not sure if the purpose was to provide a civics lesson ('sup, 'holic?) or a comedy show, as opposed to the tragedy of having to endure all the ads.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 6:29 pm**

Maybe it was the OSCE - UN election monitoring.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:25 pm**

Mikey wrote:
smackaholic wrote:I haven't a problem with the constitution. If the pols in charge would actually follow the fukking thing, I wouldn't much care which side was in control.
You'd have to change the Constitution to get rid of the EC.

Yeah, that's the problem. Maybe the Supremes could just decide it wasn't constitutional and do away with it that way. Wouldn't be the first time they used that tactic.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:31 pm**

With Obama in office another four years you can be sure of getting a few new activist judges appointed. So, this might be possible in a couple of years.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:37 pm**

88 wrote: Wrong:

U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 4 wrote:The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.

OK you got me there.

I'm trying to remember what the original question was, but the times, places and manner of holding elections are still up to each state. Part of that can be overridden by Congress.

I wonder how many times that's happened.

Posted: **Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:45 pm**

Slacker

T1B

While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...

Re: While you're waiting four hours to vote today...