The media IS the Democraptic party!

Ok..

what is your definition of disenfranchise?

What exactly is there to clean up?

What is the basis for thinking that voting is

fixed

... by whom and how?

I've already covered my thoughts on these questions earlier in the thread...

Mike

How do you, Mike, personally LOSE your franchise to vote... Say, I wander up to your township and find a way to cast a vote?

the notion of franchise is not some zero sum game as you are implying......my action has no effect on your behavior or properly recorded vote. your franchise is not effected.

It is like your franchise to free speech in the public square... I have NOTHING to do with your franchise... Now, i can shout and shout you down but you still have the franchise to free speech. I have disrupted the listeners by my shouting..but your franchise is not impacted. (only the government could shut you down... BUT we have a constitution that protects that right... unlike say the Brits)

You conflate the franchise to vote and to free speech with a preferred result. Your team wins the election OR your listeners get to hear your speech.

Trump makes the same error. The Russians did lots of things to sway the election for Trump.... Trump thinks that people will assume that the russians took away their franchise to vote. Liberals think that the russians took away THEIR franchise to vote.... Both argue that Trumps victory is or is not legit BUT... it doesn't work that way!

In fact... you can make a VERY STRONG case that the republican actions in Florida in 2000 actually took away FLA voters franchise. They argued that hanging chads were not votes and in fact argued that those ballots should not be counted... Now THAT was disenfranchisement.

Closing a polling place early or having half the machines broken are cases of disenfranchisement. NOT YOURS.... its the voter who CAN't vote that is impacted

Your argument

is not an argument... just a complaint that you MIGHT not get your desired result.

I'm an enigma in your fight. I actually don't care who wins (especially this last election), I only care that the results are correct, based on actual citizens voting. Sorry if I didn't somehow make that point clearly enough

Mike

Once again.... fuzzy thinking... What do you mean by

correct

(This is what you are not clear about)

fair? honest? duly recorded? your side wins? Puerto Ricans can vote? Dual citizens can vote? the idiots can't, the mentally incompetent don't vote? ONLY people who can make it to a polling place? slaves don't vote? woman don't vote? non property owners don't vote? uneducated don't vote? You must be able to read to vote? Or... the position you seem to fix on... must have a photo ID.

Some of my possible answers to your request of

correct

are fuzzy eg FAIR... others are specific eg woman can't vote! Some have been rectified and other issues... nominally rectified. (see voting rights act) All have to stand up to the test of... Is this a barrier to YOUR franchise to vote.

The problem you seem unwilling to address is that the gap between

correct

and

franchise to vote in a democracy by citizens

is enormous and the issue is... what are the details?.

I repeat... NO ONE in the debate is saying non citizens should have

no

barrier to voting. Lord knows... they can politic in elections just like citizens and hope to influence your vote. (see Russia and Israel, and many other countries)

The only completely accurate system with integrity would be for EVERY man woman and child in the country to have a single government issued ID card (aka passport) updated every XXX years and show that along with local address documentation to VOTE. This system eliminates the gap between

correct

and

actual citizens

voting

Short of that... what trade-offs do you want to make? and what set of facts supports the need for your system and would explain what you mean by

correct

?

Why does your argument have to include so many negatives. I neither said, nor implied, nor believe any of those horrible things.

If the poor folks volunteering to work at the poll can't figure out if Voter X is a citizen, we have a problem.

If you're happy that the current system can do that, fine. I don't think everyone shares that opinion. Even if it's fake news, or whatever, this is something that we should be able to handle at this point in history.

Mike

This nicely sums up the intelligentsia that have fought tooth and nail against the ACA/Obamacare. The stoopid is strong in this one.

This Image Explains The ACA Debate I Hear Every Day

Mike,

The people at the polls are not Carnac the magnificent... they can't suss out.. who is and who is not a legal voter.. All they can do... is enforce the current set of rules. In this country... each state and locale sets the rules and history has shown that many tilt the playing field against some classes of voters. I have seen NO evidence that Poll workers are raising alarm bells about illegal voters and their inability to run an election by the letter AND spirit of the law. However, politicians and power brokers use the issue to gain power.

So... we DON'T have a problem at the polls experienced by poll workers ...... we have lots of noise about an unproven problem... that nobody can measure the amount of or ID the actual perps and then prosecute them. Moreover, these states put in place barriers that disenfranchise legitimate voters. A true Flim Flam.. The federal courts have tossed many of these rules out the window. The fight continues because its just about power and money.

I am not arguing that you in fact believe many of those issues. Don't throw up a red herring...
Of course you recognize American History and these were issues that faced the country... and slowly but surely (major war involved for one of them ...) we resolved most of these issues. Again, history shows that the arguments against members of the community being granted full CITIZENSHIP were mostly self serving power grabs by the powers in charge. Of course,they wrapped their crap argument in nice words to justify their position as fair, reasonable and of course... all American.

So, is history repeating itself? ..

Is the current noisy campaign about the supposed lack of integrity in the voting system... and the FRAUD we supposedly suffer... a legit issue... or just the usual trojan horse for yet another power grab.

the problem you have is... You take as evidence that

many people are of the OPINION that there is a problem of in person voter fraud.

I have one friend who argues... well... OK... in North Carolina... it's clearly racist actions to cut the blacks out.. BUT in Southern CAl... his cousins tell him how bad the mexican voter fraud problem is... and THAT is where the real problem is... and well... you can't prove it.. (for some reason) His

logic

is identical to yours. So, the rules to stop it are

justified

.

Opinions are not facts, evidence, or proof.... When you base your stand on opinion and look the other way at the evidence for disenfranchisement... you are in the same boat as all those citizens who argued that... blacks should not vote, ditto woman, etc etc etc. Doesn't really matter if you believe that crap or not. You are in the boat with all of the others.

Yours is not a principled argument (that is OK)... its just an expression of majority rules politics wrapped in face saving rhetoric that shows that you are

fair minded

and

really" a proponent of common sense solutions.
Is that where you want to be?

I challenge all the posters on the subject of voting to go to the classes and become a poll worker and then report on what they have seen.

Mark, you make sense until you start wrapping the hatred and problems of the past and bigger

power players

into the argument. Now I can't have an opinion that our system could use enhancement without being accused, or at least associated with, evil and second-handedness?

And I'm the one with the problem?

I have no secret agenda, and generally despise politics. The only votes I don't want counted are fraudulent ones.

I already told you what they do in my town, and I don't think it's fair. Send in a census by mail, walk right in, give your name and address and vote. No census, go show your ID to a separate desk and get back in line. Sure, this is better than nothing, and probably eliminates most fraud, but seems like a double standard (some show IDs, others don't).

Again, I don't think we have a problem yet (at least not enough to actually change a result), but why wait until we can prove an election was rigged? That would be a mess from which we'd never want to have to recover.

Mike

This is why we are at an impasse. There is NO actual evidence of a problem but there are drastic changes taking place to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Those drastic changes are tilting the ability of people to vote unanimously in favor of republicans. You don't see this as a gigantic problem and threat to democracy? C'mon guys, you at least have to know that there is a problem before you justify messing with voting rights or you just need to admit that the system is being changed/rigged to favor one party over the other. THIS action is what is rigging the votes - you can't see that?

You are taking it on

faith

that there is some non-quantifiable problem with voting that can only be fixed by eliminating a certain category of voter that just happens to tilt the voting in your favor...That's koolaid drink turning into serious landscape changing activity. That's scary stuff.

Actually, Mike, the poll workers only have to verify that the person standing in front of them is ELIGIBLE to vote. It's not our job to determine WHY (as in, citizen or whatever).

And to Jake's point, we are discussing ways to bring in that last (estimated) 1% of the people who COULD be eligible to vote but for some reason AREN'T able to vote (transportation, identification, etc).

Does missing this 1% disinfranchise the 99%? Not sure.

I can't personally believe that the low overall voter turnout numbers are only due to the problem of getting those few that slip through the cracks a ballot...

What was the turnout this election cycle (eligible voters vs. those that actually voted)? Maybe 50%-60%?

As hotly contested and vitriolic as it was, you'd think the turnout to vote (by mail, in person, etc) would be higher. Especially given how many people have made comments about the election. So it's not like this was one of those election dates that people forgot about.

So in my mind, there are other reasons people don't exercise their right to select leadership. Not because they can't find a way to cast a ballot.

Your thoughts?

Good points. The registration process should determine who's eligible (citizen or not), correct?

Turnout is never 99% (missing just the 1% you mentioned).

I think this past election drove us into four groups: Those who voted for Trump (or against Hillary), those who voted for Hillary (or against Trump), those who thought they were both bad, but voted for who they thought would do the least damage, and those who were so disgusted with the choices that they just stayed home.

I think the last group was bigger than usual, and probably answers to your question. There are always people who stay home because they don't think their vote counts (like if you live in a state that one party

always

wins, and you'd prefer the opposite candidate).

BTW, how many homeless/jobless people are actually registering and voting? I think both sides are coming up with some pretty implausible arguments.

Mike

I would agree with you Mike.

It seems that everyone's upset based on the results rather than a particular issue with the process. But they blame the process as

rigged

. As of yet, I haven't seen any credible (or even plausible) theory on how it was rigged.

We got on a tangent regarding people and their ability to vote, but I think we can agree that those who weren't able to vote were overshadowed by those who chose not to vote.

Maybe I've missed an important topic as to date I haven't read the details on how this election process was rigged (other than disinformation campaigns and allegations of

Pay to stay home

campaigns).

It's not implausable. In fact, the only actual fact that has come up on this topic is the number of voters that don't have the ID's to vote in their areas. You can't gloss this over:

From HERE
A federal court in Texas found that 608,470 registered voters don’t have the forms of identification that the state now requires for voting.

...

Across the country, about 11 percent of Americans do not have government-issued photo identification cards, such as a driver’s license or a passport, according to Wendy Weiser of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.

From HERE

The 2001 Carter-Ford Commission on Election Reform found that between 6-11 percent of voting-age citizens lack driver’s license or alternate state-issued photo ID.
A 2007 Indiana survey found that roughly 13 percent of registered Indiana voters lack an Indiana driver’s license or an alternate Indiana-issued photo ID.
In a 2009 study in Indiana, Professors Matt Barreto, Stephen Nuño, and Gabriel Sanchez found that election restrictions like voter ID laws have the greatest impact on the elderly, racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, those with less educational attainment and lower incomes. The professors found that of the citizen adult population, 81.4% of all white eligible adults had access to a driver’s license, whereas only 55.2% of black eligible adults had the same access. Indeed, study after study has similarly concluded that burdens to voting have a large and disparate impact on individuals with fewer resources, less education, smaller social networks, and those who are institutionally isolated.
The 2007 study, Voter ID Requirements and the Disenfranchisement of Latino, Black, and Asian Voters, based on exit polls from the 2006 elections in California, New Mexico, and Washington State, found that minority voters are less likely than whites to be able to present photo identification.
Many citizens who believe they have valid and sufficient photo IDs often do not. A national survey conducted after the November 2008 election found that 95% of respondents claimed to have a driver’s license, but 16% of those respondents lacked a license that was both current and valid. So of the of Americans who possess a photo ID, many lack proper identification that would enable to them to vote in elections under the new laws passed in Wisconsin, Kansas, Texas, South Carolina, and under legislation pending in many more states.

Additional studies and research findings on voter ID are collected here .

The voter fraud

problem

is made up. The number of people without IDs is not.

It's all garbage, on both sides.

We need politicians worth our votes, then people will make the effort to register and vote. Even if that means getting an ID.

Mike

Mikes starts with a principled and truly American stand that American citizens and only American citizens should determine their future by casting legal and proper ballots. He doesn't pay attention to the specifics about how the principle actually works out in the real world and doesn't want to think critically about the policies.

Over the course of US history... we have patched the constitution up to reflect this principled ideal.... the patches are reactions to the power politics of each era. At any moment in US History... on the ground.... the American principle is just a fig leaf to mask power politics that gain you power. The patches come about when those politics are defeated.

No!
the voting ID thing has been going on for 10+ years as part of a deliberate republican strategy of voter suppression to maximize their results. Many of the photo ID court cases predate the supreme courts decision on voting rights title 9? (pre clearance). The southern states were held back from these campaigns because of (pre clearance rules) ergo... North Carolina's situation.

Same as it every was.... take the American principle and use it to mask your power politics game.

If you had not noticed the attack on voting rights aka voter suppression... ... you simply were not the target... and had the luxury of being ignorant about the power politics at work. (remember... it's not a zero sum game here)

The basic idea is the same ol same ol.... Group X is taking the goodies from god fearing true American patriots. So, by god... vote for us and we will stop it... This is human nature...... You can disguise this motivation by attempting to wrap it up in the american ideal of voting and democracy... but its just a racket. Power politics wrapped up language that allows you to pretend that you are indeed principled and truly american.

There is nothing principled about voter photo ID.. it is just the latest strategy in voter suppression to win and hold power. What is needed is critical thinking by each voter if you want to go back to taking a principled American stand....

Step one in the critical thinking process is... what is the data... How good are the measurements and what is the weakness of the data. Jake nicely sums up the available data.

You can question the data collection, statistical analysis, relevance etc etc.. to sort out the actual reality... but you need to have much more then..

or as my friend uses... anecdotal opinions about illegal Mexicans voting in So Cal. This is critical thinking!

AND... nothing says that you have to take an AMERICAN principled stand on these issues.. It is the USA. you can stand up an say... I am a Zionist... uber Israel... I am a White Nationalist (uber David Duke and the KKK) ... i am a black nationalist (uber the black muslims and Farrakhan)...or I am a Bernie supporter... uber Democratic Socialism... or simply HEY, get real.... its about winning... I want mine! do what ever it takes.

Finally,

Negative campaigning works, (as old as the country) Voter suppression works as well (an equal ugly record), moreover, the degree to which voter suppression and negative campaigning drive voter disgust with the entire process is a major factor in the embarrassing (for the supposed premier democracy on the planet) voter participation rates. (

It's rigged

... is just more bs that lets the voter off the hook by blaming

others

or... the whine...

we just need better candidates

Nope... its the voters responsibility...)

I premised my stand on

American citizens and only American citizens should determine their future by casting legal and proper ballots

and the standard... the will of the people will carry the day. Sadly, this is JUST NOT REALTY. What we are upset about is how disinformation and propaganda marshaled by the international right wing AND coupled with negative campaigning, character assassination, and voter suppression are able to impact a minority of the voters in a quirky system to take power.

All I can do.. is point out the fuzzy thinking at play that led to 48% of the country calling the shots for the 51% of the country of voters ... not to mention the enormous number of citizen non voters.

...moreover, the degree to which voter suppression and negative campaigning drive voter disgust with the entire process is a major factor in the embarrassing (for the supposed premier democracy on the planet) voter participation rates.

Mark, on this, we fully agree.

There's just too much paranoia and vitriol in the rest. Stop insulting people who have a different opinion than yours.

Mike

Don't have a photo/signature ID? THEN VOTE BY MAIL

See the attached Florida voter registration form. It DOES NOT REQUIRE anything other than social security number....

You get your ballot by mail, so I guess you can't be homeless...

Only those folk who choose to show up at the voting station would need to show ID to prove who they are.

Perhaps that helps circumvent the

poll tax

argument and the barrier to voter registration? Voter registration form

Mike... this is a debate... I am not intending to insult you... I am challenging your position at the level of facts with respect to your belief that your position is constitutional and

American

...

My inferences are perhaps ugly... but follow from the argument and are an attempt to persuade you of the fall out from your position.

If you agree with Jake's set of facts... and then form an opinion after that.... I want to understand how you get there. What is the reasoning.. I may or may not agree... but first step is to understand what the reasoning you are using is. After this last election... I refuse to let fuzzy thinking pass.

Or you don't agree with Jakes facts... then I want to know what you are basing your opinion on. Data that I don't know about? Data that i don't find valid?, anecdotes from your part of the country?, fox news?, what ever... If your position is not supported by facts.... all I can do is point this out and note that its unprincipled and factually not supportable. (that is not paranoia or vitriol)

As I repeatedly note... its a free country... you stand for any principal and opinion on any basis you want... but... if you enter the debate... the game is ... you get to defend it. I suggested a range of other principled positions... some particularly odious. All of those principled positions don't speak to the AMERICAN Principle of voting/citizenship. So Why raise them? Not to insult you or infer that you support any of them. .... but to point out the basic requirement: Sure, you can SAY you hold the shared American principle, but presumably your argument on the voting issue is logical. A shared principle not supported by reality in facts or by action is a waste of energy (So... once again,... what is the logic in your position?)

So, please explain why you find this debate paranoiac or vitriolic? I draw harsh inferences and point them out... but that is NOT saying that is your position Its a debate the contrast is needed to focus the argument that a principled position is founded on facts supporting your principles... you get to counter and argue a position as well.!

Consider this alternative to principled voting.
My sister voted for trump.... when I asked why... she said... I don't know anything about any of these policies ... either Clinton or Trump... but I want a change and he is different. So, she makes no argument... she makes no pretense of standing on a principle of any kind... She makes no attempt to persuade or justify her vote on any principled ground.
So, if she is not standing on principle... she is voting a value. OK, what does she value in voting? The only value that she expressed was ... she values change? When you ask her... what change does she wants to see?.... She said... too many

poor black and uneducated white people

are now showing up in her hospital because of obamacare. I asked... what is the problem... Too many poor people?... or too much medical care?.... She had no thoughtful answer beyond both! AND that is OK!.. She just wanted a change... and to hope for

better

whatever that is. It doesn't have to make sense either... That is the thing about values... they are what they are... They are not persuasive,don't have to make a bit of sense or be based in reality (of course there is more of a chance they are shared values if based in reality) and what you value can change in an instant.

So, not much to debate with my sister and thus learn from her. She does not have a logical position... there is not much to learn from in her experience living in the country... and no chance that any argument of any kind could change her opinion.

Since, I know my sister from her beginnings... I was not surprised... Why did I bother?... Because, my civics education stressed responsibility to vote... and the other part... you must be responsible for your vote.. The point I make to my sister is... OK... I got it... you voted on what you value. So... you voted... that is half of your citizen responsibility. Good news!, you are responsible for Trump and his politics and actions going forward. (and if you did not vote... you are saying... whomever wins... well that is OK with you) All of us, trump voter, clinton voter and the feckless who did not vote or voted otherwise are responsible.

So, If Trump takes action on starting the torture process back up (as he repeatedly promised) ... He does it in the name of the USA and we are responsible. You can't wiggle out of responsibility for your vote. You have to own it...

So, while I may disagree with Obama on some decisions.... I understand his principles, hold most of them as well and I can argue from the facts in the real world, applying my principles and supporting my opinion and Obama's actions.

Jay, your point is just a work around for the possible disenfranchisement. Not a problem, it works,... just not the point and does not address the fairness component.

The state of Washington has NO polling places... all voting is by mail. Problem solved...everyone is equal... nobody is disenfranchised but again..that is not really the point.

The game being played is how to disenfranchise some voters to gain an edge in particular states ... power politics wrapped up in a warm fuzzy blanket of American Principles.

This is NOT a game of how to make a bullet proof and fair system that removes barriers to the full exercise of citizenship.

So far... we have solutions the fully enfranchise all voters... they are.

Vote by mail, all citizens,.... State of Washington.

Or National ID system that is mandatory and free to all citizens.

Almost all of the new laws go in the opposite direction.
As several courts have judged.

Bump

bump

Did this thread really need a bump?

I personally prefer the vote-by-mail process Mark. Not sure why we even need the physical polling stations and all the associated hassle.

A very good question I will pose to the supervisor of elections.

I guess my follow-up to your point on voting by mail is how does one go about registering to get such a ballot, and what does one need to do to prove they are eligible to vote?

Quote of the year...

Mike

Haha not for me to moderate but to be honest more talk on this thread that on any other, it will sink when more people talk sailing, RIP Rick

Ah.... there again is the issue. Voting registration is up to each state and ... you can play games at the registration of voting level as well. The difference is.. disputes have time to be sorted out.

RE: 100 percent mail ballots
People think there is something important about election day Its the way it has always been...Something about civics of the crowds in voting..lines etc etc... BECAUSE!.. And of course

Last minute bombshells

are able to shift results.
Remember... Comey weighed into this election for the THIRD time... two or so days before hand. The Bush drunken driving charge was two weeks etc etc... Politicians like the high stakes of VOTING DAY.. Data show... that if your football team wins the Sunday before... the more likely you vote the incumbent. Passions carry the day.... The Princeton Poly sci group say FBI's Comey's 2nd intervention caused a 4 percent swing.... of which 2 percent held through election day.

So, I agree the uniform vote by mail is a preferable system. The argument against it... is... What happens with late breaking information that could change your vote.... Don't we NEED a polling station.. My answer... Its like your taxes... postmarked by such and such a day and time... ITS A VOTE... it gets counted. Otherwise its a spoiled ballot... So... you could wait to the very very last minute if that is what you want... Otherwise... the first count of votes is issued on election night. And in tight races... whenever everything gets counted...

Ooooh, a little gem in there Mark...

spoiled ballot

...

So if you vote by mail you only get one shot to fill it out as you want it. If you screw it up (fill it out wrong - can't be in pencil) or mark it up so it's not read... you can't ask to get another mailed to you...

Another question I'm asking the elections supervisor: If you

spoil

a vote-by-mail ballot, can you see when/why it wasn't tabulated, and can you do anything about it (like vote in person)...?

I believe the mail ballots aren't counted until after election date so if they're f'd up then you don't get a re-do.

If you vote in person and by mail (the database tells you that a ballot was mailed) you commit fraud

Hmm... voter error ??

I have to admit... I have clicked enter on the voting machine and then had a brief panic attack that I filled it out incorrectly as I walk away.

In my states machine era... You clicked enter and that was a final decision. No oops... I want a redo opportunity.

In my states scantron era... I don't know... If you walk up with a ballot that you have not scanned and spoiled in some way... I would assume... they record destroying the bad one and give you another go... Once it enters the scanner... finished..

I take the word

cast

as meaning a once and done final decision.... No Redos.... So... I cast my vote by postmarking it. hitting enter on the machine... or stuffing it into the scanner.

So, I would imagine... IF you want a redo of your spoiled ballot that is still in your possession... you get a redo. Once you post mark it... or scan it... or click enter... You are finished.

Personally, I don't see how

Rules

on the orderly management of vote collection are in any way disenfranchising a voter. Do you have an argument on this issue that I am missing?

The small d democratic principle is that citizens have the right and duty to vote and the state has the responsibility to maximize the opportunity to vote and conduct the voting fairly.. with out disenfranchising anyone... or favoring one party.

in this light....

to cast

is a final irrevocable action and small d democratic.

One interesting thought came up.... If you have mail in ballots... How do you ensure privacy... How far must the state go to allow you /ensure that you CAN vote in privacy.. If you mail ballots to husband and wife... What stops one individual from coercing the other to vote a certain way. Should the state HAVE to provide a public polling place?