As we gear up towards Election Day in the US, if you are of age and legally able, please vote! Exercise your civic right and duty! MAKE IT COUNT and BE SAFE OUT THERE!

I dropped off my ballot and my wife's ballot at our local Board of Elections and they gave me stickers!

Election day is Nov. 3

New York (NY)

Registration deadlines

Online: Oct. 9

By mail: Postmarked by Oct. 9

In person: Oct. 9

Absentee ballot deadlines

Request: Received by Oct. 27

Return by mail: Postmarked by Nov. 3

Return in person: Nov. 3 by 9:00 p.m.

Early voting

Oct. 24 - Nov. 1, but dates and hours may vary based on where you live

4 hours ago, BricksBrotha said:

My state (ME) is the first to implement Ranked Choice voting even though the Repubs are hell bent on getting rid of it. All of our state elections have been this way since 2017, but this will be the first presidential election to use this system. I am starting to like this system better as it requires a candidate to receive at least 50% of the vote to be declared a winner. If no one receives 50% then the lowest candidate is removed and the votes recounted and repeated until there is a clear winner.

Under this system, voters rank each candidate based on preference. If only 3 candidates then you vote them by 1st choice, 2nd choice, and lastly 3rd choice.   

 

Speaking about parties, I have been a green party member ever since signing up Freshman year in college.  I am happy not be associated with the Dems or Repubs, but sadly, the green party will never be taken seriously on their current path.

As many have said before, all the other smaller parties do not have the funding or logical platforms needed for them to succeed.  

 

https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)

That may sound good in theory but would make vote counting terribly complicated and slow.  Plus if either party contests the result, you would have to redo the whole counting process all over again

Not to mention educating the voter base on a new way to vote.  I can see confusion galore and even fraud

 

10 minutes ago, Darth_Raichu said:

That may sound good in theory but would make vote counting terribly complicated and slow.  Plus if either party contests the result, you would have to redo the whole counting process all over again

Not to mention educating the voter base on a new way to vote.  I can see confusion galore and even fraud

IDK... I suppose a reasonable amount of fear and suspicion should be considered, but I think we can handle this... it is fairly simple, and a much more democratic solution (if you are into that sort of thing...(that's not a dig, there is a reasonable argument to be made against each vote counting equally)... Slower isn't necessarily a bad thing. Quite a few other countries use it.  Here is a podcast that focuses on it... Super interesting.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/tweak-vote

1 minute ago, House Schubert said:

 

IDK... I suppose a reasonable amount of fear and suspicion should be considered, but I think we can handle this... it is fairly simple, and a much more democratic solution (if you are into that sort of thing...(that's not a dig, there is a reasonable argument to be made against each vote counting equally)... Slower isn't necessarily a bad thing. Quite a few other countries use it.  Here is a podcast that focuses on it... Super interesting.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/tweak-vote

Nothing simple about asking Americans to change the way they do things.  Otherwise we would have been using the metrics system in 2020

 

Ironically, if I use CA as an example, using Maine's system would have actually given Trump an even larger electoral college win.
Think about it this way, Trump's popular vote 2016 (nation wide) was under Hillary by only 2.86 million (only 2% difference).  (I was mistaken earlier re: CA votes, there were actually 13 mil+ votes cast in CA alone in 2016).  Hillary won CA 8,753,788 (61%) to Trump's 4,483,810 (31%) - (diff of 4.3 mil. votes - in other words, if you take out CA's popular vote, Trump won the popular vote nation-wide by over 1.5 mil. people).

Since you bring up California, one discussion point I always bring up is how the electorate might have voted if popular vote were counted vs the Electoral College system.

As someone stated above, if you know how your state is likely to go, it feels a little like “why bother?” A Trump voter in California could feel disenfranchised because “Hilary will take the state.” If the state is pretty assuredly going to go one way or the other, how likely are you to vote? Or legitimately vote for your candidate? It goes both directions - why would a Biden voter bother to vote in their very red state?

Now flip that around to a popular vote, and you may have had a different result. Not saying it is right or wrong, or that we should change the system, but under that system, you might get a more true will of the people.

I have no great insight. But I do know people that stayed home because they felt that their vote didn’t matter in 2016.

9 minutes ago, Darth_Raichu said:

That may sound good in theory but would make vote counting terribly complicated and slow.  Plus if either party contests the result, you would have to redo the whole counting process all over again

Not to mention educating the voter base on a new way to vote.  I can see confusion galore and even fraud

Its not just theory,  Maine has been using this system for 3.5 years. So there is actual evidence/data stating otherwise. Doesnt take months for a result. Other states could adapt and make the transition easier. Its actually not that complicated.  The current system is antiquated to the point of fraud and abuse as it stands so a change could be good for the people.   

Maine already split their electoral college for the first time in history in 2016 election, without RCV. 

27 minutes ago, BricksBrotha said:

Its not just theory,  Maine has been using this system for 3.5 years. So there is actual evidence/data stating otherwise. Doesnt take months for a result. Other states could adapt and make the transition easier. Its actually not that complicated.  The current system is antiquated to the point of fraud and abuse as it stands so a change could be good for the people.   

Maine already split their electoral college for the first time in history in 2016 election, without RCV. 

It may not matter when the state is overwhelmingly blue or red.  My concern lays on the complication when the result is contested.  I can't help but imagine the whole "hanging chad" sh!t show with this voting system.  Not only do they need to figure out which vote goes to which candidate, they have to fight over the validity of voter's preference for every vote.  ie. Did the voter prefer 3rd party candidate, Biden, then Trump or was the vote for 3rd party, Trump, then Biden ?  

I fear all the believers that voting is "rigged" by the illusion of "faking it' or simple mistakes that were corrected or are being corrected.  There are what 200 million votes available to those 18+. There are bound to be mistakes here and there but nothing of "significant" scale.  

It is sad to see Trump, personally, to continue this rhetoric about how "fake" it is.  Yet it is the same voting systems that were used 2 years ago, 4 years ago, etc... with upgrades.

But this is his prerogative, to sew doubt into the system so it can be contested. 

PS: hats off to all the volunteers, that I don't doubt will be dragged through the mud. 

PPS: Let's get along a little too.  I'm tired of the left vs right BS.  It's so incredibly stupid and more destructive each and every day.

Edited October 7, 20205 yr by LegoMan1212

I fear all the believers that voting is "rigged" by the illusion of "faking it' or simple mistakes that were corrected or are being corrected.  There are what 200 million votes available to those 18+. There are bound to be mistakes here and there but nothing of "significant" scale.  
It is sad to see Trump, personally, to continue this rhetoric about how "fake" it is.  Yet it is the same voting systems that were used 2 years ago, 4 years ago, etc... with upgrades.
But this is his prerogative, to sew doubt into the system so it can be contested. 

I think one question is - what is significant?

Is a handful of ballots going to dead people or the wrong address significant? Or does that lead us down a road of thinking that the problem is much bigger?

Does every vote really count? Or do accept that some disenfranchisement occur because the system isn’t perfect. And at what point do we cross the line?

7 minutes ago, LegoMan1212 said:

I fear all the believers that voting is "rigged" by the illusion of "faking it' or simple mistakes that were corrected or are being corrected.  There are what 200 million votes available to those 18+. There are bound to be mistakes here and there but nothing of "significant" scale.  

It is sad to see Trump, personally, to continue this rhetoric about how "fake" it is.  Yet it is the same voting systems that were used 2 years ago, 4 years ago, etc... with upgrades.

But this is his prerogative, to sew doubt into the system so it can be contested. 

PS: hats off to all the volunteers, that I don't doubt will be dragged through the mud. 

PPS: Let's get along a little too.  I'm tired of the left vs right BS.  It's so incredibly stupid and more destructive each and every day.

Technically not the same.  Four years ago I was not asked repeatedly by State Election Office to send my vote early by mail, NOW.  If I wanted to vote early by mail, I would have requested early ballot myself.  Thank you very much.

So something changed.  To what degree, I guess we will see in November

I think one question is - what is significant?

Is a handful of ballots going to dead people or the wrong address significant? Or does that lead us down a road of thinking that the problem is much bigger?

Does every vote really count? Or do accept that some disenfranchisement occur because the system isn’t perfect. And at what point do we cross the line?

It’s not significant if what we’re talking about is some misplaced ballots through the postal system or someone not properly filing out a ballot—that’s user or system error not voter disenfranchisement.

If it targets a specific group of folks and is designed to hinder them from voting, like the understanding laws in the Jim Crow south, then its disenfranchisement.

4 hours ago, joneyyy1981 said:

Vote Trump. thanks

Vote Biden. thanks.

2 hours ago, Darth_Raichu said:

That may sound good in theory but would make vote counting terribly complicated and slow.  Plus if either party contests the result, you would have to redo the whole counting process all over again

Not to mention educating the voter base on a new way to vote.  I can see confusion galore and even fraud

Just try it out for NFL and NBA MVP voting...once its accepted there then most of the nation should be familiar with it.  I think NBA MVP and Allstar votes this way already...right?

13 minutes ago, KvHulk said:

Vote Biden. thanks.

Just Vote. Thanks

I think one question is - what is significant?

Is a handful of ballots going to dead people or the wrong address significant? Or does that lead us down a road of thinking that the problem is much bigger?

Does every vote really count? Or do accept that some disenfranchisement occur because the system isn’t perfect. And at what point do we cross the line?

It’s not significant if what we’re talking about is some misplaced ballots through the postal system or someone not properly filing out a ballot—that’s user or system error not voter disenfranchisement.

If it targets a specific group of folks and is designed to hinder them from voting, like the understanding laws in the Jim Crow south, then its disenfranchisement.

The definition of disenfranchise is depriving someone the right to vote. There’s no specification that it has to be a group of people, although obviously targeting a specific group is what we are more familiar with.

Regardless of the definition, the point remains - at what point do we say “a number of votes, whether intentional or accidental, are going to be subject to loss and we are ok with that” or so we say “every single vote counts?”

My own opinion agrees with you - there will be spoilage, it happens, it’s unavoidable. And you hope that the spoilage that happens is the “Act of God” kind where there is nothing that could have done to prevent it.

However, this election is certainly highlighting that the way we vote may be antiquated, that there needs to be some security and assurances, and trust in the system is definitely in question.

1 hour ago, Alpinemaps said:

The definition of disenfranchise is depriving someone the right to vote. There’s no specification that it has to be a group of people, although obviously targeting a specific group is what we are more familiar with.

Regardless of the definition, the point remains - at what point do we say “a number of votes, whether intentional or accidental, are going to be subject to loss and we are ok with that” or so we say “every single vote counts?”

My own opinion agrees with you - there will be spoilage, it happens, it’s unavoidable. And you hope that the spoilage that happens is the “Act of God” kind where there is nothing that could have done to prevent it.

However, this election is certainly highlighting that the way we vote may be antiquated, that there needs to be some security and assurances, and trust in the system is definitely in question.

Yes, spoilage will happen. We agree. I also don't think there's any way around that. I disagree that losing a ballot or disqualifying a ballot because it was improperly filled out is voter disenfranchisement. 

2 hours ago, Alpinemaps said:

I think one question is - what is significant?

Is a handful of ballots going to dead people or the wrong address significant? Or does that lead us down a road of thinking that the problem is much bigger?

Does every vote really count? Or do accept that some disenfranchisement occur because the system isn’t perfect. And at what point do we cross the line?

Ok, so if dead people get it, but a vote still shows up.  Then those people are found and prosecuted. This has happened in the past and those people have been tried and jailed or fined.  Same with wrong address, if I get someone else's voting package and fill it in and return it, then I can be tossed in jail if found out.  

People have been caught voting twice, or voting when they are not allowed to vote per laws, and they have been tried and jailed or fined.

I would like to believe that the vast majority of people would not want to "try their hand" at illegally voting and going to jail over it.  

Trump tweeted about a postal worker that threw away mail in NJ recently.  The mail was located, it had a handful of ballots (like under 10, maybe only 3 if I remember correctly) but the mail was delivered and that person now will probably be going to jail.  What was the point to tweet about it, to bust nuts about someone that was caught... no.... it was to give the appearance that this is occurring across the country, when it is not.  

Also, stories can be made up so easily.  I can throw my own mail on the ground and take a picture of it, or I can put it in the fire, or I can take my ballot, make copies and make it appear that I got 100 of them. 

But the mere fact that, to me, it appears that instead of accepting what an outcome may be, to already deny what the outcome may be, is a sad position to already be taking.  

39 minutes ago, LegoMan1212 said:

But the mere fact that, to me, it appears that instead of accepting what an outcome may be, to already deny what the outcome may be, is a sad position to already be taking.  

it's strategy.  either side will accuse the other of "forcing their hand"...but the bar has been lowered probably going back decades....and all sense of decency and respect for the office (and the country) has all been given up since maybe Gore. 

47 minutes ago, LegoMan1212 said:

But the mere fact that, to me, it appears that instead of accepting what an outcome may be, to already deny what the outcome may be, is a sad position to already be taking

Ironically, some people still have not accepted the result of 2016 election

Personally, I don't have any problems with mail in voting and I am solidly on the Republican side of most issues. Actually I hope that every Democrat who wants to vote decides to vote by mail. I will be voting in person on 3 Nov though.

I do take issue with states that send unsolicited ballots out to every registered voter though. That is just asking for ballots to be sent to dead relatives opening up the possibility of fraud. If you want to vote by mail, what is so hard about going online and requesting a ballot be mailed?

I think that our country definitely needs widespread voting reform and the first thing that I would start with is gerrymandering. And why in this digital age we are in are we still arguing about mail-in voting when we should be arguing about online voting? Surely with the advances made in digital security such as block chains (not an expert, please don't flame me haha) we should be able to ensure the integrity of online voting.

Ok, so if dead people get it, but a vote still shows up.  Then those people are found and prosecuted. This has happened in the past and those people have been tried and jailed or fined.  Same with wrong address, if I get someone else's voting package and fill it in and return it, then I can be tossed in jail if found out.  
People have been caught voting twice, or voting when they are not allowed to vote per laws, and they have been tried and jailed or fined.

So, just so I am understanding your point correctly. You believe that unlike every other crime committed, every single act of voter fraud is always discovered and prosecuted? People can get away with murder, but not voter fraud?

20 minutes ago, Shortbus311 said:

So, just so I am understanding your point correctly. You believe that unlike every other crime committed, every single act of voter fraud is always discovered and prosecuted? People can get away with murder, but not voter fraud?

Voter fraud is RARE in the US. Many mistakes that are considered fraud tend to be at the administrative level, often due to misreading instructions, missing information or confusion rather than outright maliciousness.

Furthemore, voting my mail tends to be safe and secure. Many states have required witness requirements, notary requirements, or enclosing ID requirements. Once a ballot is received, it is processed and tabulated. If the person appears to have voted twice, most jurisdiction invalidate the extra vote. Others notify the person in question.

The most prominent cases of mail fraud have tended to involve campaigns, not voters. For example,  North Carolina invalidated the results of a 2018 congressional election after state officials found that a Republican campaign operative had orchestrated a ballot fraud scheme.

 

Rare, but it happens.

So circling back to my question from earlier - what level of fraud do we find acceptable?

Voter ID should be the law of the land.

15 minutes ago, Alpinemaps said:

Rare, but it happens.

So circling back to my question from earlier - what level of fraud do we find acceptable?

head over to the ethics thread and find out!

2 hours ago, Alpinemaps said:

Rare, but it happens.

So circling back to my question from earlier - what level of fraud do we find acceptable?

Zero.  I don't find murder acceptable either in case you were wondering.  However, when either occur, I expect it to be captured and put through the justice system.

For voting fraud to occur, you have to have so many things go wrong.  This is not a full list but some items as examples

1) Each district knows the population  

2) Each district knows how their district typically votes (within deviations of course)

3) Each district knows what percentage of voters typically turn out (high, lows, etc..)

4) Each district has Multiple people watching over the election process

5) Each district has their own standards on how people can register to vote

6) Each district is within the USA and falls under our judicial system, of which, the vast majority of people know it is unlawful to illegally vote.

Is it still possible to commit voter fraud.  Of course it is, just like murder is possible.  However , unlike murder, which I would say is very low already, it is already statistically so much lower than murder that it is a "fake outrage" that is being created.  Especially when some states have been voting by mail 100% for year and years and year, w/o any issues.  So what would they suddenly have one now?

If voter fraud was such an issue, why even waste money on advertising, on campaign visits, on everything. Just spend the money making ballots and blowing past all those items listed above.  

Like Russia, where there are video's after video's of people taking ballots and just dumping them in.  

Let's not forget too, part of the stimulus package was more money for elections, but Republicans balked at this being included... which surprised no one.  Anyone else hear about Texas reducing ballot drop off boxes to 1 per County.  Which equates to 4.7MM Houston citizens that have 1 drop box to utilize.  If they all chose to use the drop box, they would have to drop off 6,000+ ballots per hour every hour to meet the deadline.  Imagine that for a second, 6,000 people having to drop off their ballots every hour until election to satisfy the County.  Opponents say "well if you want to vote, you will drive by and drop it off, we still make time for grocery shopping".  Imagine having to go buy groceries and having 6,000 people there as well within the same hour.  

Anyway, the answer is Zero.     I don't care who you vote for, but vote and don't complain if you don't vote and don't like the outcome.

EDIT: Obviously, I voted Biden.  I hoped for the best with Trump, I really did.  But I've been in my house for 240 days only leaving for groceries and to see my mom/dad 2 times and I'm sick of there being no f'ing plan to get us out of this.  I'm tired of "putting cloth" over our face even being debatable.  It's disgusting, the leadership is awful and full of BS over and over and over again.  The press conferences on COVID were embarrassing.  I don't care what happened or was said in the first couple weeks.  There has been zero shift in plans since except spew the same dumb stuff over and over again.  Scientists will save us, not this administration.  When a vaccine becomes available from any company that succeeds, whomever is president will surely have it distributed after it passes all the necessary tests.  Overall, I'm fed up with this timeline and look forward to another team coming in and Leading from the top to everyone, not just red states or whomever is in his trumps pocket.  I'm also pissed that he steals golf revenue from us every week.  We complain about the smallest things, but accept millions beyond millions just going directly to his businesses.  That is not very presidential if you are trying to save the USA money when we are exceeding budgets like crazy.  Anyway, go vote.  I'll still be your friend if we are not on the same page here.  I have kept level heads with any republican friends throughout this.  I was once a republican and voted that way all the way up to 2016.  (and never Scott Walker too)  Take care everyone 

EDIT2:  Sometimes I'm asked, well how would you have solved this COVID thing... Sure here goes.

#1 - Have a goal.  Maybe in April/May/June or July even made the serious goal of "we want to make sure our children are back in school come Sept 1"

#2 - How do we obtain this goal.  Severe methods vs Non-Severe methods.  What are other countries doing, etc....  Select the most appropriate method and implement it across the nation.  It probably would have just had to be some of the following (and others too of course):

2a... everyone who can stays at home (duh right)
2b..... everyone will be provided with enough money to pay rent/home payments, auto, etc.... and where needed food assistance including delivery of food to those most at risk (pretty much keep unemployment going + extra to those that may not qualify and to be fair to all those actually working still)
2c..... all small businesses are provide with income to continue to survive to pay their rents/expenses etc.....
2d... basically pull out all the cards to make sure nearly everyone possible is taken care of to keep the cases from going up

#3... test the hell out of everyone, test them more than once, but make sure the virus is cornered.
#4.... educate everyone on why this is being done and drill home the following ovre and over and over again "proper masks to wear, social distancing, we are in this together, we are getting there, be 100% honest, just be honest"
#5... mail every person in America multiple masks.  have a store online where citizens can buy more masks from the Post Office (help fund them too) to get creative ones or ones that fit your style, maybe you need a larger size too
#6.... if needed, pay incentives to those whom are covid free (small tax credit) - this one I'm sketchy on, but I feel there could be some kind of incentive to those that continually test negative, but not Large enough to matter in the grand scheme (it's a work in progress)
#7... then obviously make sure all front line workers no matter what industry they are in have the proper items to keep them from spreading 

anyway, these items are just things I literally wrote in the last 7 minutes.  I'm not a task force, which is why I can't believe the "task" force implemented next to nothing other than "hope" for a vaccine.  

This is the end. I can only do so much of this, but this is also a stress reliever simply typing it out, even if you hate everything about it.  That's your problem, not mine.  I wanted a common solution we could all get behind.  Imagine COVID was under control and only popping up in pockets here and there.  Trump would have won in a landslide and even though I probably still would have voted Biden (not sure) it wouldn't have mattered as much because he took care of us...instead of watching 200k die and barely acknowledging it.
 

Edited October 8, 20205 yr by LegoMan1212