US Puppet Democracy

[Minimalist]

There are scads of disabled, elderly, crazy or poverty-stricken people who would find that too much of a burden, Danny.  However, that is not to say that we can not do much, much more to make voting easier. 

1.  Move election day to a weekend.
2.  Make better use of mail-in ballots.  ( I usually don't have much good to say about Arizona but the early balloting system works like a charm.  I'll never stand on a line again.)
3.  Online voting.  (And before someone starts shrieking about voter security remember we have an extensive online banking system already in place.  It could be done.)

Instead we get bogus voter-fraud and picture ID horseshit because we have one political party ( the republicunts ) who fully understand that they are toast if too many disadvantaged people get to vote.

So I see your point, even if I think you haven't thought it all the way through.

[Aractus]

Min, there's pre-polling and mobile polling booths that address those concerns. However if a person couldn't attend a polling booth because of a disability or another similar reason, it would be a valid reason not to vote.

[Minimalist]

Let me be clear.  The political will is to make voting harder not easier.  At least among one party.  And that party runs 23 of the 50 states while the democrats control 7.  (The others are divided.)

The first task is to stop them from disenfranchising people.

[Cecelia]

I don't think that knowing the results influences those results as much as people think they do. If anything, seeing your candidate losing (especially when it's a one vs one contest) should make you want to vote more; not less. Otherwise your vote won't be heard. Seeing how close candidates are in the primaries gives you a chance to switch horses. That's why they do things the way they do. I suppose if it's not a close contest, you'll see people less motivated to vote. Usually, though, when it's close it benefits candidates.

The real problem with American Representative Democracy is that we allow our politicians to be bought and sold for the highest dollar. We have Super PACs trying to outspend each other, so they have candidates who owe them. So long as we have that, it won't matter if we have preferential voting, if we vote on Saturdays, or anything else. Having fewer parties no doubt makes this easier, but having more parties will do little good until we get money out of politics.

[Minimalist]

And blessed by the Supreme Court, Cecila.

[Ryantology]

The Republicans are vicious, inhuman corporate and religious scumbags who hold sway over the literally retarded. The Democrats are cowardly, indifferent toads who care only about being not quite as bad as the Republicans. And the same extraordinarily wealthy oligarchs buy and own politicians in both parties.

It's a shame we have to follow up a decent president with a scumbag, but at least we get to choose between a scumbag who pretends not to be a scumbag, and a scumbag who revels in his scumbaggery.

[Aractus]

You're not forced to vote. You only have to go to a polling place, accept a ballot paper, take it to a booth, and then put it in the ballot box. It's a secret ballot, so if you want to leave it blank that's up to you.

I should clarify this statement. You are legally required to cast a valid formal vote. However because it is a secret ballot (which is an Australian invention, and even the USA and UK now view it as a basic requirement of democracy) it is not possible to impose a penalty on a person for that particular breach of the Electoral Act. Some people have argued that once an electronic voting system is implemented that voters could be forced to cast formal ballots. While I personally think that would be a good thing, I don't think that's very likely: 1. because we don't even use an electronic voting system at all for Federal elections in 2016, we use pencil and paper, and 2. It is used in the Territory elections, and has been for some time now, however it's your right to ask for a paper ballot instead and in fact most polling places only have paper ballots anyway, and since this has been used for more than 15 years now in the ACT I think that pretty much proves that electronic voting does not all the apparent benefits that are claimed of it (reducing cost and counting error) and will be discussed further below.

It should be noted here that way back in 2000, AEC representatives were sent to the USA to observe electronic voting in the USA presidential election. Given the widespread problems of the American system (such as the infamous butterfly ballots in Florida), it's not at all surprising then that the chairperson Tony Smith MP found for the 2013 Parliamentary report into the matter that "After hearing from a range of experts, and surveying the international electoral landscapes it is clear to me that Australia is not in a position to introduce any large-scale system of electronic voting in the near future without catastrophically compromising our electoral integrity." I guess this may seem strange when it is in fact used in ACT and Tasmania, although one should take note that technology is used to read the ballot papers, which greatly reduces the benefit of electronic voting in polling places. It should further be noted that these operate strictly on a secured LAN that is not connected to the outside world, and designing such a system that did not make any use of the public internet for security on a national level would be much more difficult. There is actually an electronic system used federally that few people know about for vision-impaired voters, but again whether this really has an advantage over paper Braille ballots is not clear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gqvkhaht-9w


You are completely right Min, that the political will is to make voting harder in the USA. Many US States now require photo identification, which is just plainly ridiculous. Most people, at least here in Australia, only have one form of ID - their driver's license. If they have their license suspended by a police officer prior to an election, they may not be able to get an alternative identification in time to vote. Furthermore, it would eradicate the rights of silent voters who do not have their address listed on the electoral role out of fear for their safety. And homeless people would also be disadvantaged, as most of those people do not carry photo identification. Here's my question - where's the evidence that such a system as reduced "voter fraud"?

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Oh and can someone please explain this to me. Hillary Clinton said "if you are under FBI investigation you should not be able to just walk into a shop and buy a gun no questions asked". But she's under FBI criminal investigation as we speak and she can run for president?? What kind of hypocrite double-standards does the dumb bitch have?

If you were a reporter and asked her that question do you think you would get fired?

[Aractus]

Alan Jones would ask the question in those or much stronger words and not get fired.