i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
But early voting is a convenience, something offered to people to make their lives easier if they can't make it to a polling place.
Election day is the first Tuesday in November. Thats when your ballot matters, even if your state allows early counting. If you die before then, your vote shouldn't count by the word of the law. And we have to have arbitrary limits on things at some point or you get anarchy. Oh you turn 18 the day after election, close enough you can vote. Oh you're two days out, well we let one day out vote, where does it end?
It feels wrong and dirty, but sometimes the rule of law doesn't always feel right. This is a fringe case, I'm guessing less than a thousand people in this country cast an early ballot and then die before election day. But we have to have rules and limits.
If not that's how you get a zombie president on the promise of brains...... Which isn't far from thai presidency .
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
I think it's different because it happened in election day not September 20th. The dead can't vote.
I don't even know what side I'm on. One side seems right for the rule of law and feels icky, but the other feels like it should be right but yet we have to have rules and limitations.
I'm trying to quantify how bad that Harris County thing is. 8,969,226 people voted in texas in 2016.
Right now 538 has Trump at 48.2% and Biden at 47.2%. Applying that to the 2016 number would give us 4,323,167 and 4,233,475 votes, respectively. Granted it looks like more people are going to vote this year around, but considering the margin of error, this could very well swing the election in Texas.
Undead Scottsman on
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
I think it's different because it happened in election day not September 20th. The dead can't vote.
I don't even know what side I'm on. One side seems right for the rule of law and feels icky, but the other feels like it should be right but yet we have to have rules and limitations.
early ballots are ballots
they should count if the person was alive when they submitted it
i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
But early voting is a convenience, something offered to people to make their lives easier if they can't make it to a polling place.
Election day is the first Tuesday in November. Thats when your ballot matters, even if your state allows early counting. If you die before then, your vote shouldn't count by the word of the law. And we have to have arbitrary limits on things at some point or you get anarchy. Oh you turn 18 the day after election, close enough you can vote. Oh you're two days out, well we let one day out vote, where does it end?
It feels wrong and dirty, but sometimes the rule of law doesn't always feel right. This is a fringe case, I'm guessing less than a thousand people in this country cast an early ballot and then die before election day. But we have to have rules and limits.
If not that's how you get a zombie president on the promise of brains...... Which isn't far from thai presidency .
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
It should depend on the state. I feel cold saying this but I guess I've made up my mind on how it should work.
If your state allows early vote counting it should count, if they don't allow counting until election day it should be thrown out.
+2
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
I'm trying to quantify how bad that Harris County thing is. 8,969,226 people voted in texas in 2016.
Right now 538 has Trump at 48.2% and Biden at 47.2%. Applying that to the 2016 number would give us 4,323,167 and 4,233,475 votes, respectively. Considering the margin of error, this could very well swing the election in Texas.
is Harris county 90/10 Democrat?
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+1
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
i mean, throwing out 100,000 ballots is certainly bad, regardless
but bad for us specifically is not necessarily the case
The reason I can see it thrown out is because she is deceased before election day. Like, I can see the reasoning. Don't think it's right though.
If you are dead, you don't care about the result of the election either way. Dead people shouldn't rule/vote beyond their grave.
It still removes the franchise from those following the rules. Someone who legally votes on their deathbed because they care about democracy shouldn’t have their vote annulled because the right wing is desperately trying to kick out every vote they can in a losing election.
Yeah, I don't see the justification here. If you live long enough to cast a vote, the vote should count. Philosophically, someone near death might still care about the future direction of the country.
If someone requests and absentee ballot, dies, but their voting intention is known, for instance they filled out a sample ballot, should their heir be able to cast that vote?
I would say no. I realize you have to draw a line somewhere, but "if the person voted legally, their vote should count, regardless of what happens after they voted" seems like the most reasonable place to draw it to me.
Given the variable ragged edge of when early voting begins, Election Day still seems the most straightforward cutoff. Particularly since you have a more open question of validity for a dead man's vote, and a good deal more administrative overhead to compare postmarks with social security's death index rather than just comparing the list versus election day. Especially since, as we found out, post marks aren't always printed on return ballots.
i think it's pretty easy to draw a line between a dead person casting a ballot and a person dying after their ballot was cast
seems uncontroversial to me
Also the actual election is in mid-December anyway. Are we going to check back with the entire electorate over the next five weeks to confirm they're all still alive, and then somehow discard the correct votes?
i think it's pretty easy to draw a line between a dead person casting a ballot and a person dying after their ballot was cast
seems uncontroversial to me
Also the actual election is in mid-December anyway. Are we going to check back with the entire electorate over the next five weeks to confirm they're all still alive, and then somehow discard the correct votes?
Damn you Electoral College, you always foil my plans.
i mean, throwing out 100,000 ballots is certainly bad, regardless
but bad for us specifically is not necessarily the case
In 2018 nearly every local race in Harris County went Dem.
So yeah, the GOP wants to cut some of that out.
The drive through plan was announced months ago but suit wasn't filed until it could cause a disruption. And when they failed at the state level they waited to file it federally.
+18
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
i mean, throwing out 100,000 ballots is certainly bad, regardless
but bad for us specifically is not necessarily the case
In 2018 nearly every local race in Harris County went Dem.
So yeah, the GOP wants to cut some of that out.
The drive through plan was announced months ago but suit wasn't filed until it could cause a disruption. And when they failed at the state level they waited to file it federally.
i understand that's what they're trying to do
i'm saying it's not necessarily going to work
Allegedly a voice of reason.
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
But early voting is a convenience, something offered to people to make their lives easier if they can't make it to a polling place.
Election day is the first Tuesday in November. Thats when your ballot matters, even if your state allows early counting. If you die before then, your vote shouldn't count by the word of the law. And we have to have arbitrary limits on things at some point or you get anarchy. Oh you turn 18 the day after election, close enough you can vote. Oh you're two days out, well we let one day out vote, where does it end?
It feels wrong and dirty, but sometimes the rule of law doesn't always feel right. This is a fringe case, I'm guessing less than a thousand people in this country cast an early ballot and then die before election day. But we have to have rules and limits.
If not that's how you get a zombie president on the promise of brains...... Which isn't far from thai presidency .
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
It should depend on the state. I feel cold saying this but I guess I've made up my mind on how it should work.
If your state allows early vote counting it should count, if they don't allow counting until election day it should be thrown out.
i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
But early voting is a convenience, something offered to people to make their lives easier if they can't make it to a polling place.
Election day is the first Tuesday in November. Thats when your ballot matters, even if your state allows early counting. If you die before then, your vote shouldn't count by the word of the law. And we have to have arbitrary limits on things at some point or you get anarchy. Oh you turn 18 the day after election, close enough you can vote. Oh you're two days out, well we let one day out vote, where does it end?
It feels wrong and dirty, but sometimes the rule of law doesn't always feel right. This is a fringe case, I'm guessing less than a thousand people in this country cast an early ballot and then die before election day. But we have to have rules and limits.
If not that's how you get a zombie president on the promise of brains...... Which isn't far from thai presidency .
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
It should depend on the state. I feel cold saying this but I guess I've made up my mind on how it should work.
If your state allows early vote counting it should count, if they don't allow counting until election day it should be thrown out.
it doesn't matter when they count the ballots
it was a valid ballot when it was submitted
But depending on the wording of the law, and how your state does counting, maybe it shouldn't .
Sometimes what's right by the law doesn't feel right.
i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
I mean, by the argument being made, if you die on Election Day, after having voted in person, but before the end of voting, should your vote not be counted, as the deadline for having that vote counted has not yet passed? If you vote at 11:59pm on the Monday, or 12:01am on the Tuesday, should it matter?
I mean, if you use the reasoning that if you're dead before the election is finalized, then shouldn't your vote also not count if you die before the votes are certified? Or go a step further, before the swearing in day?
Also, I'm not sure Republicans want to go the "if you die, your vote doesn't count" route, given how they tend to traditionally swing older voters who are more likely to.
If it's in the window of time for a ballot to be legally cast, by the person who is casting it, it should be counted as a legitimate ballot.
EDIT: Added a caveat, that someone else filling out a ballot in someone else's name because "they know their intent" is NOT ok in this instance. Ballots are secret in a democracy for a reason. I can say I'm voting a certain way in public, and vote differently in the booth, for a host of legitimate reasons.
This also apply to reaching the age of majority, and yet we do not consider the arbitrariness of the cutoff to be a ridiculous controversy. If you turn 18 at 12:01am on November 4th you don't get to vote this year. Making the legal requirement to cast a valid ballot be 'still alive' when polls close is a similarly arbitrary cutoff, but one that similarly ensures the integrity of the composition of the electorate. The dead should have no say in the governance of the living.
+5
Options
Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
But early voting is a convenience, something offered to people to make their lives easier if they can't make it to a polling place.
Election day is the first Tuesday in November. Thats when your ballot matters, even if your state allows early counting. If you die before then, your vote shouldn't count by the word of the law. And we have to have arbitrary limits on things at some point or you get anarchy. Oh you turn 18 the day after election, close enough you can vote. Oh you're two days out, well we let one day out vote, where does it end?
It feels wrong and dirty, but sometimes the rule of law doesn't always feel right. This is a fringe case, I'm guessing less than a thousand people in this country cast an early ballot and then die before election day. But we have to have rules and limits.
If not that's how you get a zombie president on the promise of brains...... Which isn't far from thai presidency .
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
It should depend on the state. I feel cold saying this but I guess I've made up my mind on how it should work.
If your state allows early vote counting it should count, if they don't allow counting until election day it should be thrown out.
it doesn't matter when they count the ballots
it was a valid ballot when it was submitted
But depending on the wording of the law, and how your state does counting, maybe it shouldn't .
Sometimes what's right by the law doesn't feel right.
The law shouldn't be what feels right
What feels right to you feels wrong to me
If somebody votes legally just count the vote
+17
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
But early voting is a convenience, something offered to people to make their lives easier if they can't make it to a polling place.
Election day is the first Tuesday in November. Thats when your ballot matters, even if your state allows early counting. If you die before then, your vote shouldn't count by the word of the law. And we have to have arbitrary limits on things at some point or you get anarchy. Oh you turn 18 the day after election, close enough you can vote. Oh you're two days out, well we let one day out vote, where does it end?
It feels wrong and dirty, but sometimes the rule of law doesn't always feel right. This is a fringe case, I'm guessing less than a thousand people in this country cast an early ballot and then die before election day. But we have to have rules and limits.
If not that's how you get a zombie president on the promise of brains...... Which isn't far from thai presidency .
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
It should depend on the state. I feel cold saying this but I guess I've made up my mind on how it should work.
If your state allows early vote counting it should count, if they don't allow counting until election day it should be thrown out.
it doesn't matter when they count the ballots
it was a valid ballot when it was submitted
But depending on the wording of the law, and how your state does counting, maybe it shouldn't .
Sometimes what's right by the law doesn't feel right.
no
if you are allowed to submit a ballot early, the ballot counts as submitted and is valid
that's why lawsuits to get ballots thrown out rely on proving ballots were invalid, not proving ballots don't feel right to those filing suit
i mean that's supposed to be the case if you're dead before you cast your vote
If your dead before "you" cast your vote, then it's not "your" vote. There's still potential for you to change your mind up to the point where you actually cast your ballot (whether by mailing it, turning it into a drop box or voting in a booth) so at best it's someone trying to falsify a vote to what they think you'd want, and at worse it's someone uses your vote to vote fradulently.
Once you've done all that though, then you've voted and the mail is in the possession of government agencies. Even if you die afterwards, you were alive when you cast your 100% legitimate ballot and it should be counted as such.
But early voting is a convenience, something offered to people to make their lives easier if they can't make it to a polling place.
Election day is the first Tuesday in November. Thats when your ballot matters, even if your state allows early counting. If you die before then, your vote shouldn't count by the word of the law. And we have to have arbitrary limits on things at some point or you get anarchy. Oh you turn 18 the day after election, close enough you can vote. Oh you're two days out, well we let one day out vote, where does it end?
It feels wrong and dirty, but sometimes the rule of law doesn't always feel right. This is a fringe case, I'm guessing less than a thousand people in this country cast an early ballot and then die before election day. But we have to have rules and limits.
If not that's how you get a zombie president on the promise of brains...... Which isn't far from thai presidency .
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
It should depend on the state. I feel cold saying this but I guess I've made up my mind on how it should work.
If your state allows early vote counting it should count, if they don't allow counting until election day it should be thrown out.
it doesn't matter when they count the ballots
it was a valid ballot when it was submitted
But depending on the wording of the law, and how your state does counting, maybe it shouldn't .
Sometimes what's right by the law doesn't feel right.
The bigger issue is that it would be a vote suppression tool.
If I have the same name as someone who died before election day after submitting their vote, and I vote as well, how do they know which one to toss? How do they know that person is dead and voted? Who goes through all of those votes to find ours?
As we see with voter registration purges it will not be applied equally and will only serve to suppress democracy.
You filled out a valid ballot and turned it in? It counts.
Also, again, by what mechanism are you going to enforce this by? Cross check every ballot with records to see if the caster has been reported dead before 8pm on Tuesday night? For every ballot?
The time at which a vote counts varies from state to state, like most election-related stuff.
Some count once the ballot is cast (early or same-day).
Some are invalidated if the person dies on or before election day (and some only if the vote is disputed by providing notice of death).
Some states don't have anything on the books for this eventuality.
Also, as far as that Minnesota mask-at-the-polls discussion earlier, Minnesota does not have a voter ID requirement for pre-registered voters. So there's no need to identify people's faces unless they're registering and then voting. (Bonus facts on election law differences between states: 29 states don't let you register and vote on the same day.)
Let’s take a case from my experience. The GOP in North Carolina really wants to tie voting to IDs, to the point where I was nearly unable to vote in the last election.
Why? Because my ID is from a different address than my voter registration. Under the GOP laws that the courts threw out, I would have been disqualified as a voter.
That seems rational and “feels right” to a lot of people. If your view of the world goes in that direction, then I am in the wrong.
But here’s the thing. I tried to get my ID updated in person multiple times and was sent home. That was because the line was super long, the GOP had made sure that the DMV was understaffed, and they were telling people like me to come back another day because they needed to handle new licenses and title transfers and other business that were more urgent than my desire to vote.
I tried to do it online, despite the issues that would cause because it wouldn’t be a REAL ID so I’d still need my passport to fly and enter federal government buildings (kind of a thing for me since I am an on and off again federal contractor hence the moving around a lot bit). The website had issues with my application and told me to go in person.
So, I was in a trap made by the GOP to disqualify my vote that worked because it sounded reasonable to those ignorant of how the trap worked. Good lesson on why you don’t let people manipulate the rules in that way.
I really think states need to change the signature rules. The idea that it's up to someone's judgement feels wrong as it can make disenfranchisement so easy. I've heard she states allowing you to sign with last 4 of social and date of birth.
Also, again, by what mechanism are you going to enforce this by? Cross check every ballot with records to see if the caster has been reported dead before 8pm on Tuesday night? For every ballot?
The same method that Election Authorities use to ensure that they don't mail a ballot to a dead person in the first place.
moniker on
+1
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
Utah
Trump 51
Biden 44
Y2 Analytics, last week, n=700, MOE 3.8%
Trump won it by 18
I like this, but these are more votes that only really affect the national total.
Utah
Trump 51
Biden 44
Y2 Analytics, last week, n=700, MOE 3.8%
Trump won it by 18
I like this, but these are more votes that only really affect the national total.
losing significant ground in stronghold Red States is still good news even if he wins them as it would imply depressed support in general which could swing the result if it's similar in more closely contested states
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+2
Options
Monkey Ball WarriorA collection of mediocre hatsSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
Yet another update for WA state relative turnout vs The Previous Election Year You Know The One (source)
@ -4 days, 64.8% turnout 2020 vs. 41.1% before
Last time we had 4.270M registered voters, currently we have 4.871M
"I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
+9
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
Organizers in Graham, NC are reporting that local police attacked a march to the polls, pepper-spraying children and arresting at least 2 people including a reporter. Situation is ongoing.
Jillian Johnson is the Mayor Pro Tem of Durham, NC
Arizona 50-46
North Carolina 51-45 (!)
Wisconsin: 52-44
Michigan: 53-41
Biden ahead in all.
Those are REALLY good numbers
+20
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
edited October 2020
today i received a mailer from a Virginia Police PAC ostensibly supporting a vote for Abigail Spanberger (the current Democrat in what is mostly Eric Cantor/Dave Brat's old district)
it talks about how we need legislation that lets cops do their jobs safely and stuff so vote for Spanberger
the thing is
i live in a black neighborhood. i am the only white person on my street
i can't help but think this is duplicitous. it feels really gross
e: it specifically says the mailer is not endorsed by any candidate
Chanus on
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+3
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Organizers in Graham, NC are reporting that local police attacked a march to the polls, pepper-spraying children and arresting at least 2 people including a reporter. Situation is ongoing.
Jillian Johnson is the Mayor Pro Tem of Durham, NC
Organizers in Graham, NC are reporting that local police attacked a march to the polls, pepper-spraying children and arresting at least 2 people including a reporter. Situation is ongoing.
Jillian Johnson is the Mayor Pro Tem of Durham, NC
Jesus fucking christ
Dismantle that entire office now
I am looking forward to DOJ having a Civil Rights Division again.
Organizers in Graham, NC are reporting that local police attacked a march to the polls, pepper-spraying children and arresting at least 2 people including a reporter. Situation is ongoing.
Jillian Johnson is the Mayor Pro Tem of Durham, NC
Well you know, they probably thought it was an antifa rally. It's really putting the police in a confusing situation, how are they supposed to keep straight which black crowds they're supposed to terrorize and opress?
Organizers in Graham, NC are reporting that local police attacked a march to the polls, pepper-spraying children and arresting at least 2 people including a reporter. Situation is ongoing.
Jillian Johnson is the Mayor Pro Tem of Durham, NC
Jesus fucking christ
Dismantle that entire office now
I am looking forward to DOJ having a Civil Rights Division again.
Honestly, shit like this makes me think that's a pipe dream.
Real hard to not cheat an election when you already have an army ready to fuck people up for you benefit, without you even saying so.
+2
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Organizers in Graham, NC are reporting that local police attacked a march to the polls, pepper-spraying children and arresting at least 2 people including a reporter. Situation is ongoing.
Jillian Johnson is the Mayor Pro Tem of Durham, NC
Jesus fucking christ
Dismantle that entire office now
I am looking forward to DOJ having a Civil Rights Division again.
Honestly, shit like this makes me think that's a pipe dream.
Real hard to not cheat an election when you already have an army ready to fuck people up for you benefit, without you even saying so.
Posts
Early voting is voting. With all the rights. If you put your ballot in the box, and someone shoots you after, what then?
I don't even know what side I'm on. One side seems right for the rule of law and feels icky, but the other feels like it should be right but yet we have to have rules and limitations.
Right now 538 has Trump at 48.2% and Biden at 47.2%. Applying that to the 2016 number would give us 4,323,167 and 4,233,475 votes, respectively. Granted it looks like more people are going to vote this year around, but considering the margin of error, this could very well swing the election in Texas.
early ballots are ballots
they should count if the person was alive when they submitted it
there's your line
It should depend on the state. I feel cold saying this but I guess I've made up my mind on how it should work.
If your state allows early vote counting it should count, if they don't allow counting until election day it should be thrown out.
is Harris county 90/10 Democrat?
but bad for us specifically is not necessarily the case
Given the variable ragged edge of when early voting begins, Election Day still seems the most straightforward cutoff. Particularly since you have a more open question of validity for a dead man's vote, and a good deal more administrative overhead to compare postmarks with social security's death index rather than just comparing the list versus election day. Especially since, as we found out, post marks aren't always printed on return ballots.
Also the actual election is in mid-December anyway. Are we going to check back with the entire electorate over the next five weeks to confirm they're all still alive, and then somehow discard the correct votes?
Damn you Electoral College, you always foil my plans.
In 2018 nearly every local race in Harris County went Dem.
So yeah, the GOP wants to cut some of that out.
The drive through plan was announced months ago but suit wasn't filed until it could cause a disruption. And when they failed at the state level they waited to file it federally.
i understand that's what they're trying to do
i'm saying it's not necessarily going to work
it doesn't matter when they count the ballots
it was a valid ballot when it was submitted
But depending on the wording of the law, and how your state does counting, maybe it shouldn't .
Sometimes what's right by the law doesn't feel right.
This also apply to reaching the age of majority, and yet we do not consider the arbitrariness of the cutoff to be a ridiculous controversy. If you turn 18 at 12:01am on November 4th you don't get to vote this year. Making the legal requirement to cast a valid ballot be 'still alive' when polls close is a similarly arbitrary cutoff, but one that similarly ensures the integrity of the composition of the electorate. The dead should have no say in the governance of the living.
The law shouldn't be what feels right
What feels right to you feels wrong to me
If somebody votes legally just count the vote
no
if you are allowed to submit a ballot early, the ballot counts as submitted and is valid
that's why lawsuits to get ballots thrown out rely on proving ballots were invalid, not proving ballots don't feel right to those filing suit
The bigger issue is that it would be a vote suppression tool.
If I have the same name as someone who died before election day after submitting their vote, and I vote as well, how do they know which one to toss? How do they know that person is dead and voted? Who goes through all of those votes to find ours?
As we see with voter registration purges it will not be applied equally and will only serve to suppress democracy.
You filled out a valid ballot and turned it in? It counts.
Some count once the ballot is cast (early or same-day).
Some are invalidated if the person dies on or before election day (and some only if the vote is disputed by providing notice of death).
Some states don't have anything on the books for this eventuality.
Also, as far as that Minnesota mask-at-the-polls discussion earlier, Minnesota does not have a voter ID requirement for pre-registered voters. So there's no need to identify people's faces unless they're registering and then voting. (Bonus facts on election law differences between states: 29 states don't let you register and vote on the same day.)
Why? Because my ID is from a different address than my voter registration. Under the GOP laws that the courts threw out, I would have been disqualified as a voter.
That seems rational and “feels right” to a lot of people. If your view of the world goes in that direction, then I am in the wrong.
But here’s the thing. I tried to get my ID updated in person multiple times and was sent home. That was because the line was super long, the GOP had made sure that the DMV was understaffed, and they were telling people like me to come back another day because they needed to handle new licenses and title transfers and other business that were more urgent than my desire to vote.
I tried to do it online, despite the issues that would cause because it wouldn’t be a REAL ID so I’d still need my passport to fly and enter federal government buildings (kind of a thing for me since I am an on and off again federal contractor hence the moving around a lot bit). The website had issues with my application and told me to go in person.
So, I was in a trap made by the GOP to disqualify my vote that worked because it sounded reasonable to those ignorant of how the trap worked. Good lesson on why you don’t let people manipulate the rules in that way.
The same method that Election Authorities use to ensure that they don't mail a ballot to a dead person in the first place.
Trump 51
Biden 44
Y2 Analytics, last week, n=700, MOE 3.8%
Trump won it by 18
I like this, but these are more votes that only really affect the national total.
Arizona has a lot of Mormons who normally vote extremely Republican.
losing significant ground in stronghold Red States is still good news even if he wins them as it would imply depressed support in general which could swing the result if it's similar in more closely contested states
@ -4 days, 64.8% turnout 2020 vs. 41.1% before
Last time we had 4.270M registered voters, currently we have 4.871M
Jillian Johnson is the Mayor Pro Tem of Durham, NC
CNN poll:
Arizona 50-46
North Carolina 51-45 (!)
Wisconsin: 52-44
Michigan: 53-41
Biden ahead in all.
That bodes pretty well for Ben McAdams keeping his seat, since Republicans won the Senate race 62-31 and the House vote 59-36 in 2018.
Those are REALLY good numbers
it talks about how we need legislation that lets cops do their jobs safely and stuff so vote for Spanberger
the thing is
i live in a black neighborhood. i am the only white person on my street
i can't help but think this is duplicitous. it feels really gross
e: it specifically says the mailer is not endorsed by any candidate
Jesus fucking christ
Dismantle that entire office now
I am looking forward to DOJ having a Civil Rights Division again.
Well you know, they probably thought it was an antifa rally. It's really putting the police in a confusing situation, how are they supposed to keep straight which black crowds they're supposed to terrorize and opress?
Honestly, shit like this makes me think that's a pipe dream.
Real hard to not cheat an election when you already have an army ready to fuck people up for you benefit, without you even saying so.
They don’t have a fucking monopoly on force