Clinton to call for at least 20 days of early voting nationwide

[The Rabbi]

Next Clinton will call voter registration discriminatory and urge we scrap it.

 

[Statistikhengst]

chuckle, chuckle.

In 2017, CDS is going to make ODS look like a walk in the park.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's a good idea. There is no viable reason not to have early and vote by mail voting for everyone.

There is no valid reason to have anything other than voting on election day and absentee ballots.

Illness, family emergencies, unplanned business trips, weather emergencies, transportation problems, etc, etc,etc...

You plan to have these things ~20 days ahead of time?
Oh wait... you think people should be able to vote early because they -might- have these issues?
If so - absentee ballot.

Most states recommend you order your absentee ballot a month before the election. A week is usually the minimum time in most states because they mail out absentee ballots..

So....?
If you are someone where any of the before-mentioned are realistic issues, you apply for the ballot, fill i tour and send it in.

 

[Seawytch]

Outside of poll workers who get paid very little and mostly volunteer, no extra costs are involved since most sites are in schools or libraries.

So the ID is no longer an obstacle.
So exorbitant cost is no longer an obstacle.

Next phantom reason to oppose it??m

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

I already explained to you that you don't have to open a traditional polling place for in person early voting. California does it in all 58 counties 29 days before every election at the elections offices.

 

[Seawytch]

It's a good idea. There is no viable reason not to have early and vote by mail voting for everyone.

There is no valid reason to have anything other than voting on election day and absentee ballots.

Illness, family emergencies, unplanned business trips, weather emergencies, transportation problems, etc, etc,etc...

You plan to have these things ~20 days ahead of time?
Oh wait... you think people should be able to vote early because they -might- have these issues?
If so - absentee ballot.

Most states recommend you order your absentee ballot a month before the election. A week is usually the minimum time in most states because they mail out absentee ballots..

So....?
If you are someone where any of the before-mentioned are realistic issues, you apply for the ballot, fill i tour and send it in.

Emergency situations happen. You have to go out of town for an emergency. No time to have a ballot mailed. What is so horrible about having the ability to vote in person at the election office before election day? What conceivable reason is there to be against it? The cost is negligible since you're using personnel already on staff and facilities you already own. What is wrong with having the ability to cast your vote in person at an election office anytime in the 29 days preceding the election?

 

[candycorn]

Outside of poll workers who get paid very little and mostly volunteer, no extra costs are involved since most sites are in schools or libraries.

So the ID is no longer an obstacle.
So exorbitant cost is no longer an obstacle.

Next phantom reason to oppose it??m

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

Every polling place I have ever voted at was a shared use facility (i.e. library, fire station, school, multi-service center). The cost of running it is $0.00. Staffing (the voting booths) is usually done by volunteers. Those who I know of who have gotten paid for staffing the voting center got paid something like $100 for the entire season.

There will be extra costs; I don't doubt it. The costs are nowhere near the prohibitive picture you're lamely attempting to paint.

 

[M14 Shooter]

There is no valid reason to have anything other than voting on election day and absentee ballots.

Illness, family emergencies, unplanned business trips, weather emergencies, transportation problems, etc, etc,etc...

You plan to have these things ~20 days ahead of time?
Oh wait... you think people should be able to vote early because they -might- have these issues?
If so - absentee ballot.

Most states recommend you order your absentee ballot a month before the election. A week is usually the minimum time in most states because they mail out absentee ballots..

So....?
If you are someone where any of the before-mentioned are realistic issues, you apply for the ballot, fill i tour and send it in.

Emergency situations happen. You have to go out of town for an emergency. No time to have a ballot mailed. What is so horrible about having the ability to vote in person at the election office before election day? What conceivable reason is there to be against it? The cost is negligible since you're using personnel already on staff and facilities you already own. What is wrong with having the ability to cast your vote in person at an election office anytime in the 29 days preceding the election?

As noted: There is little to no necessity in doing do..

 

[SwimExpert]

Welcome to America. Our military costs $1 trillion a year to protect our rights and freedom. Unfortunately, we can't afford $37.50 to improve access to the voting booth.

 

[The Rabbi]

Illness, family emergencies, unplanned business trips, weather emergencies, transportation problems, etc, etc,etc...

You plan to have these things ~20 days ahead of time?
Oh wait... you think people should be able to vote early because they -might- have these issues?
If so - absentee ballot.

Most states recommend you order your absentee ballot a month before the election. A week is usually the minimum time in most states because they mail out absentee ballots..

So....?
If you are someone where any of the before-mentioned are realistic issues, you apply for the ballot, fill i tour and send it in.

Emergency situations happen. You have to go out of town for an emergency. No time to have a ballot mailed. What is so horrible about having the ability to vote in person at the election office before election day? What conceivable reason is there to be against it? The cost is negligible since you're using personnel already on staff and facilities you already own. What is wrong with having the ability to cast your vote in person at an election office anytime in the 29 days preceding the election?

As noted: There is little to no necessity in doing do..

Liberals make the perfect the enemy of the good. So if one person on his way to the voting booth has a heart attack and needs to be rushed to the hospital and can't vote then that is intolerable and we need to set up polling stations in ERs to take care of that contingency.

 

[candycorn]

You plan to have these things ~20 days ahead of time?
Oh wait... you think people should be able to vote early because they -might- have these issues?
If so - absentee ballot.

Most states recommend you order your absentee ballot a month before the election. A week is usually the minimum time in most states because they mail out absentee ballots..

So....?
If you are someone where any of the before-mentioned are realistic issues, you apply for the ballot, fill i tour and send it in.

Emergency situations happen. You have to go out of town for an emergency. No time to have a ballot mailed. What is so horrible about having the ability to vote in person at the election office before election day? What conceivable reason is there to be against it? The cost is negligible since you're using personnel already on staff and facilities you already own. What is wrong with having the ability to cast your vote in person at an election office anytime in the 29 days preceding the election?

As noted: There is little to no necessity in doing do..

Liberals make the perfect the enemy of the good. So if one person on his way to the voting booth has a heart attack and needs to be rushed to the hospital and can't vote then that is intolerable and we need to set up polling stations in ERs to take care of that contingency.

No, liberalism at its best takes the best ideas and implements them. So you don't have to schedule your life around election day, so you don't have to worry if the weather is going to be bad for a 12 hour period and keep you from casting your ballot, so that you have maximum leeway on deciding when you vote and are not told to by a dictatorial government.

 

[Nyvin]

Outside of poll workers who get paid very little and mostly volunteer, no extra costs are involved since most sites are in schools or libraries.

So the ID is no longer an obstacle.
So exorbitant cost is no longer an obstacle.

Next phantom reason to oppose it??m

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

Polling locations cost almost nothing, they're almost always held in tax sponsored buildings anyway and the staff is paid next to nothing.

 

[boedicca]

20 days for more illegals to cross the border and vote democrat.

And for ACORN to bus around low info voters from polling place to polling place.

How about 20 days of campaigning. I am so sick and tired of. Listening to candidates for a year.

Our campaigns are way too long and too expensive. There is no reason why we can't shorten the cycle to a more realistic and tolerable length. Maybe not 20 days, but certainly a lot less than 18 months.

How long does it take for candidates to communicate their positions on issues? How long does it take for the electorate to get to know the candidates, their qualifications and their election platform?

Here we have some common ground as far as preference goes, but in a nation such as ours, restricting candidates to any kind of time frame is problematic per the First Amendment. But there could be a rule for Presidential nominations that could prevent a formal announcement before a specified date. I also wish we would get away from the all or nothing concept for presidential elections so that a candidate would take to the convention only the percentage of votes he or she actually got in any given state. That would throw the choice of the candidate to the convention the way it used to be. If nobody wins on the first ballot, then the delegates are free to vote any way they see fit. That would stop a lot of nonsense and we wouldn't have these two-year campaigns.

You really can't stop someone from campaigning as it would be a violation of the right to free speech. However, you can certainly attack the issue via campaign finance laws.

The real impact of campaign finance laws is to protect incumbents and the two party system.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

Polling locations cost almost nothing, they're almost always held in tax sponsored buildings anyway and the staff is paid next to nothing.

Wrong.
Here is a letter from the League of Women Voters on a proposal to reduce the number of early voting stations in my city. It is clear that budgetary constraints forced them to do this or lay off 36% of their staff.

Subject:
Mayor’s Budget Carves Out DCEC Staffing

Comments:
The League of Women Voters of Nashville (LWVN) advocates for fair, free, and accessible voting procedures that make it easy for citizens to vote. Last Tuesday, we observed the frustration of the Davidson County Election Commissioners (DCEC) in achieving these same goals.

Members of LWVN regularly attend DCEC meetings and post reports on our website. To our surprise, these meetings are rarely observed by reporters from Nashville media.

A successful election requires paid and trained poll workers, effective technology, and excellent coordination of resources. This is possible only if DCEC staff have completed the necessary preparations in the months preceding an election. While the Metro budget proposed by the Mayor’s office for 2015-16 will provide full funding for elections days during the year, it cuts the 12 existing DCEC positions needed to make election days run smoothly. That represents 38% of the DCEC staff.

These 12 positions had erroneously been listed as non-recurring expenditures instead of ongoing operating expenses in the proposed Metro budget from the Mayor’s office. DCEC Chairman Buchanan reported that Metro Finance Director Reibling concurred that in future budget years these 12 existing positions should be re-classified as ongoing expenses. However, additional funds for salary were not added in the Mayor’s budget that was presented to Metro Council this month.

The only way that the DCEC can offset such a deep operational budget cut is to eliminate all optional early voting sites (the Howard School site would be the only early voting site available) in the August election and September runoff. DCEC hopes that the threat of such change in early voting opportunities and sites will be sufficient to convince Metro Council members to approve supplemental funds needed to support staffing.

The League of Women Voters of Nashville encourages an agreement among the Election Commission, Metro Council, and Mayor’s office that will result in both adequate DCEC staffing AND full usage of all possible early voting sites in the upcoming Metro election.

Debby Gould, President
League of Women Voters of Nashville

 

[hipeter924]

Early voting doesn't really work, as more people voting at once encourages others of the same political persuasion to vote. But if Clinton wants to lose, she can follow the method of the New Zealand opposition and lose to the GOP.

 

[Flopper]

Outside of poll workers who get paid very little and mostly volunteer, no extra costs are involved since most sites are in schools or libraries.

So the ID is no longer an obstacle.
So exorbitant cost is no longer an obstacle.

Next phantom reason to oppose it??m

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

I don't think you understand early voting. Neighborhood polling places don't have to be kept open for early voting.

First off, early voting is already being done in 33 states. Most of those states use mail in ballots the same as they use for absentee voting. 10 more states allow voters to apply in person a short time before the election to apply for an absentee ballot to be mailed. That leaves only 7 states with no early voting.

The problem is not that early voting is not allowed. States don't make voters aware that it's available nor do they make it easy. In many cases, early voting is more inconvenient than going to your normal polling place on election day.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx

 

[candycorn]

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

I don't think you understand early voting. Neighborhood polling places don't have to be kept open for early voting.

First off, early voting is already being done in 33 states. Most of those states use mail in ballots the same as they use for absentee voting. 10 more states allow voters to apply in person a short time before the election to apply for an absentee ballot to be mailed. That leaves only 7 states with no early voting.

The problem is not that early voting is not allowed. States don't make voters aware that it's available nor do they make it easy. In many cases, early voting is more inconvenient than going to your normal polling place on election day.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx

Like most cons, he's rejected reality and substituted one of his own.

 

[Flopper]

Early voting doesn't really work, as more people voting at once encourages others of the same political persuasion to vote. But if Clinton wants to lose, she can follow the method of the New Zealand opposition and lose to the GOP.

Oh, really. Colorado, Oregon, and Washington conduct all elections by mail. Obama carried all these states in 2004 and 2008. Clinton carried all these states in 1992 and Oregon and Washington in 1996.

 

[hipeter924]

Early voting doesn't really work, as more people voting at once encourages others of the same political persuasion to vote. But if Clinton wants to lose, she can follow the method of the New Zealand opposition and lose to the GOP.

Oh, really. Colorado, Oregon, and Washington conduct all elections by mail. Obama carried all these states in 2004 and 2008. Clinton carried all these states in 1992 and Oregon and Washington in 1996.

All those states did it for 20 days?

 

[hipeter924]

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

I don't think you understand early voting. Neighborhood polling places don't have to be kept open for early voting.

First off, early voting is already being done in 33 states. Most of those states use mail in ballots the same as they use for absentee voting. 10 more states allow voters to apply in person a short time before the election to apply for an absentee ballot to be mailed. That leaves only 7 states with no early voting.

The problem is not that early voting is not allowed. States don't make voters aware that it's available nor do they make it easy. In many cases, early voting is more inconvenient than going to your normal polling place on election day.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx

I don't think you read the thread title, you want 20 days of early voting?

 

[OKTexas]

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence, but feel free to carry on.

Which facts are those?

Facilities? Open already.
Equipment? Only used at election time. Incredibly unlikely that there will be other state wide elections happening within 20 days of a federal election and, even if it were, in Texas--as you know--early in person voting not every polling place open on election day is open during early voting.
Personnel? As stated, this will be an extra cost but its not as if they get paid a huge amount of money anyway. And we would only be talking about a few workers, not the entire election staff.

You can pretend that keeping places open double the time won't cost double, but you're delusional.

As long as you keep pretending that is what I said, I'm comfortable with you looking dumber than usual

Tell me, how many polling places are there in the US and what is the average daily cost of running one? Answer that and then you might have an argument that it won't cost that much.

I don't think you understand early voting. Neighborhood polling places don't have to be kept open for early voting.

First off, early voting is already being done in 33 states. Most of those states use mail in ballots the same as they use for absentee voting. 10 more states allow voters to apply in person a short time before the election to apply for an absentee ballot to be mailed. That leaves only 7 states with no early voting.

The problem is not that early voting is not allowed. States don't make voters aware that it's available nor do they make it easy. In many cases, early voting is more inconvenient than going to your normal polling place on election day.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx

I've been using early voting for more than 20 years, I can't speak to other States but here early voting is announced on local TV and radio. It's not kept a secret as you insinuate.