Page 3 of 6 [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

21 Mar 2015, 3:02 am

Nebogipfel wrote:
Who_Am_I wrote:
Fnord wrote:
I vote in every election anyway, and such a law would serve only to make the lines longer at the polling places, so compulsory voting would make mail-in ballots all the more attractive.

I say, "Let's have compulsory voting", and watch all of the slackers and traitors move to Australia or Brazil and we'll be rid of them, once and for all!


f**k off, we're full.

Also, we have compulsory voting anyway.
`

You better hope that Yellowstone never erupts, then, because Australia is one of the countries that have agreed to absorb the displaced population.


http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/joke


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

21 Mar 2015, 8:37 am

If it ever happens and you're opposed to it:

vote for someone/something not on the ballot (just scribble in a new runner and tick that)

Been doing that since...18. Though I'll always tick the Fishing and Shooting Party if they're on the ballot. :P



Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,472
Location: Houston, Texas

21 Mar 2015, 8:51 am

Dillogic wrote:
If it ever happens and you're opposed to it:

vote for someone/something not on the ballot (just scribble in a new runner and tick that)

Been doing that since...18. Though I'll always tick the Fishing and Shooting Party if they're on the ballot. :P


Good plan!


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!

Now proficient in ChatGPT!


ScrewyWabbit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,154

21 Mar 2015, 12:40 pm

It is a good idea but one that seems incompatible with secret ballots - i.e. I can make you show up to the polling place but then how will I force you to actually vote for every issue on the ballot, or even any of them? Maybe some sort of electronic voting where a vote on every topic is required?

In any case we ought to first start with something much more achievable and ultimately less invasive. Mandatory voting for our congressman and senators. No more abstaining on touchy issues, no more non-voting because you couldn't be bothered to show up and represent your constituents when congress is in session.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

21 Mar 2015, 1:27 pm

I like the way U.S. elections were conducted before 2000. It involved some very reliable and secure measures such as neighbors who lived in the voting precincts would act as elections judges. As such, they could recognize most if not all of their voting neighbors (so little or no identification was required) and, if a voter was challenged, it would be easy to ask another neighbor to vouch for the challenged voter. Also, the judges would count the ballots (with poll watchers) after voting had ended. This allowed the judges to identify any spoiled ballots so those ballots would be reviewed (and usually accepted) by county election clerks. Paper ballots are a very sophisticated and secure means of voting compared to voting by mail or by electronic voting where fraud and tampering is legend (see Bush-Gore 2000 and Kerry-Bush 2004). Paper ballots are also easily stored for decades if necessary to prove fraud or tampering after the fact.

In my own opinion, I like the idea of elections which are conducted in this manner. But, I would sarcastically go further by providing that the ballots are blank pieces of paper, and the voter uses a Crayola crayon (color optional) to write the names of the voter's chosen candidates. This would mitigate votes for candidates who the voter doesn't know well enough to remember their names let alone their ideas.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

21 Mar 2015, 2:46 pm

What is so terrible about voting that people will make any lame excuse to avoid it?



guzzle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2013
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,298
Location: Close To The Border

21 Mar 2015, 2:55 pm

Fnord wrote:
What is so terrible about voting that people will make any lame excuse to avoid it?


I doubt it is something you will ever truly understand... :mrgreen:



Orangez
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2014
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 320
Location: British Columbia

21 Mar 2015, 2:57 pm

Fnord wrote:
What is so terrible about voting that people will make any lame excuse to avoid it?


I don't find popularity contest to be a good way to form a government.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

21 Mar 2015, 4:26 pm

Orangez wrote:
Fnord wrote:
What is so terrible about voting that people will make any lame excuse to avoid it?

I don't find popularity contest to be a good way to form a government.

A Libertarian I knew described his idea that, like jury duty, ALL elected government offices (state, local and federal) should be selected by a random lottery; one-term only. The selected individuals would be paid and have their previous jobs guaranteed when they return to their private lives. Certain selected individuals would be avoided only for health or criminal-background problems. Otherwise, their involvement would be treated like the public service it once was.

We couldn't do any worse than what the current election system provides us.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Mar 2015, 5:27 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
I like the way U.S. elections were conducted before 2000. It involved some very reliable and secure measures such as neighbors who lived in the voting precincts would act as elections judges. As such, they could recognize most if not all of their voting neighbors (so little or no identification was required) and, if a voter was challenged, it would be easy to ask another neighbor to vouch for the challenged voter. Also, the judges would count the ballots (with poll watchers) after voting had ended. This allowed the judges to identify any spoiled ballots so those ballots would be reviewed (and usually accepted) by county election clerks. Paper ballots are a very sophisticated and secure means of voting compared to voting by mail or by electronic voting where fraud and tampering is legend (see Bush-Gore 2000 and Kerry-Bush 2004). Paper ballots are also easily stored for decades if necessary to prove fraud or tampering after the fact.

In my own opinion, I like the idea of elections which are conducted in this manner. But, I would sarcastically go further by providing that the ballots are blank pieces of paper, and the voter uses a Crayola crayon (color optional) to write the names of the voter's chosen candidates. This would mitigate votes for candidates who the voter doesn't know well enough to remember their names let alone their ideas.


My late mom used to work in the neighborhood polls like that. But since then, Washington state has switched to voting by mail.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

21 Mar 2015, 5:46 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
AspieUtah wrote:
I like the way U.S. elections were conducted before 2000. It involved some very reliable and secure measures such as neighbors who lived in the voting precincts would act as elections judges. As such, they could recognize most if not all of their voting neighbors (so little or no identification was required) and, if a voter was challenged, it would be easy to ask another neighbor to vouch for the challenged voter. Also, the judges would count the ballots (with poll watchers) after voting had ended. This allowed the judges to identify any spoiled ballots so those ballots would be reviewed (and usually accepted) by county election clerks. Paper ballots are a very sophisticated and secure means of voting compared to voting by mail or by electronic voting where fraud and tampering is legend (see Bush-Gore 2000 and Kerry-Bush 2004). Paper ballots are also easily stored for decades if necessary to prove fraud or tampering after the fact.

In my own opinion, I like the idea of elections which are conducted in this manner. But, I would sarcastically go further by providing that the ballots are blank pieces of paper, and the voter uses a Crayola crayon (color optional) to write the names of the voter's chosen candidates. This would mitigate votes for candidates who the voter doesn't know well enough to remember their names let alone their ideas.

My late mom used to work in the neighborhood polls like that. But since then, Washington state has switched to voting by mail.

I think the neighborhood-precinct method of voting helps instill a sense of ownership and trust in the electoral process by having one's own neighbors be the first level of vote security and counting. I vote by mail mostly because I distrust electronic voting (my two choices), but I realize that by-mail voting has its problems, too. Either way, what trust could any voter gain from those two methods? I feel disconnected to every election.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Mar 2015, 6:08 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
AspieUtah wrote:
I like the way U.S. elections were conducted before 2000. It involved some very reliable and secure measures such as neighbors who lived in the voting precincts would act as elections judges. As such, they could recognize most if not all of their voting neighbors (so little or no identification was required) and, if a voter was challenged, it would be easy to ask another neighbor to vouch for the challenged voter. Also, the judges would count the ballots (with poll watchers) after voting had ended. This allowed the judges to identify any spoiled ballots so those ballots would be reviewed (and usually accepted) by county election clerks. Paper ballots are a very sophisticated and secure means of voting compared to voting by mail or by electronic voting where fraud and tampering is legend (see Bush-Gore 2000 and Kerry-Bush 2004). Paper ballots are also easily stored for decades if necessary to prove fraud or tampering after the fact.

In my own opinion, I like the idea of elections which are conducted in this manner. But, I would sarcastically go further by providing that the ballots are blank pieces of paper, and the voter uses a Crayola crayon (color optional) to write the names of the voter's chosen candidates. This would mitigate votes for candidates who the voter doesn't know well enough to remember their names let alone their ideas.

My late mom used to work in the neighborhood polls like that. But since then, Washington state has switched to voting by mail.

I think the neighborhood-precinct method of voting helps instill a sense of ownership and trust in the electoral process by having one's own neighbors be the first level of vote security and counting. I vote by mail mostly because I distrust electronic voting (my two choices), but I realize that by-mail voting has its problems, too. Either way, what trust could any voter gain from those two methods? I feel disconnected to every election.


To be sure, voting by mail doesn't give one the same sense of taking part in government affairs like actually taking time to go to the polls used to.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,472
Location: Houston, Texas

21 Mar 2015, 6:29 pm

Is online voting done anywhere?


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!

Now proficient in ChatGPT!


luan78zao
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 490
Location: Under a cat

21 Mar 2015, 8:24 pm

There is no aspect of life which "progressives" don't want to control. If only the right orders could be given, they think, what a paradise we'd have! Let's see, how would such a law actually be enforced? The police are surely busy enough – you know, dealing with actual crimes – so I suppose we'll be hiring millions of election police. Will they come to your home and drag you to the polls at gunpoint? Or will there merely be fines, penalties, and prison after the fact?

(First convict, waiting on a bench: "I robbed a bank, what you guys in for?"
Second convict: "Mother-rapin'."
Third convict: "Father-rapin'."
Fourth convict: "I overslept on Election Day and didn't vote.")

AspieUtah wrote:
Only if such a plan would include a "Two Minutes Hate." After all, we might as well fully embrace Orwell if we shift to mandatory elections.


That about covers it.


_________________
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission – which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." – Ayn Rand


Lintar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,777
Location: Victoria, Australia

21 Mar 2015, 8:54 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
The most uninformed would also vote for whoever had the longest string of specious statements rattled off at a 3rd grade vocabulary and comprehension level. Sounds like a great plan for ensuring the future of this country.


Yes, here in Australia we have compulsory voting and just look at the person we ended up with :roll:

Tony, full of baloney, Abbott! 8O

Ah hell, I don't even believe in 'democracy' anyway. It's mob rule, the selection of someone based upon their popularity and cash-flow, and not their wisdom or talent. How else could Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger (not sure that's the correct spelling, but you know whom I mean) have become governors of California? We need to restore the divine right of kings; only monarchies actually work, republics consistently fail.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

21 Mar 2015, 9:11 pm

Lintar wrote:
Ah hell, I don't even believe in 'democracy' anyway. It's mob rule, ... .


Democracy is mob rule. :P