View Single Post

Old 09-04-2018, 01:49 PM
Daskinor Daskinor is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 259

Not in all cases. If you have a post office box where you have to get to the post office, then that means you have to get to the post office. So you'd either have to drive (gas, wear on the car), walk (a decent amount of time) or take public transit (pay a fare, time). Not everyone has a mailbox outside their house or at their apartment complex.
There is a legal theory of minimum effort. Like you need to be able to get mail, or use a phone. Or have someone who can do those things for you. Also before you start splitting hairs, case history on this is really clear about. Minimums on time and effort required before it becomes suppression or a poll tax. If you are really curious I can give you the ISBNs so you can do the reading.

And if ballots are supposed to be anonymous, doesn't a "mail in" ballot sort of defeat that purpose?
That can still be accomplished. And to answer your question, no. We actually call the current ballot type in use by most states an "Australian ballot". And current voting systems were not really in place until 1952.

So then, just how much voter fraud is OK?
Mathematically speaking about .05%. In essence, no system is 100% infallible. IDs wont solve the problem, real vs fake. And I would also include making it so eligible voters can't vote a failure of the system even if no fraud has occurred.

Funny thing about gerrymandering. People are against it unless it's benefiting them.
So are you for or against, I can't tell. I stand by gerrymandering as a voter suppression technique.

The question is: Did the non-citizens vote? That's why we need more oversight. The Constitution doesn't say "residents" can vote. It says citizens can vote.
The point was the state made a mistake, and issued them a voter card. Even though they checked the box saying they are a non citizen.

Also, is it OK and Constitutional for non-citizens to vote? Answer to both: No.
Wow, you are just not right, at all. The situation is complicated.

There is something you ARE legally required to have: Citizenship.
See above

How do you propose people prove that? "Take my word for it"?
How does a drivers license prove it? Don't flip out the answer is it does not.

Also, aren't people generally big on "one person, one vote"? If people are voting more than once, doesn't that violate that premise? Answer: Yes.

"One person, one vote" is also why a lot of people don't want "approval voting", either.
No idea what you are trying to say
Reply With Quote