Why can't the US have a NORMAL election for once?

[The Dog]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061024/ap_on_re_us/virginia_senate_glitch

Its really a joke - you would have thought that in 6 years SOMEONE would get it right by now....

[SLCPUNK]

I know........why can't they?

Are dirty tricks the only way to go about it?

Do we need to use exit polls as they do in third world countries to make sure that we have not been duped? I'm starting to think so.

[The Dog]

I know........why can't they?

Are dirty tricks the only way to go about it?

Do we need to use exit polls as they do in third world countries to make sure that we have not been duped? I'm starting to think so.

I think before we bring democracy to another part of the world, we should me 100% certain we can do it right in our OWN country first!!!! 

Total joke.

[pasnow]

I don't know, I'm a Democrat & all but I think it's kindof stupid to put = James H. "Jim" Webb. on a ballot for US Senator?!

I mean, I could understand if it's his natural name that is long (Alexvorastovski or something), but why bother putting James AND Jim. It also sounds kindof stupid (William J. "Bill" Clinton) I mean come on, I would think they would research which name is perceived as better with potential voters, and go with that one (James or Jim). Someone here posted an article how some voters like "Hillary Rodham Clinton" vs. "Hilary Clinton" I would think alot of politicians do similar market research studies. Especially those running for Senator, this sounds like something from someone running for mayor of Bumblefuck.

[SLCPUNK]

You mean to tell me that threatening somebody with jail if they vote, is not democratic?

[The Dog]

I don't know, I'm a Democrat & all but I think it's kindof stupid to put = James H. "Jim" Webb. on a ballot for US Senator?!

I mean, I could understand if it's his natural name that is long (Alexvorastovski or something), but why bother putting James AND Jim. It also sounds kindof stupid (William J. "Bill" Clinton) I mean come on, I would think they would research which name is perceived as better with potential voters, and go with that one (James or Jim). Someone here posted an article how some voters like "Hillary Rodham Clinton" vs. "Hilary Clinton" I would think alot of politicians do similar market research studies. Especially those running for Senator, this sounds like something from someone running for mayor of Bumblefuck.

Thats irrelevant, the point is the machines can't process long names!!!  What if his name was Alexander Vlad Raskelnokov.  I don't think that'd fit.  Webb is just one example.  Whether or not its dumb for him to have James and Jim is besides the point (but I kinda agree with you).  I believe hes not the only candidate this will effect.  Didn't it also say it cuts off their party as well on the summary page? thats just ridiculous.

[Surfrider]

You mean to tell me that threatening somebody with jail if they vote, is not democratic?

That's kind of misleading.  He said that if you are not a citizen and vote then you can go to jail.  Sure it was wrong, but he is right in that it is a crime to vote if you are not a citizen.  I think he was trying to prevent Loretta Sanchez from winning another election on the backs of illegal immigrants.

If you guys are so in favor of honest elections, why aren't you screaming about the Democrats' position against voter identification?  None of you guys answered my question regarding this in the other thread.

[SLCPUNK]

You mean to tell me that threatening somebody with jail if they vote, is not democratic?

That's kind of misleading.  He said that if you are not a citizen and vote then you can go to jail.  Sure it was wrong, but he is right in that it is a crime to vote if you are not a citizen.  I think he was trying to prevent Loretta Sanchez from winning another election on the backs of illegal immigrants.

Boo hoo hoo, you don?t like my sarcasm? Wanna pick apart little words, so you can avoid the real subject? The real subject is that a dirt bag republican used bully tactics and threats to try and suppress democratic voter turnout.

[Chief]

our whole election system is a complete scam, its totally WRONG!! we need a complete overhaul!!!

[Surfrider]

You mean to tell me that threatening somebody with jail if they vote, is not democratic?

That's kind of misleading.? He said that if you are not a citizen and vote then you can go to jail.? Sure it was wrong, but he is right in that it is a crime to vote if you are not a citizen.? I think he was trying to prevent Loretta Sanchez from winning another election on the backs of illegal immigrants.

Boo hoo hoo, you don?t like my sarcasm? Wanna pick apart little words, so you can avoid the real subject? The real subject is that a dirt bag republican used bully tactics and threats to try and suppress democratic voter turnout.

At least you admit illegal immigrants are the base of the democrats.  I said the tactics were wrong and he should not have written the letter.  However, when the veil is lifted, all he did is tell people who can legally vote, that it is illegal for them to vote and that they can get in trouble for doing so.  Anyone legal citizen that would be intimidated by this to the extent that they wouldn't vote probably shouldn't be voting anyway.  Your characterization that he is attempting to suppress legal voters is misleading. 

If you are so in favor of honest elections, how come you don't discuss any of the democrats that try to get these illegal voters to vote.  That is how Loretta Sanchez won in her seat.  When placed in that context, it is much more understandable that her opponent would send such a letter.

[SLCPUNK]

At least you admit illegal immigrants are the base of the democrats.  I said the tactics were wrong and he should not have written the letter. 

Actually, no I did not.

[SLCPUNK]

At least you admit illegal immigrants are the base of the democrats.  I said the tactics were wrong and he should not have written the letter. 

Actually, no I did not.

If you are so in favor of honest elections, how come you don't discuss any of the democrats that try to get these illegal voters to vote.

She did that and it was wrong.

[misterID]

From what I know that Spanish letter was misleading saying that anyone not born in the country could go to jail if they voted.

I think democrats should stop allowing illegal immigrants to vote the very second the republicans stop allowing dead people to vote

[Surfrider]

If you guys are so in favor of honest elections, why aren't you screaming about the Democrats' position against voter identification?? None of you guys answered my question regarding this in the other thread.

dodge
?verb (used with object) 1. to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy: to dodge a blow; to dodge a question. 
2. Also, hold back. Photography. (in printing) to shade (an area of a print) from exposure for a period, while exposing the remainder of the print in order to lighten or eliminate the area (sometimes fol. by out). Compare burn1 (def. 43). 
?verb (used without object) 3. to move aside or change position suddenly, as to avoid a blow or get behind something. 
4. to use evasive methods; prevaricate: When asked a direct question, he dodges. 
?noun 5. a quick, evasive movement, as a sudden jump away to avoid a blow or the like. 
6. an ingenious expedient or contrivance; shifty trick. 

[GeorgeSteele]

If you guys are so in favor of honest elections, why aren't you screaming about the Democrats' position against voter identification?? None of you guys answered my question regarding this in the other thread.

dodge
?verb (used with object) 1. to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy: to dodge a blow; to dodge a question.?
2. Also, hold back. Photography. (in printing) to shade (an area of a print) from exposure for a period, while exposing the remainder of the print in order to lighten or eliminate the area (sometimes fol. by out). Compare burn1 (def. 43).?
?verb (used without object) 3. to move aside or change position suddenly, as to avoid a blow or get behind something.?
4. to use evasive methods; prevaricate: When asked a direct question, he dodges.?
?noun 5. a quick, evasive movement, as a sudden jump away to avoid a blow or the like.?
6. an ingenious expedient or contrivance; shifty trick.?

If you insist...

About 20 million eligible voters don't have gov't ID (6-10% of eligible voters); these voters are disproportionately poor urban minorities.  It makes no sense to impose additional burdens on people who are already entitled to vote and don't have the time or money to waste on bureaucratic bullshit.  I might feel otherwise if a bunch of John Does were going around voting 20 times per election, but that is not remotely the case.  Numerous studies have shown that individual voter fraud is miniscule and very rarely affects election results.  So Republicans are trying come across as the proactive group in dealing with election problems, but most people aren't fooled by that crap.  Voter identification does nothing to address the voting issues that Republicans are associated with - organized voter intimidation and vote suppression campaigns. Their only goal in all this is to disenfranchise a demographic that never votes for them. 

[Surfrider]

If you guys are so in favor of honest elections, why aren't you screaming about the Democrats' position against voter identification?? None of you guys answered my question regarding this in the other thread.

dodge
?verb (used with object) 1. to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy: to dodge a blow; to dodge a question.?
2. Also, hold back. Photography. (in printing) to shade (an area of a print) from exposure for a period, while exposing the remainder of the print in order to lighten or eliminate the area (sometimes fol. by out). Compare burn1 (def. 43).?
?verb (used without object) 3. to move aside or change position suddenly, as to avoid a blow or get behind something.?
4. to use evasive methods; prevaricate: When asked a direct question, he dodges.?
?noun 5. a quick, evasive movement, as a sudden jump away to avoid a blow or the like.?
6. an ingenious expedient or contrivance; shifty trick.?

If you insist...

About 20 million eligible voters don't have gov't ID (6-10% of eligible voters); these voters are disproportionately poor urban minorities.? It makes no sense to impose additional burdens on people who are already entitled to vote and don't have the time or money to waste on bureaucratic bullshit.? I might feel otherwise if a bunch of John Does were going around voting 20 times per election, but that is not remotely the case.? Numerous studies have shown that individual voter fraud is miniscule and very rarely affects election results.? So Republicans are trying come across as the proactive group in dealing with election problems, but most people aren't fooled by that crap.? Voter identification does nothing to address the voting issues that Republicans are associated with - organized voter intimidation and vote suppression campaigns. Their only goal in all this is to disenfranchise a demographic that never votes for them.?

Sorry.  The government will provide IDs for free and will personally deliver them to anyone that needs one.  There is a huge problem in California and otehr southwestern states with illegal immigrants voting in elections.  This is especially true considering the recent debate on illegal immigration.  Democrats will not support cracking down on illegal voting because the illegal immigrants vote for them.  There is no way to justify such a position if you are actually for accurate and fair elections.

[GeorgeSteele]

If you guys are so in favor of honest elections, why aren't you screaming about the Democrats' position against voter identification?? None of you guys answered my question regarding this in the other thread.

dodge
?verb (used with object) 1. to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy: to dodge a blow; to dodge a question.?
2. Also, hold back. Photography. (in printing) to shade (an area of a print) from exposure for a period, while exposing the remainder of the print in order to lighten or eliminate the area (sometimes fol. by out). Compare burn1 (def. 43).?
?verb (used without object) 3. to move aside or change position suddenly, as to avoid a blow or get behind something.?
4. to use evasive methods; prevaricate: When asked a direct question, he dodges.?
?noun 5. a quick, evasive movement, as a sudden jump away to avoid a blow or the like.?
6. an ingenious expedient or contrivance; shifty trick.?

If you insist...

About 20 million eligible voters don't have gov't ID (6-10% of eligible voters); these voters are disproportionately poor urban minorities.? It makes no sense to impose additional burdens on people who are already entitled to vote and don't have the time or money to waste on bureaucratic bullshit.? I might feel otherwise if a bunch of John Does were going around voting 20 times per election, but that is not remotely the case.? Numerous studies have shown that individual voter fraud is miniscule and very rarely affects election results.? So Republicans are trying come across as the proactive group in dealing with election problems, but most people aren't fooled by that crap.? Voter identification does nothing to address the voting issues that Republicans are associated with - organized voter intimidation and vote suppression campaigns. Their only goal in all this is to disenfranchise a demographic that never votes for them.?

Sorry.? The government will provide IDs for free and will personally deliver them to anyone that needs one.? There is a huge problem in California and otehr southwestern states with illegal immigrants voting in elections.? This is especially true considering the recent debate on illegal immigration.? Democrats will not support cracking down on illegal voting because the illegal immigrants vote for them.? There is no way to justify such a position if you are actually for accurate and fair elections.

Wrong, there are already numerous incidents of people getting rejected because they could not present what the government deemed to be "adequate" proof of citizenship.  Besides, I find it hilariously absurd that the proponents of this legislation are so high-minded about election fairness but don't find it necesary to speak out against blatant voter intimidation and suppression, which has an exponentially higher impact on election outcomes than the "huge problem" of illegals voting.

[The Dog]

If you guys are so in favor of honest elections, why aren't you screaming about the Democrats' position against voter identification?  None of you guys answered my question regarding this in the other thread.

dodge
?verb (used with object) 1. to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy: to dodge a blow; to dodge a question. 
2. Also, hold back. Photography. (in printing) to shade (an area of a print) from exposure for a period, while exposing the remainder of the print in order to lighten or eliminate the area (sometimes fol. by out). Compare burn1 (def. 43). 
?verb (used without object) 3. to move aside or change position suddenly, as to avoid a blow or get behind something. 
4. to use evasive methods; prevaricate: When asked a direct question, he dodges. 
?noun 5. a quick, evasive movement, as a sudden jump away to avoid a blow or the like. 
6. an ingenious expedient or contrivance; shifty trick. 

If you insist...

About 20 million eligible voters don't have gov't ID (6-10% of eligible voters); these voters are disproportionately poor urban minorities.  It makes no sense to impose additional burdens on people who are already entitled to vote and don't have the time or money to waste on bureaucratic bullshit.  I might feel otherwise if a bunch of John Does were going around voting 20 times per election, but that is not remotely the case.  Numerous studies have shown that individual voter fraud is miniscule and very rarely affects election results.  So Republicans are trying come across as the proactive group in dealing with election problems, but most people aren't fooled by that crap.  Voter identification does nothing to address the voting issues that Republicans are associated with - organized voter intimidation and vote suppression campaigns. Their only goal in all this is to disenfranchise a demographic that never votes for them. 

Sorry.  The government will provide IDs for free and will personally deliver them to anyone that needs one.  There is a huge problem in California and otehr southwestern states with illegal immigrants voting in elections.  This is especially true considering the recent debate on illegal immigration.  Democrats will not support cracking down on illegal voting because the illegal immigrants vote for them.  There is no way to justify such a position if you are actually for accurate and fair elections.

Wrong, there are already numerous incidents of people getting rejected because they could not present what the government deemed to be "adequate" proof of citizenship.  Besides, I find it hilariously absurd that the proponents of this legislation are so high-minded about election fairness but don't find it necesary to speak out against blatant voter intimidation and suppression, which has an exponentially higher impact on election outcomes than the "huge problem" of illegals voting.

What, you mean like this???

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=2432899&nav=168XS1G8

[Surfrider]

If you guys are so in favor of honest elections, why aren't you screaming about the Democrats' position against voter identification?? None of you guys answered my question regarding this in the other thread.

dodge
?verb (used with object) 1. to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy: to dodge a blow; to dodge a question.?
2. Also, hold back. Photography. (in printing) to shade (an area of a print) from exposure for a period, while exposing the remainder of the print in order to lighten or eliminate the area (sometimes fol. by out). Compare burn1 (def. 43).?
?verb (used without object) 3. to move aside or change position suddenly, as to avoid a blow or get behind something.?
4. to use evasive methods; prevaricate: When asked a direct question, he dodges.?
?noun 5. a quick, evasive movement, as a sudden jump away to avoid a blow or the like.?
6. an ingenious expedient or contrivance; shifty trick.?

If you insist...

About 20 million eligible voters don't have gov't ID (6-10% of eligible voters); these voters are disproportionately poor urban minorities.? It makes no sense to impose additional burdens on people who are already entitled to vote and don't have the time or money to waste on bureaucratic bullshit.? I might feel otherwise if a bunch of John Does were going around voting 20 times per election, but that is not remotely the case.? Numerous studies have shown that individual voter fraud is miniscule and very rarely affects election results.? So Republicans are trying come across as the proactive group in dealing with election problems, but most people aren't fooled by that crap.? Voter identification does nothing to address the voting issues that Republicans are associated with - organized voter intimidation and vote suppression campaigns. Their only goal in all this is to disenfranchise a demographic that never votes for them.?

Sorry.? The government will provide IDs for free and will personally deliver them to anyone that needs one.? There is a huge problem in California and otehr southwestern states with illegal immigrants voting in elections.? This is especially true considering the recent debate on illegal immigration.? Democrats will not support cracking down on illegal voting because the illegal immigrants vote for them.? There is no way to justify such a position if you are actually for accurate and fair elections.

Wrong, there are already numerous incidents of people getting rejected because they could not present what the government deemed to be "adequate" proof of citizenship.? Besides, I find it hilariously absurd that the proponents of this legislation are so high-minded about election fairness but don't find it necesary to speak out against blatant voter intimidation and suppression, which has an exponentially higher impact on election outcomes than the "huge problem" of illegals voting.

Where is evidence of these numerous incidents.  They were probably denied because they weren't citizens.  It is not too difficult to prove citizenship.  Do you really want people voting that can't prove they are citizens?

I am against voter intimdation or suppression.  More importantly, just because there are other voter problems out there does not mean we shouldn't correct the ones that we can.  The indimidation or suppression that you speak of isn't as blatant and as easily fixable as voter identification.  It is a much more difficult thing to correct.  There are laws on the books against voter indimiation.  They simply need to be enforced.

[GeorgeSteele]

Where is evidence of these numerous incidents.?

Here's some...

http://www.azcentral.com/specials/special29/articles/0718Prop200-voting16.html

http://www.azcentral.com/specials/special12/articles/1126voterID26.html

What, you mean like this???

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=2432899&nav=168XS1G8

Right, and don't forget these beauties...

http://www.solarbus.org/stealyourelection/voter-suppression-flyers.html