I wonder what Texas will do… Eliminating drop boxes except 1 per county (for the excuse-only absentee ballots) clearly will remain because it is discriminatory against higher population counties.
It’s unclear if the extended early voting period got more low-effort neonazis (yes, there is a big confederate flag contingency) to vote or if it let more working class democrats work it into their employment schedules.
It’s possible Texas would have flipped without the higher turnout through the longer early voting period.
Since it’s unclear, I think you’re right they’ll just go with “reducing turnout at all costs” as the standard play.
People voting is an enemy of the Trump party. And the surveillance state (widespread exposure of private personal information) is also a new cornerstone.
Now you’re just putting words in my mouth. Quite clearly, I said that come Jan 20 this vaccine “mess” will be “resolved” by Biden - by following what has been the plan all along. It’s a commentary on the extreme bias that prevails today - anything Trump does is terrible, but reframe the same thing as being Biden’s and it’s now a solution.
That’s the same line used earlier in the thread (and by conman in chief, itself). Media making up the virus being a problem. Goes away right after Biden is elected / in office. Same line of nonsense. Yes, the word changed from election to inauguration… Unfortunately (well, fortunately in every other case. But unfortunately in this one case) nature doesn’t conform to qanon conspiracy theories.
"By the way, on November 4th, you won’t hear about it anymore. "
You’re right. They should just photocopy reems of ballots and hand them out and collect them all around town. There’s no evidence that people might fill out more than one, clearly no one will fill one out if they’re not legally allowed to vote. And just to ensure no vote is suppressed, we’ll send teams out into the streets to collect any random papers that might be blowing around in case it might be one of the photocopied ballots. The fact that the election will have a few billion votes cast is a good thing, since it probably means no one’s voice was unfairly suppressed.
Your imaginary fantasy has nothing to do with an extended in-person early voting period, which clearly worked to increase turnout in Texas from abysmally low numbers in previous elections, which is what I referenced.
One last time, I didnt say “go away”. I said that Biden will lead us out of this mess…by doing what was going to happen anyways. He’ll get credit for essentially the same things Trump gets blamed for.
Of course, quantity is far more important than quality.
Casting uninformed votes is far more dangerous to society than not voting at all. And votes cast early are inherently less informed than those cast on election day.
I’m not saying having different ways to vote is bad. I’m saying that this bending over backwards and loosening/removing restrictions to facilitate as many votes being cast as possible is a bad priority. The priority of any voting process should be to ensure the integrity of the votes that are cast. It’s up to the people to participate in the process, it’s not up to the process to go out and get the people.
Your assumption is inherently wrong. There’s absolutely nothing guaranteeing that a voter will be either more or less informed on election day than a day or a month before. “Disinformation” is a kind of information (per previously referenced Simpsons quote: “hearsay and conjecture … are kinds of evidence”).
Voting is not mandatory and there’s no penalty for not voting. There’s no requirement or incentive to vote either early or in the last hour – short of having to stay in a long line outside in the cold and rain, voters are free to do as they wish. If they can’t make up their mind, they can wait until the last minute. You are incorrectly assuming that early votes are inherently uninformed. As I mentioned before, I could have voted in June and nothing would have changed my mind. In fact I’d guess that from the people participating in this thread, most did not change their mind this year, and no one changed their mind since the summer.
No, he’s exactly right. All options have time value until they expire, and your option to wait to learn more about the candidates you will vote for is no different. It’s optimal to vote at the last minute (baring practical considerations like mail in votes), in the same way you almost never exercise your stock options early but sell them instead. Maybe that’s the analogy - it’s right to sell your vote early, but otherwise you should wait?
If you think people will become less informed over time as a reason to vote early, I’m not sure why you think so highly of these people’s initial misimpression of who to vote for if they can’t make up their minds and apply logic to whatever new information shows up (I’m sure this group is a decent fraction of voters, sadly). Why not tell them to vote now for 2024?
Only if the voter has not irreversibly made up their mind. According to all the polls I’ve seen (including the very detailed one posted in this thread earlier), most voters make up their mind long before the last day of voting, only a minority make up their minds in the last month, and a very small percentage make it up in the last week or day.
Yes, bare practical considerations.
Like more flexibility needed since polling places are intentionally a further distance away from “less desirable” voters to those in charge, have longer lines, and the voters have less flexibility in their employment situation
I’ll disagree with this view. I vote in Oregon and voting here has been by mail for a long time. I know I spend a few hours actually reading the booklet I receive with all this information about candidates, programs, proposed levies/taxes, etc. while entering my votes in the ballot. I can’t imagine me spending all that time the actual election day.
Reality is that most useful information about candidates and proposals becomes available weeks or months before the election. What you’ll get towards election day are bombshells from left field, aimed more at creating confusion than bringing clarity. Just my humble opinion, of course.
And having irreversibly made up your mind weeks or even months in advance would be the antithesis of casting an informed vote.
The argument you are looking for is the fact that in (I think) most states, if you mail in a ballot but still vote in person too, that mail ballot is discarded. That allows for some means to change your vote should a last minute deal breaker come to light. But I don’t think that’s possible with early in person voting.
I know there are some people like that for whom politics is their religion and they don’t think at all, but just like people writing naked puts on Enron (“I’ll be happy to the company at a cheap price, regardless”), it turns out for many people there are some things that really can change your mind - like accounting fraud, or bribery by China / Russia of a candidate, or some gross violation of public morality (Tara Reade, who?).
Voting say a month early says “I’m a religious zealot and I could never change my mind about candidate X even if they killed/raped my relative, violated the religious values I associate with them, etc”. So yeah, it doesn’t take a big chance to make it right to wait til closer to the deadline, since presumably if that does happen you’ll regret your action a lot.
Biden & his cohorts were involved in mass fraud & corruption & media refused to air anything. Many hard working folks never paid any attention to news. These folks especially don’t have Alzheimer’s
affection.
Perhaps these folks didn’t care for Trumps loud, bold statements. They voted for Biden. Many of these uninformed voters today say " I wish I could change my vote". They have heard the terrible information of the Biden fraud & corruption.
No, I’m not looking for an argument about having the ability to change your mind by casting a vote in person after having voted by mail. I’m pretty sure this is and should stay illegal.
While I agree that people devoted to a religion don’t think at all, that isn’t necessarily the case with politics. I don’t actually vote for the individual candidate in a presidential election, I vote for the party, because one party and its platform closely aligns with my values, while the other party and its platform is diametrically opposed to my values. I suppose in a primary election it does make more sense to wait, as some candidates end up dropping out. But in a presidential election the candidate does not matter to me. So if the insane hypothetical scenario you described played out, where the candidate is involved in some heinous unforgivable crime like murder or rape, I’d still vote for them and let the courts or the party figure out what that means. Perhaps if the choices were not so opposing and obvious, I would have a different answer, like if two members of the same party or two independents were running against each other. In this country and now the choice is clear.
