The link and the two answers in the thread are pretty clear if you care to try to understand. Do you remember the flap up there in Washington about the absentee ballots from the Military in the 2004 election? We had the same thing in Florida during Bush vs Gore. Absentee ballots were slow getting to the servicemen and therefore late getting back to be counted. Career Servicemen are much more likely to want to vote than the younger troops and are much more likely to vote for Republican Candidates. That is why Obama is now trying to get that edge. The Democrats count on being able to capitalize on the dificulty in voting for those most likely to vote for Republicans. Actually pretty simple.
78 even said he was denied the right to vote twice. That has not happened to me, but voting while deployed was never easy.
Let's address this as two separate questions.
First -- The article was about service members who are in the state they vote in and who are voting in person. My question is simple -- why do those people need three extra days to cast their ballots?
Second -- You said, "Military members vote in the states of their home of record, not where they currently live. Often, they are in the midst of heavy predeployment field training in places like Ft Irwin, Twentynine Palms or Ft Polk, La and do not get their mail forwarded...."
If they are only deployed domestically for a few weeks, then they can order their absentee ballots long before. If they are deployed domestically for a longer period, then they can have their mail forwarded. I don't think a law to protect them from their own negligence in not forwarding their mail is really appropriate. Nor do I think that I should be protected from my own negligence if I fail to have my mail forwarded before I visit my parents for a couple of months -- which I just did.
I understand that those who are deployed overseas have special needs that need to be addressed with legislation. But I need convincing that those who are deployed domestically are in the same boat. And I don't think you're ever going to convince me that people who are voting in person do.
"The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism."
The link and the two answers in the thread are pretty clear if you care to try to understand. Do you remember the flap up there in Washington about the absentee ballots from the Military in the 2004 election? We had the same thing in Florida during Bush vs Gore. Absentee ballots were slow getting to the servicemen and therefore late getting back to be counted. Career Servicemen are much more likely to want to vote than the younger troops and are much more likely to vote for Republican Candidates. That is why Obama is now trying to get that edge. The Democrats count on being able to capitalize on the difficulty in voting for those most likely to vote for Republicans. Actually pretty simple.
78 even said he was denied the right to vote twice. That has not happened to me, but voting while deployed was never easy.
Let's address this as two separate questions.
First -- The article was about service members who are in the state they vote in and who are voting in person. My question is simple -- why do those people need three extra days to cast their ballots?
Second -- You said, "Military members vote in the states of their home of record, not where they currently live. Often, they are in the midst of heavy predeployment field training in places like Ft Irwin, Twentynine Palms or Ft Polk, La and do not get their mail forwarded...."
If they are only deployed domestically for a few weeks, then they can order their absentee ballots long before. If they are deployed domestically for a longer period, then they can have their mail forwarded. I don't think a law to protect them from their own negligence in not forwarding their mail is really appropriate. Nor do I think that I should be protected from my own negligence if I fail to have my mail forwarded before I visit my parents for a couple of months -- which I just did.
I understand that those who are deployed overseas have special needs that need to be addressed with legislation. But I need convincing that those who are deployed domestically are in the same boat. And I don't think you're ever going to convince me that people who are voting in person do.
Yoda out...
.
The only thing that I would say in addition is that people could get an absentee ballet if they had time enough before the election deadline date. Often pre-deployment work-up are such that you do not get home for days or even weeks at a time even when in your home locality. You go to load ammo and bombs. You run electronic ranges. You have an intense schedule even while at home. There is nothing about this additional three days that harms anyone and to deny it could impact a person's ability to vote at all. Civilians have no point of reference unless they have been there. You can also get short notice TDY orders that can affect your ability to vote. This happened to me twice while stationed in Guam. These did not have any affect on my ability to vote, but it could have. This whole thing is just political maneuvering on the part of Obama to try to hold down some of the military vote.
Getting mail forwarded to TDY locations, at sea or war zone locations can be tricky.
Re: Obama sues to deny vote to Military « Reply #23 on Aug 6, 2012, 12:04am »
From reading the lawsuit, the case isnt being argued to remove military members 3 days extension...
Rather it is about reinstating the 3 day extension for all residents. The military members arent going to lose their rights if the lawsuit is successful, the rest of Ohio will get the same 3 day privilege like the used to
From reading the lawsuit, the case isnt being argued to remove military members 3 days extension...
Rather it is about reinstating the 3 day extension for all residents. The military members arent going to lose their rights if the lawsuit is successful, the rest of Ohio will get the same 3 day privilege like the used to
You mean conservatives are making a mountain out of a molehill? I'm shocked, shocked.
How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it. Adam Smith
Re: Obama sues to deny vote to Military « Reply #26 on Aug 6, 2012, 1:33am »
I remember someone saying, if you are not practicing birth control, then you are trying to get pregnant.
Similarly, if you are not preventing voter fraud, then you are trying to perpetrate it.
Voting fraud is as old as voting itself. In this case, the soldier has a bit more voting rights than the average Joe. But his special situation might reasonably warrant those extra rights. So is reducing that special right - reducing voter fraud or is it suppressing potential Republican voters by design?
Given the hard-ball Chicago style politics that surround BO, in this case, he is trying to suppress GOP voters and is planning on conducting voter fraud where he is opposing Government ID checks.
OK, I am convinced you are not dishonest. Your link does not convince me and did not address the two examples I gave. Now, since you are not dishonest, what other explanation would you have for your stance? Do you agree that we want only valid voters casting valid votes? Are you willing to have simple rules to insure that is the case?
What I am saying is that the motivation for these laws is not about voter fraud. It's about voter suppression. If the data doie not support the policy, what would you assume the motivation to be? C'mon Win, you're not that naive, so the only thing that expains your response is that you support voter suppression.
OK, I am convinced you are not dishonest. Your link does not convince me and did not address the two examples I gave. Now, since you are not dishonest, what other explanation would you have for your stance? Do you agree that we want only valid voters casting valid votes? Are you willing to have simple rules to insure that is the case?
What I am saying is that the motivation for these laws is not about voter fraud. It's about voter suppression. If the data doie not support the policy, what would you assume the motivation to be? C'mon Win, you're not that naive, so the only thing that expains your response is that you support voter suppression.
That is the stock answer if you are in favor of taking a chance on the vote. Would you insist on ID for someone to cash a check? To board a plane?
What I am saying is that the motivation for these laws is not about voter fraud. It's about voter suppression. If the data doie not support the policy, what would you assume the motivation to be? C'mon Win, you're not that naive, so the only thing that expains your response is that you support voter suppression.
That is the stock answer if you are in favor of taking a chance on the vote. Would you insist on ID for someone to cash a check? To board a plane?
If you can offer evidence that there is a major problem with voter fraud, we can have further debate. Otherwise, argument over.
From reading the lawsuit, the case isnt being argued to remove military members 3 days extension...
Rather it is about reinstating the 3 day extension for all residents. The military members arent going to lose their rights if the lawsuit is successful, the rest of Ohio will get the same 3 day privilege like the used to
From reading the lawsuit, the case isnt being argued to remove military members 3 days extension...
Rather it is about reinstating the 3 day extension for all residents. The military members arent going to lose their rights if the lawsuit is successful, the rest of Ohio will get the same 3 day privilege like the used to
So much for Obama's War on Military Votes, huh?
I guess so if you are happy with our military vote being systematically suppressed election after election by Democrats.
Joined: Feb 2012 Gender: Male Posts: 874 Location: Los Angeles
Re: Obama sues to deny vote to Military « Reply #37 on Aug 6, 2012, 7:31pm »
Republican's voter suppression strategy is very impressive. It makes sense because obviously Romney can't win straight up, he needs a 'vote buffer'. It will more than likely work IMO.
"Voter ID, which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania: done,"
---Pennsylvania GOP House Majority Leader Mike Turzai
Republican's voter suppression strategy is very impressive. It makes sense because obviously Romney can't win straight up, he needs a 'vote buffer'. It will more than likely work IMO.
"Voter ID, which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania: done,"
---Pennsylvania GOP House Majority Leader Mike Turzai
If voter ID to keep Dem voters honest is all it takes to make an election fair is that a bad thing? Voter ID will make sure the man with the most honest votes wins. Pretty simple!
Re: Obama sues to deny vote to Military « Reply #39 on Aug 6, 2012, 8:43pm »
What are the number of cases prosecuted for voter fraud in the states?
I havent done a lot of research and dont have enough education on the topic to have an educated opinion. The articles I have read indicate percentages along these lines.
"There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often."
"According to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, 178 cases of alleged voter fraud have been referred to the department since 2000."
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/home.png "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/help.png "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/search.png "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/login.png "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/register.png "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/search2.png "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/print.png "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://www.surpluslines.com/yoda.gif "[avatar]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://i325.photobucket.com/albums/k387/aztecwin/th_Annoyer-1.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p198/harris1803/AFL-1.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[image]](http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p198/harris1803/Aztec%20Roadies/Stickersm.jpg "[image]")
