Farewell, Election Day

I don't buy Will's argument. Early voting truncates the process? Sure, but it also minimizes the effect of a dishonest October surprise, a smear that comes out too late for its victim to respond. Early voting is bad because it's easy? It is easy, and it also minimizes the effect of election-day problems like broken voting machines, bad weather, or dirty tricks at the polling places. Much of Will's argument sounds like misplaced nostalgia.

After reading this column, I wonder, once again, what planet George Will lives on. But of course we know the answer: he lives in the world of the slothful rich, to use his term, for whom going to the polls and standing in line for hours will not cost tthem more than

In 2004 I was in college and needed an absentee ballot. I received two, mine and someone elses. I could easily have voted in two separate states if I had wished--could you imagine their checking the signature on every absentee ballot (we would require a few extra months for counting if that were the case--I don't hate either candidate enough to put them through that). There may be a paper trail in this sort of voting, but it is lacking on the human trail.

This is why I prefer polling places (try to set aside time outside of a lunch break). But none of that electronic garbage, I like the mechanical kind that you can hear working. Unfortunately, it is an absentee ballot again for me this year. Maybe I'll even get two ballots again this year--but it is just as likely that somebody else is going to receive mine.

There is a problem with election-day voting that trumps the genuine problems with early voting that George Will brings up: computer voting machines with no paper trail are an invitation to election fraud on a massive scale.

Analyses of voting patterns in the 2004 elections showed statistical impossibilities in the computer vote counts in key counties in Ohio and Florida: more votes counted than could possibly have been cast, etc. The exit polls in 2004 showed a Kerry win. The only states where the exit polls did not match the voting results were the swing states, and the discrepancies were only in the presidential races, not other races.

The statistical evidence pretty well proves that there was computerized election fraud. It's hard to convict, though, because the use of computers leaves no tangible evidence. It's as easy as changing a number in a spreadsheet before sending it on. Without paper ballots, there is no possibility of a recount if error or fraud is suspected.

Voting early, on paper, won't guarantee that your vote will be counted. But at least it leaves a paper record. It makes fraud much more difficult, and it enables a recount to occur if needed. Please, vote on paper and get your vote counted.

Apologies for the previous unfinished post

.The lack of empathy (not  to mention lack of imagination)  demonstrated by Mr. Will in this column is staggering.   Apparently he has a lot of free time to stand in line on Election Day. These people don't : Parents with infants and toddlers.  Elderly or disabled people.   People who work two jobs.  People who have no vehicle or cannot afford fuel.  People who have reading diabilities or lack English langugage reading skills and need a ballot read to them.   People who are confused by electronics and prefer paper ballots.  Anyone who take voting so seriously that he or she wants to take time to vote carefully and not feel pressured by the long lines behind them.

I am convinced there are many patriotic, responsible, unslothful reasons for voters to prefer to vote at home.  A kinder, more imaginative writer could probably think of more.  Such a writer might also imagine that full democratic  participation outweighs the virtues of  mingling at the polls. 

This is the least empathy I think I have ever seen from George Will.

Thank You, George Will...

Whenever I watch ABC's This Week, I've often wondered whether or not you cared about the future of all of America's children, not just the Republican Party.

You possess unquestionable intellect, and your editorials are both cerebral and infectious.

The possession of an intellect such as yours can be fashioned as a weapon for the Republican Party or an instrument of instruction for all of America's children.

When you finally make your transition from this world, if there is a God who "consciously" created us all, surely you will be asked what contribution you made to the "betterment" of the complex world he created.

To respond, "I stood up for the Republican Party and its conservative values" may not be sufficient when others have stood up for all of his children.

Still, I want to thank you for your personal assessment of both Presidential candidates in your recent editorial, "McCain Loses His Head."

...and I pray, "If a man lives and a man learns, a man can change."

So Mote It Be

Oh no, it's both cheaper and easier? Must be the State Government. Put the Feds in charge, then it'll take 4 times as long, cost 10 X as much, and be riddled with fraud, waste, and kickbacks...

Are any of the "benefits" of not doing this worth the extra cost to the state? Are you willing to cover that cost yourself George, since you see it as so critical?

Any time the Government can cut costs, while keeping the same or comparable benefits; I'm for it. That you aren't tells me a great deal about what you'd prefer for Government.

How much are you willing to spend to hopefully promote some vague semblance of "community"? Would you spend twice as much if your first attempt fails? How do you measure "community" to know if your project works, or is a complete waste of time and money?

And why do you think I'm going to be happy paying for it? Do the inexpensive, efficient, and cost-effective method; you've got no good reason to do anything else.

I think this article is short sighted. Many of us travel for work and cannot get to a polling place on election day so we opt vote early with absentee ballots. Also, just because we vote early doesn't mean we haven't feel following the election and are not well versed on the issues. I would prefer to vote in person but since that is not an option I vote early.

Presumably the saintly,cloistered Mr. Wills cannot imagine anyone being too aged, ill, or incapacitated to go to the polls. Nor would he allow any unexpected business trips or family emergencies prevent him from being near home on election day. For us slothful sinners, absentee ballots provide insurance against unforseen events that might prevent us from voting in person. This has been helpful to me on several occasions, and I have never missed voting in any election during the past 43 years.

Presumably the saintly,cloistered Mr. Wills cannot imagine anyone being too aged, ill, or incapacitated to go to the polls. Nor would he allow any unexpected business trips or family emergencies prevent him from being near home on election day. For us slothful sinners, absentee ballots provide insurance against unforseen events that might prevent us from voting in person. This has been helpful to me on several occasions, and I have never missed voting in any election during the past 43 years.

Obviously, you do not hold down three jobs and have difficultly getting time off to take a sick child to the doctor and have no concept of a large portion of voters who simply cannot get to the polls on the first Tuesday in November and are hardly 'slothfully sitting on their couch....' You conservative 'elites' who disdain anything that deviates from your perception of 'tradition' or 'the way things should be' are particularly crafty when disenfranchising voters (who tend to be Democrats and of lower socioeconomic means). You stole 2000 and 2004 and I'm sure you'll stop at nothing to still this one, too. Mail-in balloting (as opposed to 'absentee balloting') is beneficial in multiple ways. I wish all states would adopt Oregon's mandatory method. I am a physician and work very full days and, while I probably could get to the polls on Tuesday, I would rather fill out my ballot (which, this year, will be VERY long in Colorado) in the comfort of my home so that I can thoughtfully consider all of the ballot measures. I am also very leery of electronic voting machines which you Republicans used to commit mass fraud on the American electorate in the last two elections. Voting by mail prevents you from stealing my vote. "Election Day" should actually be 'Election Weekend" and extend over at least three days so that more people could actually get to the polls. But that would enfranchise the young the poor and non-whites and we all know that would mean the end of Republican rule and influence...

I can think of another word that "describes most of the people who will vote only if a ballot is shoved through their mail slot:" Employed. It would be hard for me to get to my polling place during a workday if Oregon hadn't switched exclusively to vote-by-mail.
And apparently, Mr. Will thinks that all votes are created equal, but some are more equal than others; in his worldview, individualists who listen to iPods don't deserve a voice in government.

There would be significant differences in results for states that "gamed" the system--Florida in 2000 & Ohio in 2004. Mail voting would have better reflected popular desires if you could get past the Ohio Republican Secretary of State who put the same number of voting machines at at tiny conservative college as a huge state university. Waiting a minute at the conservative university vs 13 hours at the University is a significant difference.

If Mr. Will had to work a twelve hour shift on election day and then have to rush to a polling place to stand in line for hours, providing, of course, that he got off work in time to be able to vote, perhaps he would not be so quick to call others slothful. Every year, millions of Americans can't vote because it would force them to miss work. Republicans have always fought the idea of Election Day being a true national holiday where the common man would have the day off to vote freely.
Let's declare Election Day a national holiday. This would probably be resisted on the basis of cost. A solution would be to move Election Day to the second Tuesday of November and combine it with Veterans' Day, traditionally celebrated on November 11. This would send a strong signal about the importance our country attaches to voting. And what better way could there be to honor those who fought for democratic rights than for Americans to vote on what could become known as Veterans' Democracy Day?

Well, maybe then what should be addressed is voter suppression, electronic voting with no paper ballot and not enough polling places to prevent people from having to wait in line for hours. But I guess early voting is only a problem if it doesn't benefit the conservatives.

If the press and the public can openly track the results on election day, why can we not do so now? Are they being counted already? Or are they cast into a pile and then counted only on the official Election day? If the latter case is true, are they at least verified for authenticity and as legal beforehand? It appears obvious to me that with all the new rules will follow more problems in verifying genuine votes, and more problems with all the conspiracy theorists (whom I believe are the most likely individuals capable and willing to commit voter faud) - bottom line: if there is fraud, and I believe this year there definitely will be- lets get a handle on it, and who is responsible- ahead of time.

I am an Oregon voter. I was shocked to discover that being well-informed makes a person slothful. Not only that, 100% of my fellow voters in this state are slothful as well! It's horrifying. Here I thought spending hours with the ballot and the sometimes monumental voter's booklet meant we were diligent and responsible citizens. Is dashing to the polling place after work when you are tired and frazzled and filling out a ballot under pressure more responsible? I lived in Massachusetts for many years. While I miss the communal aspect of voting at the polling place, and had a hard time getting used to vote-by-mail system here, the trade-off is worth it to me, because I feel much more confident that I have voted according to my values and have not made any errors. Isn't that democracy? Does it matter what my physical location is at the moment I drop my ballot into the box? I wish the more populous states such as Florida and Ohio had vote-by-mail - how do you think the people who waited in line for hoursI would have a lot more confidence in the fairness and accuracy of national elections if they did.
As for early voters being more partisan, I don't see voters here as more partisan than in Massachusetts. I wish one could register as an independent here, as I did there, but I find it easier to have a political discussion with someone of differing views here than there. I vote by mail and early because that's the way it works here, not because I became more partisan or 'slothful' when I crossed the state line.

I am an Oregon voter. I was shocked to discover that being well-informed makes a person slothful. Not only that, 100% of my fellow voters in this state are slothful as well! It's horrifying. Here I thought spending hours with the ballot and the sometimes monumental voter's booklet meant we were diligent and responsible citizens. Is dashing to the polling place after work when you are tired and frazzled and filling out a ballot under pressure more responsible? I lived in Massachusetts for many years. While I miss the communal aspect of voting at the polling place, and had a hard time getting used to vote-by-mail system here, the trade-off is worth it to me, because I feel much more confident that I have voted according to my values and have not made any errors. Isn't that democracy? Does it matter what my physical location is at the moment I drop my ballot into the box? I wish the more populous states such as Florida and Ohio had vote-by-mail - how do you think the people who waited in line for hoursI would have a lot more confidence in the fairness and accuracy of national elections if they did.
As for early voters being more partisan, I don't see voters here as more partisan than in Massachusetts. I wish one could register as an independent here, as I did there, but I find it easier to have a political discussion with someone of differing views here than there. I vote by mail and early because that's the way it works here, not because I became more partisan or 'slothful' when I crossed the state line.