|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 29, 2020 9:31:17 GMT -5
SCOTUS ruled against GOP's suit to stop mail-in extension in NC and PA (they ruled just the opposite in another suit from another state which I don't recall off the top of my head). The new one did not participate, which is a bit unexpected if I do say so myself.
Anyhoo, there are a lot of states where they have said mail-in ballots will be accepted after Nov 3 if they are postmarked by that day but others will not (above). Is that how it should work? I feel like they should be postmarked by what would be considered a reasonable time for normal mail without expediting. Say the Friday before the election?
I don't know about yall but I want to know the undisputed winner by 6pm on Wednesday.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 29, 2020 10:40:56 GMT -5
What's the song? You can't always get what you waaaant....
Voting was explicitly put in the state's hands under the constitution. And if we're going to be really technical about it, the state don't have to turn over results until the beginning of December when the electoral college votes. (Although most states have a deadline to ratify the results in their state law or constitution).
My opinion is that SCOTUS shouldn't get involved unless it's a matter of voters being disenfranchised. And they (and the federal government) should always be on the side of the voter, not the state government. So if the state says one drop box is okay for an area covering 47,000 people (I'm looking at you Texas), then the feds have the right to tell them to add more so voters have easy access to them. Same with states who try to get away without printing enough paper ballots as backup if their machines break down - they should have to show that they have printed more than enough for the next election.
And I think mail-in should be like taxes - if it's postmarked on or before the deadline, it counts. Problem being that with all the issues at the PO, how do you determine what a 'reasonable' length of time to allow delivery should be?
In an ideal world, states would release voter totals on the 3rd (xxx voted early, yyy absentee ballots received to date, zzz voted in-person today) and then hold the actual results until Friday to give time for absentee ballots to arrive and provisional voters time to clear any issues. I don't know if my heart could stand that type of suspense and anxiety though.
I would like all the states to issue results AND outstanding ballots on election night though.
So xxx votes cast - here is the breakdown
But there are yyy absentee/mail-in ballots still outstanding
That way people have at at least somewhat of an idea - if a state is really close, we can all know that the result may not be final yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 29, 2020 11:05:25 GMT -5
I see Election Day and April 15 as apples and oranges comparison but agree with you on most everything else.
Also I think it was one drop off location for 4.7 million in Houston iirc.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 29, 2020 12:16:02 GMT -5
They are an apples and oranges comparison, but I was just using tax day as an example of picking a date and sticking with it - something like postmarked on Election day and received within the next 5 days or something like that.
The problem is of course that no one has faith in the post office, so they feel that their ballot will be lost in the mail.
You'd think both sides could unite on this one issue of finding a way to make sure that ballots get priority handling, since it affects both parties, yet every person I've talked to on this issue makes it sound like the PO is going to lose their personal ballot because of who they voted for. You would think they'd understand that once they open the inner envelope (that you sign) that there's really not a quick and easy way to put everything back together and send it on it's way if that person voted the way you wanted them to.....
And thanks for the correction on Texas - their governor is such a total asswipe that I've really been trying to avoid any type of news coming from there.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Oct 30, 2020 8:09:39 GMT -5
You assume both parties want people to vote.
Justice Kegs recently wrote as a BS aside that the Constitution put elections in the hands of state Legislatures, not state governments or courts. So maybe state courts should stay out of it or maybe SCrOTUS should slap those courts down when they rule "wrong".
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 30, 2020 9:44:31 GMT -5
That was the one ruling I was referring to. Correct me if I'm wrong but the way I read it, that same opinion he wrote also was applied to the others that slapped down the GOPs other suits in PA, NC? If so, then at least there's consistency in the ruling (going by what the state laws provide for or against).
FWIW- I would like to see a uniform voting process for all states and territories, if not an overhaul of how we do it altogether. I always go back to FL "chad" when making this argument. Never ever should have happened. What is it they say about chain? It is always only as strong as its weakest link. Our voting system should be as close to perfect as possible, and never left open to judicial interpretation. Oh and We should not be having perpetual campaigning e.g. the 2024 Election will start the day after this one upcoming.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 30, 2020 10:05:03 GMT -5
HA! You think there will actually be a future start to the 2024 campaign. Your innocence is so sweet and touching....
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave's Not Here Man on Oct 30, 2020 10:09:01 GMT -5
Don Jr/Ivanka 24?
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Oct 30, 2020 12:36:37 GMT -5
|
|
