Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early voting

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
HokieJoe
Posts: 13125
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by HokieJoe »

ElbertoHokie wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
BigDave wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
nolanvt wrote:Nah, touched on it in my last post. The reason USN's silly comparison was false is that my vote has already been determined when I arrive at the polling place. It has not when I go to serve on a jury.
More to the point, you're not spending your time in line deliberating. A more apt analogy would be, if offered the choice of serving on a jury for the first trial of the day with no deliberation or serving on a jury for the last trial of the day with one hour of deliberation (assuming both trials cover the same subject matter and the only difference is how long you will have to wait), which juror would you choose? Most would choose to not have to wait around in the courtroom all day.
Which juror do you want Dave? The one who "doesn't want to wait around in the courtroom all day", or the one who will sit through deliberations and listen to the arguments of others? Your conclusion is from the perspective of a lazy juror. We don't want lazy voters or jurors.
I'm not clear why you think both jurors aren't deliberating. Yeah, there are plenty of voters who automatically vote for their party's candidate, and are completely uninformed about any issues. I would suspect, though, that basically everyone on this board is far more informed than the average voter. Uninformed people don't tend to hang out on political message boards.

So there's nothing in the world that could change your vote all the way up to election day?

What if you voted for a candidate and discover afterwards, but before election day, that this person was being charged with a loathsome crime? Or perhaps candidate promised to pass some legislation that is anathema to your personal ideology?

Hopefully you'd feel bad about your poor decision making afterwards, but you'd have no one to blame but yourself. You didn't exercise due diligence before casting your vote.
In vote by mail states, you can change your vote all the way up to election day. You just have to call into the county elections office. I haven't done it so I have no idea how easy it is but you can alter your vote before or on election day.

That sounds like a system just waiting to be bilked. It's best to keep things above board and limit your surface area for fraudulent voting schemes.

Banks and retailers do the same thing (largely) by employing loss prevention measures. I'm not interested in insuring someone can vote more conveniently. I'm interested in maintaing the integrity of my vote.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
Uprising
Posts: 4875
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 9:44 pm
Alma Mater: VT
Party: etc

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by Uprising »

USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
BigDave wrote:
nolanvt wrote:Is it your opinion that early/absentee voting is somehow not Constitutional? (This one is going to be fun!)
Article II Section 1 wrote:The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.
Congress set election day to be the Tuesday of the first full week of November. Voting other than that day violates the law.

On the sliding scale of "how abhorrent to the Constitution is this", allowing for absentee ballots - where you actually have a reason other than "I want to" to need to vote early isn't nearly as bad as unrestricted early voting ... but neither one is constitutional, strictly speaking.
This is not a good interpretation of this section. Congress sets the time in which states choose their electors, but how those electors are chosen is up to the state:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors...
Congress then sets the day in which the electors choose the President, which is in December. All state electors must choose on the same day. There is nothing that prevents states from allowing early voting on electors.
This is correct.

The better question is: Is there anything that prohibits a state from not allowing early voting? I don't think so.
Is this in question? There are several states that don't have early voting.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by USN_Hokie »

Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
BigDave wrote:
nolanvt wrote:Is it your opinion that early/absentee voting is somehow not Constitutional? (This one is going to be fun!)
Article II Section 1 wrote:The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.
Congress set election day to be the Tuesday of the first full week of November. Voting other than that day violates the law.

On the sliding scale of "how abhorrent to the Constitution is this", allowing for absentee ballots - where you actually have a reason other than "I want to" to need to vote early isn't nearly as bad as unrestricted early voting ... but neither one is constitutional, strictly speaking.
This is not a good interpretation of this section. Congress sets the time in which states choose their electors, but how those electors are chosen is up to the state:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors...
Congress then sets the day in which the electors choose the President, which is in December. All state electors must choose on the same day. There is nothing that prevents states from allowing early voting on electors.
This is correct.

The better question is: Is there anything that prohibits a state from not allowing early voting? I don't think so.
Is this in question? There are several states that don't have early voting.
Fair enough though - absentee. I lump absentee with early voting since they're essentially the same.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by ip_law-hokie »

awesome guy wrote:Clinton is in Michigan right now. Yes, she needs to defend Michigan. Trump is also there. That shows where things are right now. Just going by body language, she looks tired and defeated. Trump looks energized and charging. Could just be the different staminas or it could be they both know what's coming!
Yeah bro! [emoji106][emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by 133743Hokie »

USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
BigDave wrote:
nolanvt wrote:Is it your opinion that early/absentee voting is somehow not Constitutional? (This one is going to be fun!)
Article II Section 1 wrote:The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.
Congress set election day to be the Tuesday of the first full week of November. Voting other than that day violates the law.

On the sliding scale of "how abhorrent to the Constitution is this", allowing for absentee ballots - where you actually have a reason other than "I want to" to need to vote early isn't nearly as bad as unrestricted early voting ... but neither one is constitutional, strictly speaking.
This is not a good interpretation of this section. Congress sets the time in which states choose their electors, but how those electors are chosen is up to the state:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors...
Congress then sets the day in which the electors choose the President, which is in December. All state electors must choose on the same day. There is nothing that prevents states from allowing early voting on electors.
This is correct.

The better question is: Is there anything that prohibits a state from not allowing early voting? I don't think so.
Is this in question? There are several states that don't have early voting.
Fair enough though - absentee. I lump absentee with early voting since they're essentially the same.
No they aren't. Early votes are tabulated and included in the election day totals reported. Absentee ballots (typically a much smaller number) are usually held aside and not tabulated unless the final vote tally is close enough to justify it.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by USN_Hokie »

133743Hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:[

Congress set election day to be the Tuesday of the first full week of November. Voting other than that day violates the law.

On the sliding scale of "how abhorrent to the Constitution is this", allowing for absentee ballots - where you actually have a reason other than "I want to" to need to vote early isn't nearly as bad as unrestricted early voting ... but neither one is constitutional, strictly speaking.
This is not a good interpretation of this section. Congress sets the time in which states choose their electors, but how those electors are chosen is up to the state:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors...
Congress then sets the day in which the electors choose the President, which is in December. All state electors must choose on the same day. There is nothing that prevents states from allowing early voting on electors.
This is correct.

The better question is: Is there anything that prohibits a state from not allowing early voting? I don't think so.
Is this in question? There are several states that don't have early voting.
Fair enough though - absentee. I lump absentee with early voting since they're essentially the same.
No they aren't. Early votes are tabulated and included in the election day totals reported. Absentee ballots (typically a much smaller number) are usually held aside and not tabulated unless the final vote tally is close enough to justify it.[/quote]

Irrelevant.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by 133743Hokie »

USN_Hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Uprising wrote:[

Congress set election day to be the Tuesday of the first full week of November. Voting other than that day violates the law.

On the sliding scale of "how abhorrent to the Constitution is this", allowing for absentee ballots - where you actually have a reason other than "I want to" to need to vote early isn't nearly as bad as unrestricted early voting ... but neither one is constitutional, strictly speaking.
This is not a good interpretation of this section. Congress sets the time in which states choose their electors, but how those electors are chosen is up to the state:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors...
Congress then sets the day in which the electors choose the President, which is in December. All state electors must choose on the same day. There is nothing that prevents states from allowing early voting on electors.
This is correct.

The better question is: Is there anything that prohibits a state from not allowing early voting? I don't think so.
Is this in question? There are several states that don't have early voting.
Fair enough though - absentee. I lump absentee with early voting since they're essentially the same.
No they aren't. Early votes are tabulated and included in the election day totals reported. Absentee ballots (typically a much smaller number) are usually held aside and not tabulated unless the final vote tally is close enough to justify it.
Irrelevant.[/quote]
Hardly. Big difference, so not close to "essentially the same". You just have a very difficult time admitting when you're wrong about anything.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by USN_Hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
awesome guy wrote:Clinton is in Michigan right now. Yes, she needs to defend Michigan. Trump is also there. That shows where things are right now. Just going by body language, she looks tired and defeated. Trump looks energized and charging. Could just be the different staminas or it could be they both know what's coming!
Or, it's a head fake by Clinton to give Trump the impression he has a chance in Michigan - he doesn't.
The head fake continues! Hillary has Drumpf right where she wants him (in Wisconsin - the double secret probation head fake). :lol:
Hillary Clinton blames voter suppression for losing a state she didn't visit once during the election

Clinton also blamed her loss on Scott Walker's support for voter ID laws, accusing the Republican governor of being part of a larger effort to disenfranchise voters.

"The other thing that's in hindsight, which is really troubling is … the [Associated Press] did a really well-researched piece about voter suppression in Wisconsin, and they literally found people who showed up to vote and were turned away because Wisconsin, under the current governor, Scott Walker, has been one of the leaders in voter suppression. Making it difficult," the failed presidential candidate said.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hilla ... le/2624620
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26378
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by HokieHam »

USN_Hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
awesome guy wrote:Clinton is in Michigan right now. Yes, she needs to defend Michigan. Trump is also there. That shows where things are right now. Just going by body language, she looks tired and defeated. Trump looks energized and charging. Could just be the different staminas or it could be they both know what's coming!
Or, it's a head fake by Clinton to give Trump the impression he has a chance in Michigan - he doesn't.
The head fake continues! Hillary has Drumpf right where she wants him (in Wisconsin - the double secret probation head fake). :lol:
Hillary Clinton blames voter suppression for losing a state she didn't visit once during the election

Clinton also blamed her loss on Scott Walker's support for voter ID laws, accusing the Republican governor of being part of a larger effort to disenfranchise voters.

"The other thing that's in hindsight, which is really troubling is … the [Associated Press] did a really well-researched piece about voter suppression in Wisconsin, and they literally found people who showed up to vote and were turned away because Wisconsin, under the current governor, Scott Walker, has been one of the leaders in voter suppression. Making it difficult," the failed presidential candidate said.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hilla ... le/2624620
She's such a bitch.

It's great reading the Unusuals in this thread........
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by USN_Hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
awesome guy wrote:Clinton is in Michigan right now. Yes, she needs to defend Michigan. Trump is also there. That shows where things are right now. Just going by body language, she looks tired and defeated. Trump looks energized and charging. Could just be the different staminas or it could be they both know what's coming!
Or, it's a head fake by Clinton to give Trump the impression he has a chance in Michigan - he doesn't.
At a conference in California on Wednesday, she insisted her email mess was “the biggest nothing-burger ever” and explained that she gave those toadying Goldman Sachs speeches because, well, “They paid me.”

She also added to the list of other people responsible for her loss, insisting she inherited a mess at the Democratic National Committee — “Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong.”

Oops: Andrew Therriault, the DNC chief of data science in 2014-16, revealed an even more damning Team Hillary fail in a tweet (later deleted) slamming her for “bashing DNC data,” when the DNC models never had Michigan, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania “looking even close to safe. Her team thought they knew better.”[/b]

http://nypost.com/2017/06/01/hillary-cl ... a-new-low/


#lock
#nevergoingtostoprubbingitin
:mrgreen:
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by awesome guy »

USN_Hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
awesome guy wrote:Clinton is in Michigan right now. Yes, she needs to defend Michigan. Trump is also there. That shows where things are right now. Just going by body language, she looks tired and defeated. Trump looks energized and charging. Could just be the different staminas or it could be they both know what's coming!
Or, it's a head fake by Clinton to give Trump the impression he has a chance in Michigan - he doesn't.
At a conference in California on Wednesday, she insisted her email mess was “the biggest nothing-burger ever” and explained that she gave those toadying Goldman Sachs speeches because, well, “They paid me.”

She also added to the list of other people responsible for her loss, insisting she inherited a mess at the Democratic National Committee — “Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong.”

Oops: Andrew Therriault, the DNC chief of data science in 2014-16, revealed an even more damning Team Hillary fail in a tweet (later deleted) slamming her for “bashing DNC data,” when the DNC models never had Michigan, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania “looking even close to safe. Her team thought they knew better.”[/b]

http://nypost.com/2017/06/01/hillary-cl ... a-new-low/


#lock
#nevergoingtostoprubbingitin
:mrgreen:


haha, love seeing the trolls eat their previous snark.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26378
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Trump is outperforming Romney 130k votes in FL early vot

Post by HokieHam »

USN_Hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
awesome guy wrote:Clinton is in Michigan right now. Yes, she needs to defend Michigan. Trump is also there. That shows where things are right now. Just going by body language, she looks tired and defeated. Trump looks energized and charging. Could just be the different staminas or it could be they both know what's coming!
Or, it's a head fake by Clinton to give Trump the impression he has a chance in Michigan - he doesn't.
At a conference in California on Wednesday, she insisted her email mess was “the biggest nothing-burger ever” and explained that she gave those toadying Goldman Sachs speeches because, well, “They paid me.”

She also added to the list of other people responsible for her loss, insisting she inherited a mess at the Democratic National Committee — “Its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong.”

Oops: Andrew Therriault, the DNC chief of data science in 2014-16, revealed an even more damning Team Hillary fail in a tweet (later deleted) slamming her for “bashing DNC data,” when the DNC models never had Michigan, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania “looking even close to safe. Her team thought they knew better.”[/b]

http://nypost.com/2017/06/01/hillary-cl ... a-new-low/


#lock
#nevergoingtostoprubbingitin
:mrgreen:

Nolan...... :lol: :twisted: :lol:
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
Post Reply