Campaign Reform

[rah]

Yes, start issuing a national FREE id but not make it a requirement to vote for 10 years. if you're too lazy to get one in 10 years, you're probably not voting anyway.
Win win.

[DaShi]

But IDs won't end voter fraud (or even make a significant impact in it) and have been proven to disenfranchise legitimate voters.

[Proteus_MST]

But IDs won't end voter fraud (or even make a significant impact in it) and have been proven to disenfranchise legitimate voters.

In germany it is done by not letting the people choose freely where they vote.
Instead, several weeks beforte the election, everyone eligible for vote gets a letter where he gets assigned to a polling station near the place where s/he lives.
Now he has 3 choices:
1. Either use the polling station that was assigned to him
2. Send a reply that he would like to use another polling station at a specific place
3. Send a reply that he wants to use voting via mail

The polling stations as well have lists with the name of every person that is supposed to vote there (so you cannot just, last minute, decide to go to another polling station) and after someone has voted, his name is crossed out in those lists.

Of course, such a system requires that the state knows where his citizens live (i.e. that places like residents registration offices exist).
Dunno if this is the case in the USA, or if this also is seen as too much state influence and therefore fought against as hard as any attempts at enforcing the mandatory possession of a national ID card

[rah]

No it won't end it, but it may have some impact. And if you give people 10 years to get them I really don't think the disenfranchise aspect comes into play.
I can't believe we don't have a national ID, but am sensetive to the disenfranchise argument.

[DaShi]

IDs won't have any significant impact. They never have. The only impact has been to disenfranchise people. In North Carolina it was proven that the only reason for the law was to keep blacks from voting. Anyone who tells you that IDs prevent voter fraud is feeding you a pile of horse****.

[rah]

I think it prevents some, but agreed very little. And not having it be required for voting for 10 years eliminates the disenfranchised aspect, imo.
It's just one aspect of a national ID. Why should blacks be denied an ID that could benefit them in other areas. It could help getting bank accounts, help them cash checks easier. There are many transactions that a national ID could make available. We should be going out of our way to make sure ALL people have an ID made available to them for FREE.

[giblets]

But IDs won't end voter fraud (or even make a significant impact in it) and have been proven to disenfranchise legitimate voters.

Are you suggesting someone might use a fake ID for nefarious reasons? That's nonsense.

[BlackCat]

Doesn't IRS have exact information about every citizen in US ? Maybe they could send out such letters Proteus mention.

[The Mad Monk]

I think the purpose of long queues is to discourage people in urban districts (likely Democrats) from voting.

Given that the vote is run at the county level, that would be rather surprising.

[The Mad Monk]

In germany it is done by not letting the people choose freely where they vote.
Instead, several weeks beforte the election, everyone eligible for vote gets a letter where he gets assigned to a polling station near the place where s/he lives.
Now he has 3 choices:
1. Either use the polling station that was assigned to him
2. Send a reply that he would like to use another polling station at a specific place
3. Send a reply that he wants to use voting via mail

The polling stations as well have lists with the name of every person that is supposed to vote there (so you cannot just, last minute, decide to go to another polling station) and after someone has voted, his name is crossed out in those lists.

Of course, such a system requires that the state knows where his citizens live (i.e. that places like residents registration offices exist).
Dunno if this is the case in the USA, or if this also is seen as too much state influence and therefore fought against as hard as any attempts at enforcing the mandatory possession of a national ID card

I don't know about other regions in the United States, but in Kansas and New Jersey I know for a fact that we used assigned polling places, and if you end up at the wrong one, they will direct you to the correct one -- and yes, there are lists. In New Jersey I would arrive at my polling place, they would open an ancient-looking ledger to my page (my own page!), and I would sign on the indicated line, below all of my other signatures from previous years.

By the time I got to Kansas, Kansas had adopted computerized systems.

[kentonio]

I don't know about other regions in the United States, but in Kansas and New Jersey I know for a fact that we used assigned polling places, and if you end up at the wrong one, they will direct you to the correct one -- and yes, there are lists. In New Jersey I would arrive at my polling place, they would open an ancient-looking ledger to my page (my own page!), and I would sign on the indicated line, below all of my other signatures from previous years.

By the time I got to Kansas, Kansas had adopted computerized systems.

You had your own page?!!? Posh ****ers.

[Ben Kenobi]

Why should blacks be denied an ID that could benefit them in other areas. It could help getting bank accounts, help them cash checks easier. There are many transactions that a national ID could make available. We should be going out of our way to make sure ALL people have an ID made available to them for FREE.

Yeah, because 20 bucks is so expensive. I've done it for others before, and I'm really not sympathetic to Americans who could get it but haven't.

[Proteus_MST]

Regarding the electoral college I have found a good graphics on imgur that illustrates the idiocy (and also the obstacle to any 3rd party gaining power) of the system with the electoral college and "all or nothing".

The 1992 election:


Roughly 105 million americans voted and Ross Perot (with his own party) got ~20 million of the votes, so ~20% of all votes that were cast went to Ross Perot. Nevertheless, due to the distribution of the votes (and the counties he won) and the "all or nothing"-principle he got not a single electoral vote and all electoral votes either went to democrats or the GOP.

[giblets]

At least in that election the candidate with the most votes won.

[Proteus_MST]

At least in that election the candidate with the most votes won.

True

I wonder ... what would be the lowest percentage of popular votes, that would still enable a candidate to become president (under the electoral college system)?