GOP wants to protect right to vote ? for right people

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/con...11/12/tucked_1112.html

Atlanta Journal Constitution Editor Cynthia Tucker

For several years, Republicans have waged a brilliant, Machiavellian campaign against the right to vote, persuading Americans that fair elections were under attack from a widespread and pernicious campaign of voter fraud. It?s classic sophistry; there is virtually no fraud by fake voters showing up at the polls.

Nevertheless, the voter-suppression campaign succeeded in state legislatures, where Republicans passed restrictive voter ID laws, and in courtrooms, where judges upheld them. Republicans also won the public relations battle, taking on a veneer of moral authority as they posed as protectors of the ballot.

But Barack Obama?s awesome get-out-the-vote machine overwhelmed the GOP?s cynical tactics, which had depended on shaving off a few hundred or a few thousand votes of poor and elderly Americans who didn?t have driver?s licenses, and who just happened to tend to vote for Democrats. In Obama?s winning campaign, the GOP couldn?t deter enough Democratic voters to make a difference.

Republicans didn?t just lose the presidency and congressional seats around the country. They also lost the veneer of respectability covering their campaign to block the ballot. They panicked as Obama?s poll numbers rose and in their desperation, they began throwing out one tactic after another to try to discourage voters from going to the polls. The alarm they raised was so absurd that it was comical.

Karen Handel, Georgia?s GOP secretary of state, became a partisan martinet, the Katherine Harris of this campaign. (You may remember Harris as the Republican secretary of state who dutifully carried water for George W. Bush in Florida eight years ago.) Handel took aim at Jim Powell, a Democrat running for the Public Service Commission, insisting that he didn?t meet residency requirements. Even though courts kept ruling against her, she kept after Powell until she was finally slapped down by a unanimous ruling of the Georgia Supreme Court.

But she was undeterred, finding other ways to harass Democrats. Having first declared that Democrats were having little luck registering new voters, she later did every thing she could to try to keep as many new voters as possible from casting a ballot. The Department of Justice finally put state election officials on notice because they subjected an unusually high number of registered voters to background checks. It later turned out that, in most cases, errors such as typos in electronic databases were the problem, not voter fraud.

And when Handel saw that legally registered voters were enduring four- to six-hour waits to vote early, she refused to try to extend early-voting hours, hiding behind the claim that Georgia law didn?t explicitly give her authority to do so. Operating under a similar law, however, Florida Gov. Charlie Christ extended early voting there.


(On the other hand, Handel is correct to investigate Fulton County?s lengthy and disorganized process for counting absentee ballots. Election officials allowed workers to leave the premise and return later to finish the task, in apparent violation of laws intended to guarantee ballot security.)

Meanwhile, state Rep. Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) actually denounced early voting, even though he and other GOP officials had voted in favor of the practice earlier this year as a way to make elections more convenient for their suburban constituents. Johnson lost his enthusiasm for early voting when he saw hundreds of thousands of black Georgians taking advantage of it.

?Even if it was well-intentioned, we may find that we?ve opened up more opportunities for those people who are looking for ways to cheat,? Johnson said, adding that early voting allows ?the ability to have time to go out there and pick up homeless people, and carry them to the polls, and register cats. It just opens up a 30-day period of time when, if your goal is to undermine democracy, you?ve got 30 days to do it instead of one.?

Johnson didn?t explain how cheating is any more likely with early voting than with Election Day balloting, since the same state-sponsored photo identification is required for both. Instead, he and Handel managed to shred their carefully constructed rationale for harassing legally qualified voters. Their campaign against voter fraud is, well, a fraud.



So, this raises the questions:
Has the Republican party, or at least elements of it, become a terrorist organizaton in its attempts to deny Americans their right to vote?
Or if not terrorism, is it fair to say they just want to disenfranchise Americans?

And it also raises the question:
If you are an elected official and you misuse your office by acting in a manner that denies people the right to vote, despite your knowing your actions are not based on fact, should it be a crime?
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Originally posted by: techs
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/con...11/12/tucked_1112.html

Atlanta Journal Constitution Editor Cynthia Tucker

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/con...11/12/tucked_1112.html

For several years, Republicans have waged a brilliant, Machiavellian campaign against the right to vote, persuading Americans that fair elections were under attack from a widespread and pernicious campaign of voter fraud. It?s classic sophistry; there is virtually no fraud by fake voters showing up at the polls.

Nevertheless, the voter-suppression campaign succeeded in state legislatures, where Republicans passed restrictive voter ID laws, and in courtrooms, where judges upheld them. Republicans also won the public relations battle, taking on a veneer of moral authority as they posed as protectors of the ballot.

But Barack Obama?s awesome get-out-the-vote machine overwhelmed the GOP?s cynical tactics, which had depended on shaving off a few hundred or a few thousand votes of poor and elderly Americans who didn?t have driver?s licenses, and who just happened to tend to vote for Democrats. In Obama?s winning campaign, the GOP couldn?t deter enough Democratic voters to make a difference.

Republicans didn?t just lose the presidency and congressional seats around the country. They also lost the veneer of respectability covering their campaign to block the ballot. They panicked as Obama?s poll numbers rose and in their desperation, they began throwing out one tactic after another to try to discourage voters from going to the polls. The alarm they raised was so absurd that it was comical.

Karen Handel, Georgia?s GOP secretary of state, became a partisan martinet, the Katherine Harris of this campaign. (You may remember Harris as the Republican secretary of state who dutifully carried water for George W. Bush in Florida eight years ago.) Handel took aim at Jim Powell, a Democrat running for the Public Service Commission, insisting that he didn?t meet residency requirements. Even though courts kept ruling against her, she kept after Powell until she was finally slapped down by a unanimous ruling of the Georgia Supreme Court.

But she was undeterred, finding other ways to harass Democrats. Having first declared that Democrats were having little luck registering new voters, she later did every thing she could to try to keep as many new voters as possible from casting a ballot. The Department of Justice finally put state election officials on notice because they subjected an unusually high number of registered voters to background checks. It later turned out that, in most cases, errors such as typos in electronic databases were the problem, not voter fraud.

And when Handel saw that legally registered voters were enduring four- to six-hour waits to vote early, she refused to try to extend early-voting hours, hiding behind the claim that Georgia law didn?t explicitly give her authority to do so. Operating under a similar law, however, Florida Gov. Charlie Christ extended early voting there.


(On the other hand, Handel is correct to investigate Fulton County?s lengthy and disorganized process for counting absentee ballots. Election officials allowed workers to leave the premise and return later to finish the task, in apparent violation of laws intended to guarantee ballot security.)

Meanwhile, state Rep. Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) actually denounced early voting, even though he and other GOP officials had voted in favor of the practice earlier this year as a way to make elections more convenient for their suburban constituents. Johnson lost his enthusiasm for early voting when he saw hundreds of thousands of black Georgians taking advantage of it.

?Even if it was well-intentioned, we may find that we?ve opened up more opportunities for those people who are looking for ways to cheat,? Johnson said, adding that early voting allows ?the ability to have time to go out there and pick up homeless people, and carry them to the polls, and register cats. It just opens up a 30-day period of time when, if your goal is to undermine democracy, you?ve got 30 days to do it instead of one.?

Johnson didn?t explain how cheating is any more likely with early voting than with Election Day balloting, since the same state-sponsored photo identification is required for both. Instead, he and Handel managed to shred their carefully constructed rationale for harassing legally qualified voters. Their campaign against voter fraud is, well, a fraud.



So, this raises the questions:
Has the Republican party, or at least elements of it, become a terrorist organizaton in its attempts to deny Americans their right to vote?
Or if not terrorism, is it fair to say they just want to disenfranchise Americans?

And it also raises the question:
If you are an elected official and you misuse your office by acting in a manner that denies people the right to vote, despite your knowing your actions are not based on fact, should it be a crime?

If supporting voter ID is terrorism, then 77% of the country are on the terrorist's side.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,085
5,618
126
Originally posted by: glenn1
Originally posted by: techs
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/con...11/12/tucked_1112.html

Atlanta Journal Constitution Editor Cynthia Tucker

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/con...11/12/tucked_1112.html

For several years, Republicans have waged a brilliant, Machiavellian campaign against the right to vote, persuading Americans that fair elections were under attack from a widespread and pernicious campaign of voter fraud. It?s classic sophistry; there is virtually no fraud by fake voters showing up at the polls.

Nevertheless, the voter-suppression campaign succeeded in state legislatures, where Republicans passed restrictive voter ID laws, and in courtrooms, where judges upheld them. Republicans also won the public relations battle, taking on a veneer of moral authority as they posed as protectors of the ballot.

But Barack Obama?s awesome get-out-the-vote machine overwhelmed the GOP?s cynical tactics, which had depended on shaving off a few hundred or a few thousand votes of poor and elderly Americans who didn?t have driver?s licenses, and who just happened to tend to vote for Democrats. In Obama?s winning campaign, the GOP couldn?t deter enough Democratic voters to make a difference.

Republicans didn?t just lose the presidency and congressional seats around the country. They also lost the veneer of respectability covering their campaign to block the ballot. They panicked as Obama?s poll numbers rose and in their desperation, they began throwing out one tactic after another to try to discourage voters from going to the polls. The alarm they raised was so absurd that it was comical.

Karen Handel, Georgia?s GOP secretary of state, became a partisan martinet, the Katherine Harris of this campaign. (You may remember Harris as the Republican secretary of state who dutifully carried water for George W. Bush in Florida eight years ago.) Handel took aim at Jim Powell, a Democrat running for the Public Service Commission, insisting that he didn?t meet residency requirements. Even though courts kept ruling against her, she kept after Powell until she was finally slapped down by a unanimous ruling of the Georgia Supreme Court.

But she was undeterred, finding other ways to harass Democrats. Having first declared that Democrats were having little luck registering new voters, she later did every thing she could to try to keep as many new voters as possible from casting a ballot. The Department of Justice finally put state election officials on notice because they subjected an unusually high number of registered voters to background checks. It later turned out that, in most cases, errors such as typos in electronic databases were the problem, not voter fraud.

And when Handel saw that legally registered voters were enduring four- to six-hour waits to vote early, she refused to try to extend early-voting hours, hiding behind the claim that Georgia law didn?t explicitly give her authority to do so. Operating under a similar law, however, Florida Gov. Charlie Christ extended early voting there.


(On the other hand, Handel is correct to investigate Fulton County?s lengthy and disorganized process for counting absentee ballots. Election officials allowed workers to leave the premise and return later to finish the task, in apparent violation of laws intended to guarantee ballot security.)

Meanwhile, state Rep. Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) actually denounced early voting, even though he and other GOP officials had voted in favor of the practice earlier this year as a way to make elections more convenient for their suburban constituents. Johnson lost his enthusiasm for early voting when he saw hundreds of thousands of black Georgians taking advantage of it.

?Even if it was well-intentioned, we may find that we?ve opened up more opportunities for those people who are looking for ways to cheat,? Johnson said, adding that early voting allows ?the ability to have time to go out there and pick up homeless people, and carry them to the polls, and register cats. It just opens up a 30-day period of time when, if your goal is to undermine democracy, you?ve got 30 days to do it instead of one.?

Johnson didn?t explain how cheating is any more likely with early voting than with Election Day balloting, since the same state-sponsored photo identification is required for both. Instead, he and Handel managed to shred their carefully constructed rationale for harassing legally qualified voters. Their campaign against voter fraud is, well, a fraud.



So, this raises the questions:
Has the Republican party, or at least elements of it, become a terrorist organizaton in its attempts to deny Americans their right to vote?
Or if not terrorism, is it fair to say they just want to disenfranchise Americans?

And it also raises the question:
If you are an elected official and you misuse your office by acting in a manner that denies people the right to vote, despite your knowing your actions are not based on fact, should it be a crime?

If supporting voter ID is terrorism, then 77% of the country are on the terrorist's side.

ID is ok, but if there is to be a Requirement, it has to be attainable by Everyone regardless of their Economic situation. This would involve the Poorest being able to recieve such ID at no Cost, if necessary.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: techs
So, this raises the questions:
Has the Republican party, or at least elements of it, become a terrorist organizaton in its attempts to deny Americans their right to vote?
Or if not terrorism, is it fair to say they just want to disenfranchise Americans?

No, and no.

/thread
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: glenn1
Originally posted by: techs
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/con...11/12/tucked_1112.html

Atlanta Journal Constitution Editor Cynthia Tucker

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/con...11/12/tucked_1112.html

For several years, Republicans have waged a brilliant, Machiavellian campaign against the right to vote, persuading Americans that fair elections were under attack from a widespread and pernicious campaign of voter fraud. It?s classic sophistry; there is virtually no fraud by fake voters showing up at the polls.

Nevertheless, the voter-suppression campaign succeeded in state legislatures, where Republicans passed restrictive voter ID laws, and in courtrooms, where judges upheld them. Republicans also won the public relations battle, taking on a veneer of moral authority as they posed as protectors of the ballot.

But Barack Obama?s awesome get-out-the-vote machine overwhelmed the GOP?s cynical tactics, which had depended on shaving off a few hundred or a few thousand votes of poor and elderly Americans who didn?t have driver?s licenses, and who just happened to tend to vote for Democrats. In Obama?s winning campaign, the GOP couldn?t deter enough Democratic voters to make a difference.

Republicans didn?t just lose the presidency and congressional seats around the country. They also lost the veneer of respectability covering their campaign to block the ballot. They panicked as Obama?s poll numbers rose and in their desperation, they began throwing out one tactic after another to try to discourage voters from going to the polls. The alarm they raised was so absurd that it was comical.

Karen Handel, Georgia?s GOP secretary of state, became a partisan martinet, the Katherine Harris of this campaign. (You may remember Harris as the Republican secretary of state who dutifully carried water for George W. Bush in Florida eight years ago.) Handel took aim at Jim Powell, a Democrat running for the Public Service Commission, insisting that he didn?t meet residency requirements. Even though courts kept ruling against her, she kept after Powell until she was finally slapped down by a unanimous ruling of the Georgia Supreme Court.

But she was undeterred, finding other ways to harass Democrats. Having first declared that Democrats were having little luck registering new voters, she later did every thing she could to try to keep as many new voters as possible from casting a ballot. The Department of Justice finally put state election officials on notice because they subjected an unusually high number of registered voters to background checks. It later turned out that, in most cases, errors such as typos in electronic databases were the problem, not voter fraud.

And when Handel saw that legally registered voters were enduring four- to six-hour waits to vote early, she refused to try to extend early-voting hours, hiding behind the claim that Georgia law didn?t explicitly give her authority to do so. Operating under a similar law, however, Florida Gov. Charlie Christ extended early voting there.


(On the other hand, Handel is correct to investigate Fulton County?s lengthy and disorganized process for counting absentee ballots. Election officials allowed workers to leave the premise and return later to finish the task, in apparent violation of laws intended to guarantee ballot security.)

Meanwhile, state Rep. Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) actually denounced early voting, even though he and other GOP officials had voted in favor of the practice earlier this year as a way to make elections more convenient for their suburban constituents. Johnson lost his enthusiasm for early voting when he saw hundreds of thousands of black Georgians taking advantage of it.

?Even if it was well-intentioned, we may find that we?ve opened up more opportunities for those people who are looking for ways to cheat,? Johnson said, adding that early voting allows ?the ability to have time to go out there and pick up homeless people, and carry them to the polls, and register cats. It just opens up a 30-day period of time when, if your goal is to undermine democracy, you?ve got 30 days to do it instead of one.?

Johnson didn?t explain how cheating is any more likely with early voting than with Election Day balloting, since the same state-sponsored photo identification is required for both. Instead, he and Handel managed to shred their carefully constructed rationale for harassing legally qualified voters. Their campaign against voter fraud is, well, a fraud.



So, this raises the questions:
Has the Republican party, or at least elements of it, become a terrorist organizaton in its attempts to deny Americans their right to vote?
Or if not terrorism, is it fair to say they just want to disenfranchise Americans?

And it also raises the question:
If you are an elected official and you misuse your office by acting in a manner that denies people the right to vote, despite your knowing your actions are not based on fact, should it be a crime?

If supporting voter ID is terrorism, then 77% of the country are on the terrorist's side.

ID is ok, but if there is to be a Requirement, it has to be attainable by Everyone regardless of their Economic situation. This would involve the Poorest being able to recieve such ID at no Cost, if necessary.
Well, I think the idea is as much the time it takes to go and get a picture I.D. If you want to vote, first you have to find a birth certificate, and another form of i.d. (and most states require at least one them to be a picture i.d.). Then you need to go to your Department of Motor Vehicle (in most states). Then you are ready to register. And then you have to hope some scumbag Republican doesn't purge you because of minor error in spelling etc. Then you have to actually go and vote.
It does seem like its designed to make it harder for people, especially working class people, to vote.

 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Originally posted by: sandorski

ID is ok, but if there is to be a Requirement, it has to be attainable by Everyone regardless of their Economic situation. This would involve the Poorest being able to recieve such ID at no Cost, if necessary.

I don't have a problem with that, although most Voter ID laws that I've heard of always include a failsafe of some kind - either they allowing those without ID to vote a provisional ballot, or to vote normally after executing an affadavit of eligibility. With that in mind, it's probably fair to say that both sides greatly exaggerate the risks they cite (Republicans of phantom voters, Democrats of voters who can't afford a photo ID and are thus disenfranchised).
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
This kind of thing has been going on for a long long time in a lot of places, but it has mostly been considered a separate series of local incidents. Maybe now some will wonder if they are part of a national strategy instead.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: techs
Well, I think the idea is as much the time it takes to go and get a picture I.D. If you want to vote, first you have to find a birth certificate, and another form of i.d. (and most states require at least one them to be a picture i.d.). Then you need to go to your Department of Motor Vehicle (in most states). Then you are ready to register. And then you have to hope some scumbag Republican doesn't purge you because of minor error in spelling etc. Then you have to actually go and vote.
It does seem like its designed to make it harder for people, especially working class people, to vote.
And over a 1-2 year period people can not find 1-2 hours to accomplish this.

Seems like those that do not want to put the effort into making sure the process has no flaws should not complain.

And of course, no Democrat would make any type of error. After dead people can not register or vote.

 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: techs
Well, I think the idea is as much the time it takes to go and get a picture I.D. If you want to vote, first you have to find a birth certificate, and another form of i.d. (and most states require at least one them to be a picture i.d.). Then you need to go to your Department of Motor Vehicle (in most states). Then you are ready to register. And then you have to hope some scumbag Republican doesn't purge you because of minor error in spelling etc. Then you have to actually go and vote.
It does seem like its designed to make it harder for people, especially working class people, to vote.
I'm sorry, have Republicans been in power of all forms of all governments at all times in history controlling all election regulations, up through this 2008 election?

This only seems like a problem because you see a big R at the top of the article. :roll:
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
And of course, no Democrat would make any type of error. After dead people can not register or vote.

There are no dead people in Chicago, didn't you know that? They are just "resting" in the graves, and still firmly believe in a liberal America.
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: techs
Well, I think the idea is as much the time it takes to go and get a picture I.D. If you want to vote, first you have to find a birth certificate, and another form of i.d. (and most states require at least one them to be a picture i.d.). Then you need to go to your Department of Motor Vehicle (in most states). Then you are ready to register. And then you have to hope some scumbag Republican doesn't purge you because of minor error in spelling etc. Then you have to actually go and vote.
It does seem like its designed to make it harder for people, especially working class people, to vote.

Grasping a bit eh? I am a working class person and I have a drivers license, birth certificate, and a passport....

I see no problem with requiring a picture photo ID and wish that my state did.

How easy should it be? really?
 

Insomniator

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2002
6,294
171
106
I didn't know a picture ID was not required to vote?

Who doesn't have a picture ID?! It should obviously be a requirement...
 

synapsetx

Member
Sep 19, 2008
36
0
0
Personally, I'd be willing to trade Voter ID for the following:

1) State ID can be issued for no-cost to those on any form of government assistance program.
2) Post Office is required to provide change-of address forms to the voter registrar.
3) Connecting Government databases so that updating address for Social Security, Driver's License, Tax filing, all provide an auto-registration to vote and/or update to existing registration.
4) Removing any voter from the list must be completed 30 days prior to the cutoff for registration, with an official notice sent to the last known address.
5) Mandatory 10 business days of early voting for all states.
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: synapsetx

5) Mandatory 10 business days of early voting for all states.

Umm at this point would it still be considered early then? they should just give everyone an entire week to vote but even with that many such as myself would put it off for the last day
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: sandorski

ID is ok, but if there is to be a Requirement, it has to be attainable by Everyone regardless of their Economic situation. This would involve the Poorest being able to recieve such ID at no Cost, if necessary.

If fair elections means, free IDs, so be it.

But lets be honest, a $20 ID that is good for 4-10 years is not much of hurdle to clear to vote.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: synapsetx
Personally, I'd be willing to trade Voter ID for the following:

1) State ID can be issued for no-cost to those on any form of government assistance program.
2) Post Office is required to provide change-of address forms to the voter registrar.
3) Connecting Government databases so that updating address for Social Security, Driver's License, Tax filing, all provide an auto-registration to vote and/or update to existing registration.
4) Removing any voter from the list must be completed 30 days prior to the cutoff for registration, with an official notice sent to the last known address.
5) Mandatory 10 business days of early voting for all states.

4a. All new voter registration must be turned 30 days before election day, so registrants can be verified.


5. Most states already have early voting, so this is not much of a point. I would rather us all vote on one day, which means there must be enough facilities to handle that load.
 

robphelan

Diamond Member
Aug 28, 2003
4,085
17
81
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: synapsetx
Personally, I'd be willing to trade Voter ID for the following:

1) State ID can be issued for no-cost to those on any form of government assistance program.
2) Post Office is required to provide change-of address forms to the voter registrar.
3) Connecting Government databases so that updating address for Social Security, Driver's License, Tax filing, all provide an auto-registration to vote and/or update to existing registration.
4) Removing any voter from the list must be completed 30 days prior to the cutoff for registration, with an official notice sent to the last known address.
5) Mandatory 10 business days of early voting for all states.

4a. All new voter registration must be turned 30 days before election day, so registrants can be verified.


5. Most states already have early voting, so this is not much of a point. I would rather us all vote on one day, which means there must be enough facilities to handle that load.

so you have tens of miillions of people in line at the same time all over the country. I can't think of a better way to disuade someone from voting

 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
It is so ironic to listen to liberals talk about protecting the right to vote when the guy they just elected President got everyone who ran against him disqualified in his first election.

I guess protecting the right to vote does not extend to protecting who you CAN vote for.

This is also the same group of people who want to take the right to vote away from people when it comes to union elections.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
Originally posted by: robphelan
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: synapsetx
Personally, I'd be willing to trade Voter ID for the following:

1) State ID can be issued for no-cost to those on any form of government assistance program.
2) Post Office is required to provide change-of address forms to the voter registrar.
3) Connecting Government databases so that updating address for Social Security, Driver's License, Tax filing, all provide an auto-registration to vote and/or update to existing registration.
4) Removing any voter from the list must be completed 30 days prior to the cutoff for registration, with an official notice sent to the last known address.
5) Mandatory 10 business days of early voting for all states.

4a. All new voter registration must be turned 30 days before election day, so registrants can be verified.


5. Most states already have early voting, so this is not much of a point. I would rather us all vote on one day, which means there must be enough facilities to handle that load.
so you have tens of miillions of people in line at the same time all over the country. I can't think of a better way to disuade someone from voting
ummm in most parts of the country the lines on election day were much shorter than the lines at the early voting places.

Orange Country FL (Orlando) had 10 places open for early voting and around 300 open on election day.

145,000 people voted early, or 14000 per polling places whole 600,000 voted on election day or 2000 per place. Early voting did take place over 12 days so there were only 800-1000 people voting per day, but I imagine that the places open on election day had more booths and workers on election day.