Election Day 2024 🇺🇸💙🗳️

[Free]

Geez, how many now? Five? Six?

It's not my job to keep count. That's in the CFO's hands.

 

[Willow Matthews]

So, I'm reading a comment on the Guardian, written by an American living in Australia for quite some time, one who is eligible to vote in America and did so.

They write that, perhaps it would be better if Americans were introduced to compulsory voting.
I'm interested in your thoughts on this.
The only compulsory part is fronting up to vote.
What you do with that vote is up to you.
You can naturally, vote.
You can eat it, tear it up, make a bow out of it. Draw a dick on it if you want to, and pop it in the box.
Your choice. If you choose not to have a voice. That's perfectly fucking fine, you just need to show up.

How many Americans didn't vote? Would that have made a difference?
Would more people engage and less not have to google about Biden being on the ticket the day of the election if so?

Here, if you don't front up to get your name ticked off, you might cop a small fine, but we also can vote early, do a postal vote, or have a reasonable excuse not to do so avoiding that fine.

We also get to buy a democracy sausage in a slice of bread with tommy sauce for a steal. (about $2 or so depending on the voting place).
It's usually a school and the proceeds go to that school and is run by volunteers.

Actual voting day is ALWAYS a Saturday and is open from 8 am to 6 pm.

Would more people getting out to vote because it's a requirement have made a difference?
Would it mean less needed to be spent on campaigning therefore less donations needed?
Would it help at all?

If so, would it ever happen?

I dunno. Enlighten me.

 

[Casey Pelous]

Considering one of the GOP's fundamental strategies is preventing The Wrong People from voting, I don't like its chances, Willow Matthews .

 

[Beebo Brink]

They write that, perhaps it would be better if Americans were introduced to compulsory voting.

So here is some context on voting in the U.S. Democrats are trying to make it easier to register to vote and then to cast ballots, while the GOP is doing everything in its power to make registration as difficult as possible and to make voting as difficult as possible in minority precincts.

Most recently, as in this year 2024, there was an attempt by the GOP to pass legislation that would require people's names on their birth certificate to exactly match their name on their ID in order to qualify for valid voter registration. Sounds simple enough, eh? Only most married women use a different name than the one on their birth certificate. Unless they could produce a legal change of name through the courts, they would not be able to register. Quick way to disenfranchise enough women to undercut their influence in elections, while leaving the constitutional right to vote intact.

To discourage voter registration among minorities, a common tactic is to drastically limit the locations in which they can register and to set hours that are difficult for working people to catch without missing work. That creates a powerful financial disincentive to even register. The GOP extends that same tactic to voting itself -- such as creating fewer voting precincts and assigning fewer machines in minority communities, so there are long waits.

So mandatory voting of registered voters is kinda pointless in the face of hurdles that keep people from registering to begin with. It presumes that the goal is for people to vote, when we have a major (now ruling) political party which is actively opposed to people voting.

 

[detrius]

So, I'm reading a comment on the Guardian, written by an American living in Australia for quite some time, one who is eligible to vote in America and did so.

They write that, perhaps it would be better if Americans were introduced to compulsory voting.
I'm interested in your thoughts on this.
The only compulsory part is fronting up to vote.
What you do with that vote is up to you.
You can naturally, vote.
You can eat it, tear it up, make a bow out of it. Draw a dick on it if you want to, and pop it in the box.
Your choice. If you choose not to have a voice. That's perfectly fucking fine, you just need to show up.

How many Americans didn't vote? Would that have made a difference?
Would more people engage and less not have to google about Biden being on the ticket the day of the election if so?

Here, if you don't front up to get your name ticked off, you might cop a small fine, but we also can vote early, do a postal vote, or have a reasonable excuse not to do so avoiding that fine.

We also get to buy a democracy sausage in a slice of bread with tommy sauce for a steal. (about $2 or so depending on the voting place).
It's usually a school and the proceeds go to that school and is run by volunteers.

Actual voting day is ALWAYS a Saturday and is open from 8 am to 6 pm.

Would more people getting out to vote because it's a requirement have made a difference?
Would it mean less needed to be spent on campaigning therefore less donations needed?
Would it help at all?

If so, would it ever happen?

I dunno. Enlighten me.

Sure it would help - along with discarding the electoral college, introducing single transferable voting, reforming the Supreme Court, overturning "Citizens United" etc.

The problem is that American society right now doesn't even have a firm grasp on some fundamental concepts that are basic requirements for any kind of democratic reforms, like "solidarity" or "pluralism".

 

[Willow Matthews]

So here is some context on voting in the U.S. Democrats are trying to make it easier to register to vote and then to cast ballots, while the GOP is doing everything in its power to make registration as difficult as possible and to make voting as difficult as possible in minority precincts.

Most recently, as in this year 2024, there was an attempt by the GOP to pass legislation that would require people's names on their birth certificate to exactly match their name on their ID in order to qualify for valid voter registration. Sounds simple enough, eh? Only most married women use a different name than the one on their birth certificate. Unless they could produce a legal change of name through the courts, they would not be able to register. Quick way to disenfranchise enough women to undercut their influence in elections, while leaving the constitutional right to vote intact.

To discourage voter registration among minorities, a common tactic is to drastically limit the locations in which they can register and to set hours that are difficult for working people to catch without missing work. That creates a powerful financial disincentive to even register. The GOP extends that same tactic to voting itself -- such as creating fewer voting precincts and assigning fewer machines in minority communities, so there are long waits.

So mandatory voting of registered voters is kinda pointless in the face of hurdles that keep people from registering to begin with. It presumes that the goal is for people to vote, when we have a major (now ruling) political party which is actively opposed to people voting.

So, doing something as simple as we do, that's going to the Australian Electoral Commission and just chucking your details in wouldn't be a thing Americans would be allowed to do? Because the right wing does not want them to be educated. We do need to update change of address in a timely fashion, but that's it really.

Seriously fucked Beebs. You're all behind the eightball just trying to freaking vote, and that isn't cool. And why register one way or the other (or indi) if you don't want to? Whose godawful idea was that?

 

[Willow Matthews]

Also, you're all missing out on a nice democracy snag on the day. Criminal. (sorry, I'm trying to smile about something....)

 

[Willow Matthews]

Don't get me started on the Electoral college bull crud. I'm sure it makes most states feel like they have lost before they've begun no matter how they chose to vote.

 

[Willow Matthews]

Just putting it out there. I'm 57 single and never been married.......
And I love you all.

 

[Katheryne Helendale]

Rhe gender argument gets more infuriating because Clinton is often looped i to it. Harris was a way better candidate than Clinto who was kind of shitty and broken and had plenty of really bad policies in the past and really shady crap around the Clinton Foundation work. Clinton lost because she was a bad choice. Harris lost because Dem policies are not meshing with the majority of people.

They are not the same at all.

Harris lost for two reasons, in my opinion:

1. A carton of eggs costs more now than in the early days of the pandemic, and,

2. Because Harris lacks a fucking penis between her legs!

Basically, misogyny and ignorance of how the economy works are very much alive and well in America!

Edit: Fucking autocorrect!

 

[Katheryne Helendale]

"She just wasn't a good candidate"

 

[detrius]

Don't get me started on the Electoral college bull crud. I'm sure it makes most states feel like they have lost before they've begun no matter how they chose to vote.

The most poignant description of America's democracy that I've heard was something along the lines of "Oh, they collect the votes and count them. Then they throw them away".



I like this description because it completely omits how America goes from voting to having a functioning government (it doesn't) while at the same time making it clear that getting rid of votes is an essential part of the process.

 

[Noodles]

The most poignant description of America's democracy that I've heard was something along the lines of "Oh, they collect the votes and count them. Then they throw them away".

I live in a red district in a reliably blue state, and always vote blue.

You want to talk about feeling pointless....

 

[Beebo Brink]

The count isn't over, btw. All this talk about Trump winning the popular vote isn't necessarily true, but of course he's claiming it already. It could be weeks before we have a true tally of where Harris and Trump stand on the national level.

 

[Erich Templar]

The count isn't over, btw. All this talk about Trump winning the popular vote isn't necessarily true, but of course he's claiming it already. It could be weeks before we have a true tally of where Harris and Trump stand on the national level.

Someone's going to have to explain it to this ignorant Brit. What is the point of the popular vote? (Apart from bragging rights). Does it actually have a tangible result of some kind?

 

[Beebo Brink]

Someone's going to have to explain it to this ignorant Brit. What is the point of the popular vote? (Apart from bragging rights). Does it actually have a tangible result of some kind?

No, no significance in a practical sense. It's just salt in the wound. But every four years we Dems remind everyone that the Electoral College did this, it elected a president that "should" have lost.

 

[detrius]

Just seen on temu.com.

They gave him a chin scrotum!



Also, I know how to tie knots and can think of a different way of hanging that figure on a Christmas tree.

 

[Free]

They gave him a chin scrotum!

God did that.

 

[Madi Perth]

Just seen on temu.com.

I want about a dozen of these, maybe two dozen.

 

[Cindy Claveau]

The count isn't over, btw. All this talk about Trump winning the popular vote isn't necessarily true, but of course he's claiming it already. It could be weeks before we have a true tally of where Harris and Trump stand on the national level.

True. But what we do know for certain right now is that 15 million people who voted for Biden 4 years ago did NOT vote this time.

That was the race.