Social Question

jerv's avatar

What are your thoughts on the GOP trying to restrict voting rights?

Asked by jerv (29055 points ) March 8th, 2011

I found an article on Yahoo! News that I will reprint here for those who don’t feel like following links.
———

Ahead of the 2012 campaign, states debate voting rights

If some GOP lawmakers get their way, it could be a whole lot tougher for people across the country to cast a ballot in the upcoming 2012 presidential election.

Boosted by major electoral gains in state legislatures nationwide in the 2010 campaign, Republican lawmakers in 32 states are pushing measures that would require citizens to show a state identification or proof of citizenship to vote. Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, GOP lawmakers are proposing new limits on college students who vote in the state, potentially eliminating a key base of electoral support for Democrats in the state ahead of the upcoming presidential election.

As the Washington Post’s Peter Wallsten writes, the measures have set off a partisan battle over voting rights across the country, with Democrats accusing Republicans of trying to suppress voters, including young people and minorities, who would cast their ballots for President Obama and other Democratic candidates next year.

In New Hampshire, Republicans are pushing to end rules that allow same-day voter registration in the state, which has often provided key swing votes for candidates from all parties in the state. State GOP lawmakers are also proposing new limits on students, including a bill that would allow them to vote in college towns only if they or their parents had established permanent residency in the state.

Some GOP lawmakers in New Hampshire have billed the measures as an attempt to crack down on voter fraud in the state—but recent remarks from the newly elected GOP state House speaker have suggested otherwise.

In a recent speech to a tea party group in the state, House Speaker William O’Brien described college voters as “foolish.” “Voting as a liberal. That’s what kids do,” he said, in remarks that were videotaped by a state Democratic Party staffer and posted on YouTube. Students, he said, lack “life experience” and “just vote their feelings.”

GOP lawmakers in the state have distanced themselves from O’Brien’s remarks.

“It’s a war on voting,” Thomas Bates, vice president of Rock the Vote, a youth voter-registration group, told the Post. “We’d like to be advocating for a 21st-century voting system, but here we are fighting against efforts to turn it back to the 19th century.”

Meanwhile, Republicans have also revived measures that have been debated on and off over the last several election cycles that would require voters to provide state-issued IDs at the polls.

In Wisconsin, GOP lawmakers are moving forward with legislation that would block students from using school-issued identification to verify their identity at the polls. Meanwhile, in North Carolina, Republicans are preparing to introduce a similar measure requiring state IDs—a plan that the North Carolina Board of Elections has said could be problematic for African-American voters, a key base of support for Obama in 2008.
———
Now, I would like your thoughts. Do you feel that it is a legitimate attempt to curb voter fraud, or a conspiracy by the GOP to drain the Democrats of voters, or biased reporting, or something else?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

109 Answers

filmfann's avatar

The Republicans depend on scaring and intimidating the poor, the old, and the paranoid to win elections.
It embarasses me that they don’t care more for the values of this country.

WestRiverrat's avatar

What is so bad about having to show a federally approved ID to vote? I have to show it to buy a pack of smokes or a 6 pack of beer.

IMHO voting is more critical than buying beer.

Summum's avatar

All this worry about all these things is becoming a non issue and things will change.

ETpro's avatar

This group that just swept in seem to really believe all their demonization about Democrats being commies and socialist, and they are determined to use any method they can find to create a single-party system with an absolute ruller. If we do not wake up, Big Brother will be watching to see we no longer have any chance to wake up. See what I just wrote about this and other very frightening, move

SavoirFaire's avatar

@WestRiverrat That voting is more critical than buying beer is precisely why we shouldn’t be making it even more burdensome to do it. We already have to show some form of identification. Why force it to be a particular form—and one more likely to be held only by certain subsets of the population and not others? Given the already dismal turnout the US typically gets on election day, let’s not try to disenfranchise anyone else.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Russell_D_SpacePoet This isn’t about redistricting, though. It’s about changing the requirements for voting.

WestRiverrat's avatar

@SavoirFaire Why should it be any ID they have? I have to get a federally approved ID to drive, buy beer, buy tobacco products, fly, ride AMTRAK.
I violate any of those and I risk going to jail and paying a fine.

If I fraudulently vote, it is a felony. So the standard of identification should be lower for the felony crime than for the misdemeanor crimes?

It should be just as easy to do any of those things as it is to vote.

jerv's avatar

@WestRiverrat Actually, you don’t need a federally approved ID to do any of those things… unless you consider state-issued IDs to be something entirely different. Every time I went to the polls, the bar, or got pulled over, I had to show my state-issued drivers license; a document that DC had no part in issuing. However, there is also the concept of reciprocity involved here, especially when it comes to students. I mean, am I allowed to drive only in WA state?

Sure a student with an out-of-state drivers license would need some other document showing why they are voting in an election for a state where they don’t legally reside even though they spend the majority of the year residing in that state. If only schools gave out some paperwork that you could trust… (IMO, either student IDs are valid, or diplomas aren’t worth the paper they are printed on.)

SavoirFaire's avatar

@WestRiverrat That argument makes no sense. First: fraudulent voting is a felony because it’s considered a worse crime, not because of the standard of identification needed to vote legally. Some crimes have higher punishments precisely because you’re given more rope with which to hang yourself. Second: it sounds like you have an argument for making it easier to buy beer, not for making it harder to vote.

People can go through life quite easily without a federal ID. I don’t know where you live, but I’m quite within the bounds of the law driving with my state license. And plenty of people in my city don’t even have that thanks to the excellent bus service we have. I’m not sure why you mentioned it, however, as it is a state ID that the new law proposes.

The more offensive part of the proposal, however, may be the limitations on student voting. Trying to disenfranchise a group just because it votes against you is corrupt, plain and simple.

WestRiverrat's avatar

@jerv Read the Real ID act of 2005. Your state ID has to meet certain federally mandated conditions to be valid for use as identification to travel via bus, train or plane.

ratboy's avatar

It’s less risky than preventing the votes being counted after being cast. John Roberts won’t be in a position to overrule the citizenry forever.

MyNewtBoobs's avatar

I already have to present my drivers license or other state-issued ID when I vote so that they can cross my name off. For a mail-in, I have to give the ID number. So what’s the big deal – isn’t it illegal to not have a state-issued ID after the age of majority, anyway?

augustlan's avatar

I don’t mind having to show ID, but that thing about the college students is just ridiculous. Clearly an attempt to prevent a large block of liberal voters from participating in the process.

@ETpro Your link isn’t working.

12Oaks's avatar

I’m not sure about party affiiation as to who brought this up (Meaning I would have the same thoughts if it were a Democrat who bought this up). But when I first went to vote at 18, which was the later 80s, I went to the sign-in table and, without saying a word, took out my license to prove who I am. I had no idea you didn’t have to, just assumed you had to prove your identity to vote. That still seems like a good idea to me regardless of who wants to make it law. Oh, and since then, it’s been law in Indiana, at least, to show ID when voting. I really don’t see what the big deal is.

I’d say the same exact thing if, in that article, all the GOPs said Democrat, and every word Democrat were changed to GOP. I also don’t like early voting just for the sake of early voting. Party lines have nothing to do with that, as well.

tedd's avatar

They want to keep college kids from voting in their college town, which in most cases would mean they wouldn’t vote, as many wouldn’t go through the hassle of mailing in an absentee ballot.

Moreover, what about people like how I was, who had fully lived in my college town for 4–5 years, but still put my mothers address as main address, because frankly I didn’t have one, I moved every 10 months. I would not have been eligible to vote in my college town, despite having lived there for 4 years.

The Republicans are trying to rig the next election so they win, because they know when the full force of the American electorate comes out to vote (unlike the mid terms), they’re going to lose big….... ESPECIALLY after all this crap they’ve been doing in the last few months.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

I agree with @12Oaks. This is not about party affiliation. I also had to show an ID in Georgia to vote along with my voter registration card. The voter registration card proved I could vote and the ID proved I was the person on the card.

As for college students, their current college ID could prove they go to college in the state; however, it does not prove residency. @tedd brought up most of them would not go through the hassle to do an absentee ballot. IMO, that is their personal problem. Why should voting be easier for college kids than it is for military personnel who must vote with an absentee ballot, unless they happen to be stationed in their state of residency?

tedd's avatar

@optimisticpessimist The kids LIVE in their college town for all intents and purposes… what is the point of having them send in absentee ballots to a city they MIGHT live in 3 months of the year, simply because they use it as a permanent residence because they’re in a transition stage of life?

All the Republicans are doing is adding new hoops to jump through, in hopes that more people who are less likely to vote for them, will get sick of jumping.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@tedd College students can and do establish residency in order to pay less for tuition. Get a driver’s license in the state, for goodness sake. It is not that hard.

jerv's avatar

@WestRiverrat I must have read that wrong then, as did @SavoirFaire.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

@ETpro
Maybe I’ve been spending too much time at sea and mercifully away from daily media exposure, but I really don’t think there is anything to worry about.

If they keep up their shenanigans, these people and their ilk are going to cause this country to swing so far left that even I will look conservative. I see the reactions now in the protests by mainstream state workers in many state capitals. I say let ‘er rip. These insane radicals in conservative clothing, like the governors of Florida and Wisconsin will bury their party. The saner elements in the middle class are beginning to rise up and make themselves heard after a long, long sleep.

tedd's avatar

@optimisticpessimist I never established residency, because I already lived in state… as did the vast majority of students at my university (The Ohio State University, the largest University in the US). Under the GOP proposal, I would not have been allowed to vote in Columbus Ohio, despite having lived there entirely for 4 years…. because my “permanent” address was listed as Toledo Ohio, where my mother lives.

12Oaks's avatar

@tedd Please don’t take this as a challenge or a taking of sides. I just have a question from the point of view from someone who never went to college and lived in the same city all of his life. Were you able to cite Columbus as your hme city and your room at Ohio University as your address? There is no guarantee anyone will live in the same place for four years, and just wonder if college living has its own set of residency rules.

tedd's avatar

@12Oaks You can cite wherever you want as your residency when you register to vote, however, at the voting booth they can ask you to prove your residency. This can usually be done with a utility bill or things like that, but if you’re moving frequently you very often may no longer live in the place you lived when you registered (even though you may have only moved a few blocks or miles away).

Complicating matters worse, in most states you have to be a legal resident for at least a year or some months before you can vote there, and since many students would never be hammered down to one home for long enough, they would be forced to use their permanent residence at home, even though they may not live there at all.

I voted in the 2004 election, and the 2008 election, and the most recent 2010 election. In 2004 I had to do an absentee ballot, in 2008 I had luckily lived at my current house for over a year. In 2010 I was able to vote despite having moved, because I was no longer claiming my mothers house as my permanent address and would be staying long term at my new apartment.

(and its the Ohio STATE University btw :) )

Supacase's avatar

I completely agree with showing a form of ID that proves residency. How do you not? I have always had to show my DL or voter registration card. Are there really places that just let you walk in and cast a ballot?

I also agree with students voting in their legal state of residence. Go to a campus and ask a student where home is – chances are high that they will tell you the town where their parents live, not their local address. If they want to vote in their college town, they can change their permanent residency to that town. They can move to their college town by changing their permanent address, getting a license for that state, registering to vote there, registering their vehicle there, and everything else any one of us would need to do to establish residency. They have the choice to do exactly that. No one is forcing them to remain a resident of their hometown or anywhere else.

Most members of the military and their spouses vote by absentee ballot. If they can do it, so can college students. A good number of them are in the same age range. They are adults; it is their responsibility to make sure their vote is counted by voting properly. If they take voting seriously, they will make sure to do it.

Snowbirds who live in the north during summer and south during winter have to choose a state. My grandparents were residents of KY even though they lived in FL from Oct-Apr. I was in college out of state and, later, a military spouse in another state, both while maintaining my residency in my home state… I managed to vote every time. I never would have considered voting in the town I attended college or where my husband was stationed. Those were clearly temporary and I had no vested interest in them.

What is so difficult about having rules? As long as they are the same for everyone, it is fine. Why is it better for one party to want the rules to go one way so their Presidential election votes will be stronger, but wrong for the other party to want the rules to go another way for the same reason? Different sides of the same coin.

Pick a state, any state, establish residency there and vote accordingly.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@Supacase Completely agree. College students should be smart enough to figure this out… maybe just not motivated enough. I have had 7 states of legal residency following my husband around the country.

tedd's avatar

@Supacase and @optimisticpessimist Ok so basically you’re saying that its fair that had I not lived at my current house in Columbus Ohio for more than a year in 2008, I would’ve had to fill out an absentee ballot for Toledo Ohio (my mothers address)... EVEN THOUGH I had not lived there AT ALL since 2004?

Also absentee ballots come with the lovely add on that in a lot of cases, they don’t even bother counting them. If something is wrong with your ballot it can be thrown out and you aren’t even informed. If someone challenges your ballot, you can’t defend it.

And don’t give me this crap about where they might call home. For all intents and purposes, wherever those students might think of as “home”... they LIVE in their college town. THAT is where their vote should be counted. Someone from Ireland might consider that home, but he doesn’t send in an absentee ballot if he’s lived in New York for the last 10 years.

And even more than that, what in the heck is the point of any of this??? Its not like the kids are illegally voting. They have the LEGAL RIGHT TO VOTE, and whether its counted in their college town or their home town, their vote for national political offices probably isn’t going to be any different, and since the VAST VAST majority of them go to a school in their own state, its not even effecting that.

This is Republicans trying to make it so people who tend to vote against them can’t vote, or have a harder time doing so…. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@tedd Yes. So, you are saying college students should not have to fill out absentee ballots, but military personnel should? Why should the college student have more rights or easier opportunities than the military personnel?

BTW, perhaps the whole absentee ballot thing needs to be looked at. I do not want to disenfranchise anyone. The complaining about having to cast and absentee ballot irritated me when almost all of the military has to do so in order to vote. You say your vote might not counted; well, theirs might not either. Does that make you feel better?

jerv's avatar

@optimisticpessimist APO/FPO addresses are not states, so it isn’t really comparable. Also, college students tend to remain in one state longer than many military personnel. Until I see a frat house spend a few weeks outside of any country and then show up in a foreign country, I say that it’s comparing apples and Buicks.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@jerv We have lived in seven states. No APO/FPO addresses needed in any of them. We usually live in a state for 3 years. That is close to the same amount of time it takes to get through a 4 year school. We have never lived in my husband’s state of residency. He has to cast an absentee ballot. Not apples and Buicks… laziness and motivation.

tedd's avatar

@optimisticpessimist No you see they’re not compareable, because I have friends in the military that are deployed inside the United States, and even though they may only live in Hawaii, or Texas, or North Dakota for 6 months or a year at a time, and still fully consider Ohio their home….. they VOTE IN THOSE STATES and do not cast absentee ballots.

The only reason troops deployed in Afghanistan, or Iraq, of South Korea, or anywhere NOT inside the United States cast absentee ballots, is because they are not situated in a US state that would give them the option of claiming it as their home.

And even IF its laziness… SO THE HELL WHAT? Its their right guaranteed under the constitution… and we shouldn’t be adding hurdles to what you need to do in order to vote. Whats next, are they going to bring back the spelling and intelligence tests???? Maybe they’ll just make it so you have to own land again.

The Republicans already pay off duty police to stand in uniform near inner city voting locations, in the hopes of scaring off people who may have committed crimes in the past, or just downright have a fear of law enforcement (be it well founded or not). They fought tooth and nail to get the hundreds of thousands of LEGITIMATE registrations provided by ACORN to be thrown out as illegitimate because of 20–30 falsified registrations…. Those ACORN registrations, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly voted Democrat.

You can try to justify this all you want and call college kids lazy…. and heck you may be right, they are probably lazy…. But that doesn’t mean we should be making it less attractive for a gigantic segment of the population, that already is notorious for sitting out elections, to vote.

SavoirFaire's avatar

I’d like to clarify that my problem is not with showing ID My problem is with requiring that it be a specific kind of ID that particular subsets of the population are unlikely to have. Where I vote, I have to prove who I am; but I have options as to how I can do that. This makes sense, especially in a town like mine where the need for a driver’s license is rather minimal. And contrary to what @MyNewtBoobs said, it is perfectly legal not to have a state-issued identification card after the age of majority. It’s just uncommon in many places.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@tedd If your military friends vote in the states they are stationed in versus their legal state of residence usually the state you resided in when you enlisted, they run the risk of changing their state of residence. If they accidentally change their state of residence by voting in the state they reside in solely for military purposes, they can also obligate themselves to paying state taxes for the new state even if they only intended to vote not to change their legal state of residence. Different states have different rules concerning voting and military personnel. Your friends who are in the United States are not deployed; they are stationed either permanently or temporarily.

Military personnel who do not avail themselves of absentee ballot voting just cause it is more inconvenient are also lazy. I was not justifying anything. There is a way for college students to vote. I am not saying it does not need fixing many things do, but your state, not the federal government currently decides what is needed to declare residency in that state. Complain to Ohio.

jerv's avatar

@optimisticpessimist Harvard and MIT are in Massachusetts, but what state is a US Navy ship in? The military is considerably different. I spent a few years living in “towns” whose names started with the letters USS and was often outside of any state for too long to establish residency the way someone who spends eight months a year in one location can. Therefore, the military needs different rules from civilian colleges.

12Oaks's avatar

@tedd Sorry for getting the name of that college wrong. I never heard of it, so may be the reason for the error. Hey, an off-topic just curious, but you brought it up. It that school the largest in area of campus, or student enrollment? Just curious now.

@SavoirFaire It’s law here that you either have to carry a drivers license, or a state issued ID. And not to bring up money where not an issue, but I will answer one question that I am certain will come up. If you can not afford a state issue ID, one will be issued to you for free. If you have no way to get to the license bureau, you could call and they will come pick you up and take you, free of charge. I really don’t know what an ID costs, but last I checked, which was in the early 90s, it was like 6 bucks.

I have a relative who works at a nursing home. Come every election cycle, some pollsters come in with absentee ballots for all registered, and interested, could vote and be counted.

As to the point about the Irish voting. I can’t be the only one who remember maybe about 8 years ago or so where Iraq and/or Afghanastan, I forget which right now, had elections and those from that country were able to vote in polling places in America. The Donald E. Stephens Convention Center in Rosemont, IL., was a polling place.

Maybe colleges should have a system where you could vote for National candidates there, like President or Senators, but not local candidates. We have our local elections here this year, and really I don’t want out-of-town temporary residents to decide whom my local councilman will be the next four years. Our local guys have no domain over the campuses and the happenings there, and our local issues are far and seperate from collegiate hapenings.

Just a thought, will probably be told how stupid that is.

MyNewtBoobs's avatar

@12Oaks My drivers license cost $60.

12Oaks's avatar

@MyNewtBoobs That’s about what mine costs, too, but I have a CDL-A, which cost way more. I think a general operators license is like $12 or so. It’s been a long time since I got one of those. but I think that’s about what my wife’s is.

I also have to get a physical every couple years to keep my CDL, which costs about $85.00. But that’s a different topic for another thread. ;-)

tedd's avatar

@12Oaks Enrollment. It trades it on a yearly basis with Central Florida and Texas, all of them are usually around 55k students, give or take 1–2k.

reijinni's avatar

Kick them out and restore the rights.

tedd's avatar

@optimisticpessimist The point one way or another, is that they want to add pointless legislation, that is not needed at all, to “fix” something that isn’t broken…. PURELY because they want to tip elections in their favor.

Like it or not, we shouldn’t punish lazy people by making them not vote.

12Oaks's avatar

@tedd That is quite a lot of students. If you take on the faculty and support staff, it may come close t the population of my city, which is around 83,000. But, again, another topic for another thread. Still, thanks for the information, that is a bewildering thing.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@tedd Maybe they should quit tying federal and local elections together. Then no matter where you are if you can prove you are a citizen of the United States with the right to vote, you can vote in that location, local resident or not.

tedd's avatar

@optimisticpessimist ???? No thats an awful idea because you’d get an influx of people from outside areas trying to influence the election. I’m assuming you’re trying to say thats whats happening here, but quite frankly, its NOT. You’re talking about student populations in the entire state coming in at maybe a few hundred thousand. The majority of those students are going to be in state residents anyways. They just want to vote in their local election, where they live, go to school, work, etc. Republicans are trying to make it more difficult for them to do that.

In 2008 I would’ve had to vote absentee to Toledo had I not been in my house of the time for a year (under the GOP proposal). Whats the point in that??? Why should I vote for city council members in a city I hadn’t lived in for four years? Why should I be voting for that districts representative, when I don’t even know who the candidates are??? Republicans are trying to dick people over, and if you think it has anything to do with protecting the elections from fraud, you’re incredibly naive.

And also, one of their ideas is to make it so you can’t use a State School issued ID as proof of who you are anymore. I dunno how it is elsewhere, but in Ohio you need two forms of ID already… that means Drivers license AND something else. Were I not sane enough to not carry my Social Security card around, I would not have two forms.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@12Oaks Interesting. It’s never been required anywhere I’ve lived. In the place where I currently live, the most common photo ID around is the one issued by the university where I work. I know several people who have no other photo ID than this, and several others who have no photo ID at all because they do not work for the school.

Regarding the larger issue of fraudulent voting, it seems to me that most of the problems with elections in recent years have come not from individuals, but from government and political groups seeking to sway the elections. It strikes me, then, that a different sort of reform movement might be needed if we really want to crack down on election fraud.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@tedd I am naive. It is part of my charm.

As I stated before, the state is who (what) decides what is required to be considered a resident. The federal government does not regulate that on the state level. The electoral college is what ties federal elections to local elections. If we used direct elections instead of the electoral college, it really would not matter where you voted for president just as long as you vote. However, that is whole other discussion.

MyNewtBoobs's avatar

@SavoirFaire Huh. I’ve always needed my state-issued ID in order to get my work/school photo ID.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@MyNewtBoobs At both schools I’ve attended, they just took photos of you right there and didn’t ask about what other forms of ID you might have. More regional differences, I guess.

tedd's avatar

@optimisticpessimist Hey I’d be all for a direct election… The Republicans wouldn’t have won an election since the whole Bush 1 debacle. And I’m aware its a state by state thing… but in multiple states now, Republicans want to enact legislation like this. And frankly it wouldn’t matter if it was a mid term election, a presidential election, or an election for a school levy…. I would be required to vote absentee if it were in action, and I had still been in college. that is stupid.

augustlan's avatar

I’d love to see us move to voting by phone or computer, maybe using our social security numbers and pin numbers. Obviously, this could be ripe for fraudulent voting, but it seems to me that we ought to be able to overcome that somehow. Voting should be as easy as possible.

12Oaks's avatar

@augustlan We should get the guys from American Idol to coordinate the voting. We could all call 1–888-VOTE-DEM or 1–888-VOTE-GOP or 1–888-WASTE-IT for an independent (Just kidding, guys). And we’d know the results instantly, because they seem to get 50 million votes every week, all through phone, text, or now online voting and have no problem having the counted and ready for results being revealed in less than 24 hours.

OK, just kidding. Am watching Idol now, and it’s commercial so I had a couple minutes. If you’re interested in a serious opinion, I like the way it’s done now. If I were to make two changes, that would be no early voting and absolutely POSITIVELY NO TERM LIMITS!!! I hate term limits for any elected office despite the current person/party holding office. I know these are not going to be agreed upon 100%, but hey, that’s what opinions are all about. If we all agreed, we’d be spared of a Donald Trump campaign.

augustlan's avatar

We can vote early in my area, and I love that. Why are you opposed to it?

12Oaks's avatar

@augustlan I just like having a day when we all vote. maybe I’m just a traditionalist.

It may have something to do with it seems some don’t understand what early voting is. Around here, the last election, they had early voting. A local reporter went to an early polling place and asked them why they are voting early. My favorite reason was, quote, “We gonna get Barack so far ahead that that old white man won’t have a chance to catch up.”

It’s really a traditional thing. Besides, what happens if you vote, then change your mind abuot one of the many condidates you voted for, or something happens that they are no longer in the race? I just like voting on election day, and usually am there as the polls open. To each there own, for sure, but this is one voters opinion…..

woodcutter's avatar

There’s nothing to worry about. Today’s teens and 20 somethings have grown to expect instant gratification with little to no effort invested. Hoops? If they care enough about the issues and election they will do the hoops (gasp)! If the hoops seem too off putting then they probably really are too foolish to participate thus polluting the ballots anyway. These people are mostly a single voting block and should know who they will choose way ahead of the election. They are not the swing votes, the Independents are. If anything these rules will cull out the idiots.

Supacase's avatar

@tedd Why is it that what the Republicans want because, as everyone is saying, it will help their number of votes, any worse than the fact that the Democrats are currently enjoying the favorable results they get out of the current system?

If it was already being done the way the Republicans want, the Democrats would be arguing to change it to what it is now and all of the arguing going on would be reversed.

As for the military, they have the same option as college students to change their state of residency. Many do specifically because they want to have a voice in the place they are actually living and, most likely, going to be living for the next 3 or 4 years. What is the point in maintaining residency in a place you have not lived for 4 years?

Also, I know nothing about the Irish voting system, but I do know that American citizens living abroad can vote by absentee ballot. By your logic, the Irish person living in New York should be allowed to vote in the USA just because that is where they are, regardless of whether or not they are permanent and legal citizens.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@woodcutter Yeah, because none of us teens or twentysomethings are independent voters…

MyNewtBoobs's avatar

@SavoirFaire @woodcutter Or significantly more rabid in our desire to vote than many a baby-boomer…

SavoirFaire's avatar

@MyNewtBoobs Exactly. I haven’t missed a vote yet—local, state, or federal. My parents, on the other hand…

MyNewtBoobs's avatar

@SavoirFaire Me neither. I love voting; I wish I could do it more (often, not double-voting).

ETpro's avatar

All the debate about why Republicans are pushing this seems to me to ignore the fact that we already know that form the horse’s (or elephant’s) mouth. It is intended to supress votes among a voting block that doesn’t vote Republican enough. State Speaker of the House William O’Brien said so.

Supacase's avatar

@ETpro And? Democrats would do the same thing if the situation were reversed.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Supacase Well, that makes it right then…

Or maybe it would be wrong in either case?

jerv's avatar

@Supacase That sounds like projection.
I do know that in NH, the Republicans jammed some phone boards to interfere with the Democrat’s phone boards and I think we all know about Florida in the 2000 election, but I can’t recall hearing a single remotely credible allegation of that magnitude going the other way. Nor do I know of any Dems making comments like O’Brien’s,

Of course, if they did then they would be just as wrong.

Supacase's avatar

I’m not projecting anything. My point is, it doesn’t matter if it is Republicans or Democrats – they are all looking for ways to make winning elections more likely. I’m not pro-Republican, I just don’t buy into this whole Democrats are the good guys thing.

@SavoirFaire It doesn’t make it right or wrong. It means they are both equally willing to do whatever they think it will take to win. People are so caught up in hating Republicans right now that they are allowing hate to cloud their opinions and losing sight of the issues. We should be focusing on the issues, not the parties behind them.

ETpro's avatar

@Supacase I think that @jerv has it right, that flat is projection. I provided you evidence it is deliberate voter suppression. Just asserting that it’s common for both parties to try to suppress vote is argument by assertion. What proof do you have of that?

Supacase's avatar

I find it positively laughable that I am projecting. Do you all really think Dems don’t do the same stuff? It is 2am. I’ll get back to you tomorrow.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Supacase I’ve not said anything about the Republicans or the Democrats. Nor did @ETpro‘s comment rely on the person in question being a Republican other than incidentally. The point is that these actions are unconscionable regardless of who is doing them. It’s your comment that brings party politics into this by suggesting that what the Democrats would do if they were in power is somehow relevant. It’s not.

tedd's avatar

@Supacase What on earth do you mean the dems find the “current system” favorable. You mean the current system of counting peoples votes???? All the Republican idea would do is lower voter turn out. And no I’m not naive enough to think Dems have never tried to do something along these lines… and frankly I’ll be one of the first to protest the next time they do try. Both parties are incredibly guilty of jgerrymandering. Hell look at most of the districts in the midwest states, they’re chopped up like swiss cheese to favor one party or the other.

And the point of maintaining residency at my mothers house (or any college student maintaining residency at their parents home far away from college)... is that under the rules the Republicans are proposing I could not have attained residency at college . I never lived at single place long enough to do it under the rules they’re suggesting. Under their rules I would’ve had to maintain residency, and vote, in a city I hadn’t lived in for four years. Thats the point!!!!!

and @woodcutter So let me get this straight… You’d like to stop people you think are stupid from voting, because you think they’re stupid…..... How very patriotic of you. Are you running on any other pre-civil-war platforms?

optimisticpessimist's avatar

Most of these residency and voting rules were created before people starting relocating as frequently and easily as they do now. The current system needs changing. However, I trust neither political party to do the changing without having an agenda. The federal government is taking away more and more freedom from the individual states. Rules and laws are, generally, easier for the people to change at the state level.

@Supacase Yes, military personnel can change their residency every time they move; however, most do not. One big reason is many states do not have military personnel pay state taxes if they do not reside in the state and other states have no income tax period. Another reason is because they have no plans to stay in that area once they are out of the military. Basically, why mess with local politics if you have no vested interest? To try to keep military personnel from all changing their state of legal residence to states which do not have state taxes, they are in most cases required to show proof they intend to move back to that state after they get out of the military.

Supacase's avatar

@SavoirFaire Seriously? The article itself talks about what will happen if the GOP gets their way. @filmfann said Republicans rely on intimidation to win elections. @ETpro said the Republicans are doing everything they can to create a single-party, Big Brother, system. @tedd, said, “All the Republicans are doing is adding new hoops to jump through, in hopes that more people who are less likely to vote for them, will get sick of jumping.” as well as, “Hey I’d be all for a direct election… The Republicans wouldn’t have won an election since the whole Bush 1 debacle” which, may not be specifically about this issue but leaves no question about his political stance overall. And, maybe most relevant of all, @jerv who posted the question asked if it is possibly a GOP conspiracy. This was all before I entered the conversation, so I’m not sure how I am the one brought party politics into this.

Why do the Democrats find things as they are to be favorable? As the article states, this proposal could be “potentially eliminating a key base of electoral support for Democrats in the state ahead of the upcoming presidential election.” They are well aware that college students tend to vote Democrat, so of course Democrat politicians want college students to be able to vote in their college town b/c that gives them a concentrated number of votes which makes a bigger impact than if of the votes are spread among the various home states.

@tedd You haven’t lived in Toledo for 4 years. Forgive me, my assumption was that you had been living in your college town for those 4 years, which is plenty of time to establish residency. You can pick up and move to FL whether you are a student there or not.

@optimisticpessimist I know the reasons for military retaining their original state of residency and many (probably most) do; however I also knew several people who did change residency for a variety of reasons.

tedd's avatar

@Supacase Its enough time to establish residency if you live at one house or apartment or whatever for a year or more (under the new GOP proposal). In other words, since I never lived in a dorm, or apartment, or house, for more than one year… I could not have established residency in Columbus under the new GOP proposal their rules would have me voting in Toledo elections, where I no longer lived, had no intention in living there, and had no clue about the candidates or issues.

Supacase's avatar

I sincerely fail to see how this makes voting more difficult. Have those of you who believe this is the case ever actually voted by absentee ballot? If so, what made it so much harder? If not, on what are you basing your comparison of level of difficulty?

Absentee voting is so simple – you don’t even have to leave your home. You can download the form from the internet, fill it out and mail it in. If your state does not have the form available online, it is still no more than a phone call or request letter to get one. It is no more difficult that RSVPing to a wedding. I went through more than that just figuring out where my local polling location was when I moved to this house.

Lastly, @tedd, errors occur on regular ballots as well and I have yet to have anyone check my ballot for accuracy. If I screw it up, it doesn’t get counted either. No one ever has an opportunity to defend their vote. I see no benefit to voting in person in that regard.

Supacase's avatar

@tedd That is new information for me. Do you have a resource for that? I would like to see the details and try to find the reasoning for requiring the same physical address for a year.

I came back to VA and moved three times before I stayed at one address for over a year. I was still in VA though, so it counted toward being a VA resident. I was a VA resident the day I got my license. One year after that, I was able to do anything and everything as a VA resident – including vote and receive in-state tuition rates.

jerv's avatar

@Supacase I brought that up as one possibility, not as a fact, but I did say that. I knew that it was inevitable that it would devolve into hyper-partisan bickering.
FWIW, King County, WA does elections by mail anyways, just like absentee ballots. The difference is that I actually know the local politicians; something I cannot say about NH any more. If I were a student, best case scenario would’ve made me either miss an election or vote in a race I knew nothing about.

tedd's avatar

@Supacase No exactly, thats what you CAN do now. I was able to vote in Columbus (my college town) while I was in school. Under the GOP proposal, I would NOT have been able to because I would not have had a residency there of at least a year. I would’ve been forced to absentee ballot vote into Toledo (my home town, and my mothers address, which I used as a “permanent” address while in school because of all the moving).

Both cities are in Ohio, so my national votes would’ve been the same. But I would’ve been forced to vote for city council members, issues, district representatives, etc…. that I had no interests in or knowledge of… while being denied the chance to vote on those in the district I actually resided in. Out of state students who are in the same boat wouldn’t even have their national votes counted in the right state.

Supacase's avatar

@jerv I did not say that is what your opinion is, I used it as an example of party lines being brought into the discussion when @SavoirFaire said they had not.

Supacase's avatar

Had you changed your residency when you started college, voting would be no problem after a year. You don’t have to have the same address for a year as long as the state remains the same. You can live on Maple St. for nine months and Elm St. for three – you’ve still logged a year in-state. I would love to see more information about this if you are required to live on Maple for the full 12 months because that would make no sense – in fact, it would be ridiculous.

It is your choice to keep your mom’s house as your permanent residence. Choices come with consequences – good and bad.

jerv's avatar

@Supacase Okay, we are on the same page then.

tedd's avatar

@Supacase No you are failing to understand here….. Under the new GOP proposal, I would not be allowed to declare residency in my college town, unless I lived at one address there for a year. This almost never happens with college students, who usually move to a new house with new room mates after each year, or a new dorm. Effectively this would eliminate the college students voting rights in the district they actually lived in. (and as you put it, that would be ridiculous)

Supacase's avatar

@tedd I don’t understand the reasoning behind that at all.

Regardless, I’ve thought about this a little and I think a year of residency makes no sense for any reason. I still think people should vote in their legal state of residency, but if they have established residency in that state at any time prior to the voter registration deadline (which I think is six weeks prior to election day here) they should be able to vote in that state. That is where their future is and they should have a say in what happens there.

optimisticpessimist's avatar

@tedd Could you please link to the information concerning the one year rule, please? That was not mentioned anywhere in the proceeding article. The only thing I read mentioning college and residency which seemed applicable was about NH not allowing voting if the student or their parent had not already established residency in the state. This may have been where all my confusion came into being. Thank you.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Supacase I didn’t say that party lines hadn’t been brought in. I said they had only been brought in incidentally (since it happens to be a matter of historical fact that the Republicans are the ones putting forward the current plan). So far, people have been saying that this would be bad no matter who was doing it, then you started complaining about the Democrats. Giant non sequitur.

Supacase's avatar

@SavoirFaire The idea that this is a GOP conspiracy certainly was brought up beyond mere fact, both by the OP as well as by @filmfann. There are several more comments that are clearly leaning that direction. To deny that is ludicrous.

My comment actually stated that this goes beyond party lines by saying that either party would do it, regardless of right or wrong. When it comes to practicing politics, they are one and the same. Completely relevant.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Supacase I don’t see it in the OP, and I wasn’t defending @filmfann but rather @ETpro and myself.

filmfann's avatar

Thank you. I will happily defend my own words.

woodcutter's avatar

@SavoirFaire This is what my post still reads^^...These people are mostly a single voting block and should know who they will choose way ahead of the election. They are not the swing votes, the Independents are. If anything these rules will cull out the idiots.end quote~ Does it still look like it means what you think you thought I was saying?

ETpro's avatar

@Supacase and other defenders of disenfranchisement. There are now GOP moves afoot in 32 states to make it harder or impossible for certain blocks to vote. All the voting blocks being disenfranchised are ones that vote largely for Democrats. If you can show me any evidence that Democrats have done the same, I will immediately condemn that to. But I have asked you, and so far you just keep coming back with your argument by asertion. Prove it, or live with the fact I will not accept your word for it.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@woodcutter Yes. It looks like you are saying I am not an independent voter or a swing vote. But I am both.

In case I have to make it explicit, I am one of those twentysomethings.

woodcutter's avatar

@SavoirFaire No. What it reads is the people are “mostly” a single voting block. Doesn’t nor should it suggest that all of them are. There will always be exceptions in any group. That little word “mostly” should clear things up but i think here on fluther it is one of the most skimmed over words by those determined to make a point out of a non- point, but that part is out of my control. All can do is make sure there is the essential wiggle room in case there are those who would want to take issue. It really is smart writing because nobody can know everything about everything. If that was the criteria here there wouldn’t be much to say here sometimes. It would end up being a splitting hairs session and would quickly become tiresome.
If you are a registered Indy then I will go out on a limb and assume you are because you actually look at the issues instead of block vote just because everyone else will/ Doesn’t take much imagination to be a Dem or Rep they all pretty much receive their marching orders and cause the electorate to be split almost 50/50. I will also assume because of those very reasons above you have the sense to request a absentee ballot from your state of residence in plenty of time to ponder the choices. I vote absentee now in my own state now because I don’t feel like waiting outside in line all night. As long as the postmark is before the date, you will be good to go. It’s actually LESS trouble than going out to the polls in person. That is what my post attempted to explain.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@woodcutter The word “mostly” doesn’t work for me because most of the people I know who are my age—including those registered in a party—think about voting quite a bit. I agree that it is a smart idea to give oneself wiggle room, but not when it becomes a way to discount the exceptions even if they turn out to be the majority. Despite the qualification, the whole generalization still seems flawed. Based on my experience, at least.

woodcutter's avatar

@SavoirFaire well, if you are indeed the exception then you can also know that it didn’t apply to you anyway and therefore no harm done, see? You want me to split hairs and I refuse to do that for anyone here. It’s not personal, really, but when you get to be my age you will not feel the need to include every snippet of every possible scenario. It is expected that the reader will see that it was intended as generalization and take it for face value. When you are young there is plenty of time to argue. When you are old there is no time for that. Time is non repeatable and I choose not to bother myself much about it. You’re making more of this than is really there.

We are done with this now.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@woodcutter It’s the generalization I dislike. That’s the problem. I don’t think it’s accurate.

And I’m a philosopher by profession. I’ll be splitting hairs long after I’ve ceased to have any. I’ll also still be refusing to accept unilateral terminations of a discussion.

MyNewtBoobs's avatar

@SavoirFaire I thought you were a teacher. Damn, am I confusing you with someone?

augustlan's avatar

@MyNewtBoobs I think he’s (she’s?) a philosophy professor.

MyNewtBoobs's avatar

@augustlan Oh, right, they have those. That makes sense. Ok, I think it’s beddie-bye time for this jelly, before I make an even bigger ass of myself…

jerv's avatar

I have to go with @ETpro here; the exclusionary tactics seem to be a strictly Republican thing. ~ Why not go back to the days when only land-owning Christian males could vote?

SavoirFaire's avatar

@augustlan @MyNewtBoobs Graduate teaching assistant. I am both student and teacher right now.

@jerv Not radical enough! ~

woodcutter's avatar

@jerv what is exclusionary? It will take a little more effort for the out of stater’s but it will be worth it to those who want to participate. Who in this day and age really walks around with no official ID on them? And if there are still some barefooters who want to be unencumbered with documentation on them wouldn’t it still be worth while to do it every two years, for one day? I am guessing the big hallabaloo about DL’s is part of an immigration thing too.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

Our new Republican Governor of Florida, Rick Scott, since January, has basically ordered our overwhelmingly Republican legislature to:

Cut teachers pay (Our teachers now rank as the lowest paid compared to 46 other states).

Cut unemployment insurance dispersments to 8 weeks from 26.

He unilaterally killed the rapid transit project between Tampa and Orlando (killing off 24,000 jobs over the next 4 years).

Threatened the pensions of state workers.

Yrsyerday they made it nearly impossible for felons to regain their voting rights.

Ordered the lay-off of 16,800 health department personnel and eliminating primary care for the indigent population.

Stopped the state-wide prescription drug monitoring database that is successful in controlling narcotic abuse in other states.

Wants to end collective bargaining among state employees.

I seriously believe Scott not only wants make it harder for certain groups of people to vote, but I believe he wants to depopulate the state of his “problem citizens.”

Rick Scott up until just a few years ago was a Texan. He came to Florida as the CEO of Columbia/HCA. While CEO, HCA was busted on 14 felony counts of Medicare fraud resulting in a 650 million dollar fine; the largest government fine of a corporation in American history. He was forced to resign. When he left, he took with him $9.88 million in cash and $350 million more in stock. He used $50 million of that money to rehabilitate his name and finance his run for Florida governor.

Florida has become the pill mill for the Southeast US through the proliferation of unregulated pain clinics owned by non-medical millionaires who hire unscrupulous doctors to run them. They have put all doctors and pharmacists in Florida who must prescribe pain meds on the spot. Legitimate doctors are scared to take on new pain patients and the pharmacies are being held up by crazies on a daily basis and some are refusing to stock meds from vicodin to oxycontin, some are even refusing to deal in cash, Prescription painkiller addiction is at epidemic proportions in this state, We have a new tourist in Florida now, the narco-tourist. They come from all over the Southeast to shop for drugs at the many pain clinics. The top LEOs and the governors of Kentucky and Tennessee are begging the officials of this state to remedy the problem. Ironically, There are a lot of legitimate patients suffering right now, especially new patients without regular doctors.

They just busted a clinic here in the Tampa bay area a couple of days ago. It was 11 am and the DEA brought out a plastic bag with over $75K cash in it that they claimed was that morning’s take.

One of the solutions to the problem is to create a state prescription drug database hooked into all the pharmacies and monitored by the DEA – like in many other states. But our new Governor, Rick Scott, doesn’t want this database in Florida. It might have something to do with his share of Solantic Urgent Care Clinics to the tune of $65 million which he would prefer to remain unregulated and unmonitored. One can only speculate as this guy now pretty much runs the state and he has quashed two investigations since he entered office in January. A few days ago, he turned down $1 million from oxycontin manufacturer Purdue Pharma as they were willing to fund the database.

2,488 prescription drug deaths in Florida in 2009.

938 prescription drug deaths in the Tampa bay area counties of Pasco, Hillsborough, and Pinellas in 2009 (representing 38% of total deaths in Florida). These are counties with nowhere near the populations of the Miami-Dade area.
.
3 children were born with prescription drugs in their systems this week at All Children’s Hospital, St. Petersburg.

Ha. Wisconsin thinks they have problems. Wait till America gets a load of Rick Scott. He has expressed a strong desire to be president and the Republicans just love this guy.

jerv's avatar

@woodcutter Just about every college kid I know carries at least two ID cards. You are side-stepping here, and using a falsehood to do so. Or are you saying that school IDs and any other documentation that shows that you don’t live with your parents is invalid?

If you would rather have your elections determined by people that live elsewhere while you are forced to vote in a state far from where you live, then you are advocating an uninformed electorate and we may as well roll dice instead of voting.

woodcutter's avatar

@jerv Ok let me understand here please. You ask your hometown for an absentee ballot and they mail it to you wherever you are, like the military. You fill it out and send it back? Am I missing something? That’s what I do with them. Really I’m curious and also not perfect but I’m still not seeing a real problem, other than over sensitive and possibly paranoid people thinking they are getting screwed? Here’s the thing. With all the screwing up the right has been up to before the last election it boggles my mind how they won as much as they did. But they swept, and these elections no matter who comes out on top, have consequences. All elections have consequences, right? The left lost and because of them, they are blowing up with what I call “fake outrage”. They should have held on to power. Their downfall is that in midterms, liberals don’t vote as strong as they should, ever. They screwed themselves right in the butt. The young have historically been lazy voters. The old farts always vote that’s why they succeed. Now all of a sudden it looks like the youngsters are wanting to exorcise their right to vote? Now it’s important? After they sat on their hands last time? If they would have gotten busy last election this idea would have not have seen daylight. Some people just hate being told there are some new rules, It happens all the time. How many people went batshit about seatbelt laws when they were a new thing. I know I did but now I just say fuck it and put them on and who knows it might save my life someday, or not.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@woodcutter Even assuming some set of people made a mistake, why shouldn’t they be trying to fix it now? You act like they just have to take their lumps until next time, but that’s ridiculous. Elections have consequences, yes. But we don’t lose our rights to protest or even just to have opinions in between them. Our right to expression is not exhausted by our actions at the polling station.

tedd's avatar

@woodcutter The problem is many of those college students no longer consider their home town “home.” But under some of the GOP proposals they could not establish the residency to vote in their current home (their college town), and would be forced to absentee ballot vote to their old home… where they no longer live, or have any vested interests as residents, and in many cases don’t know the issues or candidates at all.

And if you think the backlash against the left was bad in 2010, wait til you see the backlash against the right in 2012. The mistake that BOTH parties are making is that they believe winning an election is an indication that the entire populace was against everything the other group did, and their response is to do a complete 180 and go even further in the other direction than things were before their immediate predecessors. The fact of the matter is that usually a party wins an election by a margin of a couple of percent, meaning almost half the population voted for the other guy in the first place… and a significant chunk of those that did vote for them voted for them on the idea they would take things back to a more moderate center….NOT even further to the right or left than things were before.

Wisconsin for example… I will be shocked if Walker retains his governorship through 2012, in fact recall petitions are already gaining steam statewide….. I would be somewhat surprised if Dems took the Wisconsin house and senate, but the margins will shrink to near 50/50.

jerv's avatar

@woodcutter Did you vote for Greg Nickels or Mike McGinn in the last election? If you answer “Neither. ” or “Who?” then you see the problem already, even if you don’t see that you see it. And if you see that as not mattering then there is no hope of any meaningful communication between us on this issue.

As for why the Right swept the 2010 election, that is more a matter of the Left breaking too many promises that they made in 2008 than anything else. And if it’s all the same with you, I would rather have the voters (ALL of them) be able to vote whichever way they want: I would rather see my candidates lose a fair election than win a rigged one. (It should go without saying that I definitely don’t want them to lose a rigged one, but it appears that I need to spell things out :/)

You are correct that, historically speaking, the younger voters tend to be more apathetic, but that doesn’t mean that we should tamper with their right to vote in the area where they live for the majority of the year should they choose to put down the beer bong long enough to go to the ballot box.

Supacase's avatar

@SavoirFaire If you can’t see “or a conspiracy by the GOP to drain the Democrats of voters” as a possibility in the original post as bringing party lines in as anything other than “historical fact” then… ok. I don’t know what to say to that.

You don’t need to “defend” anyone – I wasn’t attacking. My entire point in that one statement is that neither party walks the high road. Yes, I do believe Democrats would do something similar given the opportunity to dissect similar Republican voting blocks. I can’t prove that particular point, @ETpro, because no reverse situation like that exists.

Additionally, @ETpro, I am not “for disenfranchisement.” I have never said that the way they are doing this is acceptable and, in fact, I said in my post above to @tedd that I do not agree with the guidelines they are trying to put in place. I simply think your vote should be counted in the place of your legal residency. I imagine most people would want to vote for state and local elections there since they care about what happens there more than where they are temporarily. If they don’t, and would prefer to change their residency in order to vote in what had been their temporary state of residence, the opportunity for them to make that change should exist and it should be an easy one – not some complex maneuver as has been described above by @Tedd.

Bottom line: I don’t think anyone should be able to vote for state and local elections in OH but have your Presidential vote counted in FL (or whatever the states may be for each case). Pick one or the other. Any changes to involved make that choice should be made relatively simple – no different for students who choose to move from one state to another than for anyone else.

jerv's avatar

@Supacase I agree that neither party walks the high road, though I still doubt that the Dems would do anything like this or like what is going on in Wisconsin; it’s not their style.

Now, as for establishing residency, I would think that the rules would be a little different for full-time college kids than for other people, and by your statement, ”...the opportunity for them to make that change should exist and it should be an easy one…”, it seems that you and I agree wholeheartedly on this. I think it all boils down to how one defines “residency”.

tedd's avatar

@Supacase Ummm…. no one can vote for local elections in one state, and national elections in another. That is incredibly illegal. You vote for local elections wherever, and your national vote is counted in that state as well.

If I moved to say… Florida, for school… If I vote absentee back home to Ohio, my ballot will have my Ohio cities issues and candidates and such on it, and THAT is where my presidential vote will count. If I establish residency in Florida and vote there instead, my ballot will have my Florida cities issues and candidates, and my national vote will count there…. You can’t do one and the other.

Supacase's avatar

@tedd Of course you are right. I don’t know what I was thinking. My main point is that if you (as an example) want to vote in FL you should make it your legal residence and it should be easy for you to do so. Just as easy as if I moved to FL; being a student should make no difference.

jerv's avatar

@Supacase That is how it should be, but that is not how it is. If it were, we wouldn’t be having this conversation :P

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Supacase My point all along was only that no one had said the Democrats are superior. Your comment implied otherwise. You were wrong. I pointed that out. You backpedaled for three days.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther