Roll Call: Who is voting early? Who is waiting til Nov. 5 (and why?)

[Calheel]

The whole process of voting via absentee ballot is more cumbersome than just going to the polls to vote. I understand it for people who will be out of town or out of the country, etc and legitimately can't vote through the more normal channels. But to plan to vote via absentee ballot when you won't actually be "absent" is just weird to me.

California mails you a ballot without asking. It has your name and bar code on it. You fill it out and pop it in your mail box. That is way, way easier than going to a polling place.

If you are a little anal retentive, you fill it out and drop it in a secure ballot box by the public library. Still way, way easier than going to a polling place on Tuesday.

 

[lightbluenc]

California mails you a ballot without asking. It has your name and bar code on it. You fill it out and pop it in your mail box. That is way, way easier than going to a polling place.

If you are a little anal retentive, you fill it out and drop it in a secure ballot box by the public library. Still way, way easier than going to a polling place on Tuesday.

Especially being able to look up candidates on your own time, and not have to be in a booth trying to remember who everyone is, especially local elections.

 

[lawtig02]

California mails you a ballot without asking. It has your name and bar code on it. You fill it out and pop it in your mail box. That is way, way easier than going to a polling place.

If you are a little anal retentive, you fill it out and drop it in a secure ballot box by the public library. Still way, way easier than going to a polling place on Tuesday.

I suppose there's always a tension between access and security. But when the security risk is 0.000001 and the access risk is 50, I'll never understand why a state would prioritize security over access. Unless the goal is to suppress the votes of those with less access, of course.

 

[EyeballKid]

Just voted at the main library in downtown Durham. Piece of cake, maybe 15 minutes from the time I parked a block away till I got back in my car after I voted.

 

[superrific]

I suppose there's always a tension between access and security. But when the security risk is 0.000001 and the access risk is 50, I'll never understand why a state would prioritize security over access. Unless the goal is to suppress the votes of those with less access, of course.

Because you don't pay a price for denying access, given that the people denied don't vote.

 

[HeelYeah2012]

California mails you a ballot without asking. It has your name and bar code on it. You fill it out and pop it in your mail box. That is way, way easier than going to a polling place.

If you are a little anal retentive, you fill it out and drop it in a secure ballot box by the public library. Still way, way easier than going to a polling place on Tuesday.

Wow, yeah that California method is definitely on the extreme end of how most states operate. Most of the time, the voting process (whether it’s showing up in person or requesting an absentee ballot) is something you have to opt-in to.

 

[Calheel]

Wow, yeah that California method is definitely on the extreme end of how most states operate. Most of the time, the voting process (whether it’s showing up in person or requesting an absentee ballot) is something you have to opt-in to.

The Western states are better at this. Washington, Colorado, Nevada and California all mail ballots to every voter and encourage mail voting. Oregon basically requires mail-only voting, although it is possible to vote in person with special arrangements.

 

[lightbluenc]

Should be a federal law that we are all automatically registered when we turn 18, and sent a ballot in the mail on a specific date to either mail back or return in person.

 

[CFordUNC]

Should be a federal law that we are all automatically registered when we turn 18, and sent a ballot in the mail on a specific date to either mail back or return in person.

Yeah, but then minorities might vote.

 

[Carolina Jones]

Should be a federal law that we are all automatically registered when we turn 18, and sent a ballot in the mail on a specific date to either mail back or return in person.

That makes too much sense. Pubs would never go for it.

 

[finesse]

Pubs are not about getting more representation for the people at large. They put power over principle decades ago.

 

[grimes70]

My Wake Co absentee package contained prepaid /pre-addressed return envelope.

 

[donbosco]

My Wake Co absentee package contained prepaid /pre-addressed return envelope.

I was advised to put THREE stamps on mine.

 

[Kraftyheel89]

Voted today. My usual very close rec center early voting site is usually a quick in and out. But the parking lot has been full all week with a line out to it. Found a lesser known place and walked right up to check in.

Some things I found unusual;

1) There are 5 (I think) on the ballot for Prez. Didn't even know all the others except Stein.

2) My county went back to paper ballots where you fill in the little bubbles. We've had the touch screen digital voting for years. Is this a statewide (NC) thing? Is it for hand recounts? Seems to be going backwards.

3) There was a referendum vote (yes/no) that only legal citizens be allowed to vote. I know this was a Pub posturing ploy on the House floor, since it is already illegal for non-citizens to vote. So how the hell did this end up on the state or local ballot? Of course I entered "yes" but what is the point?

4) In my county, Guilford, there were about 9 different district Court Judge seats up for vote out of 13. There may be more, but seat 13 was the highest I saw. Each seat was listed separately with the following in parenthesis for each seat (you may vote for only one candidate). All 9 or so seats listed had only a Dem listed. Why are only Dems running for District Judge seats? I voted for each seat and each Dem. I hope I didn't do this wrong and invalidate my entire ballot. The machine took it.

 

[Centerpiece]

Voted today. My usual very close rec center early voting site is usually a quick in and out. But the parking lot has been full all week with a line out to it. Found a lesser known place and walked right up to check in.

Some things I found unusual;

1) There are 5 (I think) on the ballot for Prez. Didn't even know all the others except Stein.

2) My county went back to paper ballots where you fill in the little bubbles. We've had the touch screen digital voting for years. Is this a statewide (NC) thing? Is it for hand recounts? Seems to be going backwards.

3) There was a referendum vote (yes/no) that only legal citizens be allowed to vote. I know this was a Pub posturing ploy on the House floor, since it is already illegal for non-citizens to vote. So how the hell did this end up on the state or local ballot? Of course I entered "yes" but what is the point?

4) In my county, Guilford, there were about 9 different district Court Judge seats up for vote out of 13. There may be more, but seat 13 was the highest I saw. Each seat was listed separately with the following in parenthesis for each seat (you may vote for only one candidate). All 9 or so seats listed had only a Dem listed. Why are only Dems running for District Judge seats? I voted for each seat and each Dem. I hope I didn't do this wrong and invalidate my entire ballot. The machine took it.

1) You could also write in Pat Paulson if you don’t like the 5

2) Touch screen voting has hated us for at least 4 years now… besides, we’re all Luddites at heart.

3) You fell for the ruse

4) ooh, you really messed up now… “only vote for one” and you went and bubbled in all 9. They’ll surely throw your ballot out. But at least you tried to do the right thing. You may have personally given pubs in Guilford county reason to gunk up the works on election night, and NOT certify the vote for the entire State…. AND Nation! Gee thanks.

 

[Kraftyheel89]

Center, thanks for the response. But seriously, I would genuinely like to know the answer as to why only Dems are running for many open District Court judgeships. Is it just a very strange anomaly, or something as simple as Pubs prefer to remain in private practice where the money is better? Dems love money too.

I also don't remember ever seeing a party listed for judicial seats. Things have changed a lot.

 

[lawtig02]

Center, thanks for the response. But seriously, I would genuinely like to know the answer as to why only Dems are running for many open District Court judgeships. Is it just a very strange anomaly, or something as simple as Pubs prefer to remain in private practice where the money is better? Dems love money too.

I also don't remember ever seeing a party listed for judicial seats. Things have changed a lot.

I think state Pubs made a strategic decision not to run candidates for district court races in the more urban counties where they had little chance of winning. Those positions are very important, but they’re generally not political, so I think the GOP didn’t see a benefit that could justify the cost, especially where the odds of winning are low.

 

[rodoheel]

Center, thanks for the response. But seriously, I would genuinely like to know the answer as to why only Dems are running for many open District Court judgeships. Is it just a very strange anomaly, or something as simple as Pubs prefer to remain in private practice where the money is better? Dems love money too.

I also don't remember ever seeing a party listed for judicial seats. Things have changed a lot.

State Republicans changed the law more than a decade ago to make judicial races partisan; they had previously been non-partisan. They did so because they thought it would help conservative judges win more judicial races.

As another poster already said, I think it’s a choice by Pubs not to run candidates for these local district court seats, which they will almost certainly lose.

I hope you voted “yes” on the sales tax initiative; the Guilford County schools need that money!

 

[Centerpiece]

Center, thanks for the response. But seriously, I would genuinely like to know the answer as to why only Dems are running for many open District Court judgeships. Is it just a very strange anomaly, or something as simple as Pubs prefer to remain in private practice where the money is better? Dems love money too.

I also don't remember ever seeing a party listed for judicial seats. Things have changed a lot.

Of course I was being totally facetious - and my usual smart-ass self. No offense. However, others have answered. Pub General Assembly made judgeships all partisan. Also, in your county - perhaps only Dems are running, but in my county (in WNC) it's usually all Pubs running and no Dems. Especially for District Judge, School Board, County Commish, etc.

This is simply because in a deep red county that usually votes 90%+ all PUB, then there is no impetus for any Dems to even throw their hat into the ring. Why waste the money? Same with a deep blue county... why run as a pub when you already know 90%+ of the voters will vote dem?

We need to cut out the severe gerrymandering and implement rank choice voting AND perhaps most importantly, allow Independents and registered unaffiliated candidates to get on the ballot without having to jump through so many hoops - like garnering 27,000,000 signatures on a petition.

 

[mpaer]

In the parking lot I was given a pamphlet of names by the Dems . I was grateful because I did not do my due diligence on County commissioners-I am pretty new in Wake County . County Commissioners had no R or D