Thread: "La Raza"-Something, "Aztlan"-HUH? Wasss

Folks, we need to go back to our original voting system. Paper ballots with X marks the vote and they cannot be deleted if their needs to be a recount.

I agree that we need to do something about voting but paper ballots presented a problem in that not only can a person put in more than one, some can be destroyed on the way to the counting house, can't they?

I wish I knew a fool proof answer to this mess.

I do not know what is wrong with the electronic voting system. Seems to me we have mililions and millions of ATM transactions every day for how many decades now? I never had a bank not know what I selected.

I don't know, either, NoToAmnesty.

You are right, though. I've been using an ATM since the 1980's and there has only been one glitch--ever-- because I keyed in the wrong pin number more than 3 times. That was MY fault, not the machine's.

I've voted electronically since the year 2000, if I'm not mistaken.

I voted from overseas twice as well.

Other than that, I voted on those machines that punch out a card and drop it into a box.

I don't have any reason to believe that the votes are rigged for local elections because there is a very high percentage of democrats out here on the border.

On the other hand, I'm not surprised that Sylvester Reyes is our Congressman because he's a democrat. Still, I can't help but wonder what happens to the people who attempt to run against him, knowing how unpopular he actually is. Is there or is there not an extortion factor even at the congressional level?

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that I don't know that the actual VOTES are rigged so much as the selection of candidates. I sincerely believe that there was extortion involved when Ross Perot tried to run for President because they knew he could beat them by popular vote. And I believe that there is some sort of extortion at the Senatorial level that allows people like Kennedy to keep being re-elected time after time.

I'm not sure I buy the "dangling chad" bit that Gore made such a stink about. I personally haven't seen one of those type machines in many years where you pull the lever to punch out a card--since Reagan maybe? And I found it hard to believe that Florida has such an antiquated system. In any event, it would seem perfectly obvious to me that if there was part of a hole punched out (and perhaps the solution would be to test the machines for sharp punches BEFORE the election!) that it was meant for the WHOLE thing to be punched out. Apparently, the people in Florida were instructed how to re-count the votes by someone who knew something they didn't.

Votes that are mailed in (like those from overseas) are written out on a paper sort of like a test in school where you mark your answer.

I think that the electronic machines can be manipulated by a clever person and therefore if they are going to be used, each individual machine or set of machines should be verified against the number of people who came through the polling booth to prevent tampering at the main terminal. The problem is getting the voters from that particular precinct back to vote again if there was a glitch and making sure that ONLY the people who could take the trouble to vote are recalled to vote again.

I think that the punch cards can conveniently "disappear" just like the absentee votes always seem to do. I feel like I wasted my time and endangered my life needlessly to go to American Embassies in two different Arab nations to vote in the 90's because those votes just got thrown away as though I, and everyone else who took the trouble to vote, were nobody.

Anyway, I actually do give this matter a lot of thought, as a voter who has been voting for more years than my kids in their 30's have been alive

I can't come up with anything that makes sense to me other than going back to those old punch card machines, having several people double checking each other to make sure they are set up and operating properly before election day and putting several people in charge of making sure the ballots get to the counting house. Maybe even let the citizenry WITNESS the counting in their area.

And, for the presidential elections, they need to get rid of that crooked electoral college, the caucuses, etc. There is no need for all that hoop-la and there would be no need for it if decent people were running for public offices.

And there is another issue that may not be common to everyplace: early voting. I think it should be abolished because it give the people playing with the machines more opportinities to doctor up the results. It may be convenient and I have done it simply for that reason, but it should be abolished.

And, for the presidential elections, they need to get rid of that crooked electoral college, the caucuses, etc. There is no need for all that hoop-la and there would be no need for it if decent people were running for public offices.

Hillary Clinton wants to do away with the electoral college -- that means it's a good idea for sure. We don't need states heavily populated with illegals that illegally vote to determine our elections. It's bad enough that they control the electoral college, but at least we stand a better chance with that.

In the beginning, the people didn't vote for the President at all.

The Constitution required the three political branches of the federal government -- the Executive, the Senate, and the House – each be elected by a dissimilar election process. The House of Representatives were elected by the popular vote of the people according to population, the Senate was appointed by the state legislatures, and the President was elected by electoral vote. In Federalist, No. 63, James Madison wrote,


"(The people) may possibly be betrayed by the representatives of the people… (but) the danger will be evidently greater where the whole legislative trust is lodged in the hands of one body of men, than where the concurrence of separate and dissimilar bodies is required in every public act."

. . . .

The states were to regulate and limit the power of the federal government, but as is, the federal government dictates to the states. In no sense of the word does the united States have a "federal" government, what we have is a national or centralized power where the states have to lobby Congress for favors and the federal government fails to do the very thing it was created for, to provide for the "common defense and general welfare" of the states, i.e., to "protect each of them against invasion" – a loveless marriage in an unholy union.


Alabama Coalition for State's Rights

True, In the beginning, only land owners got to vote.

But I still think that the electoral college is crooked and caucuses are just wasting money.

I don't really care what Hillary thinks about anything, to be honest. Her credibility with me rates right up there with Cheney, Bush, Kennedy and McCain. Zero, zip, zilch!