Early voting ... dilutes the intensity of Election Day. When a large share of votes is cast well in advance of the first Tuesday in November, campaigns begin to scale back their late efforts. The parties run fewer ads and shift workers to more competitive states. Get-out-the-vote efforts in particular become much less efficient when so many people have already voted.Personally, I like the intensity and theater of voting at a polling place. If I had to stop by some office to fill out a form, I might put it off until it's too late or start rationalizing about how it doesn't really matter. (My one vote isn't going to tip the election.) But if a ballot were mailed to me and I could just mail it back, I'm sure I'd do that. (Though in some of these local elections, I'd probably just stare at names I didn't know much about until I finally admitted to myself that I didn't care, even as it would annoy me that straight party voters, who also didn't know much, would be determining the outcome.)
When Election Day is merely the end of a long voting period, it lacks the sort of civic stimulation that used to be provided by local news media coverage and discussion around the water cooler. Fewer co-workers will be sporting “I voted” stickers on their lapels on Election Day. Studies have shown that these informal interactions have a strong effect on turnout, as they generate social pressure. With significant early voting, Election Day can become a kind of afterthought, simply the last day of a drawn-out slog.
Mayer and Burden go on to connect the problem of early voting with same-day registration:
Fortunately, there is a way to improve turnout and keep the convenience of early voting. Our research shows that when early voting is combined with same-day registration — that is, you can register to vote and cast an early ballot on the same day — the depressive effect of early voting disappears.Unfortunately, they say nothing about the possibility that same-day registration pumps up the numbers with fraud.
***
Accompanying this op-ed is a pen-and-ink illustration by James McShane that's quite nice but that — I'm sure it was unintentional — tricked my eye. It's the panel that shows a letter being mailed. This is also the panel used for the front-page teaser to the op-ed. You look at it first. I'll tell you what I saw later.
Posts
91 comments:
This is exactly the same argument I've always had for the championships of virtually all the big-ticket pro sports leagues except the NFL. Having seven games completely dilutes the impact one single, all-or-nothing game has.
My prima facie take on it would be that it makes sense, but I would have to have someone better at research and stats than I look at their methodology. Anything that's pro same-day registration is suspect by default. Not that same-day registration is inherently nefarious, but still...
On a slightly dove-tailed topic...can someone tell me again why showing ID before voting is a bad idea?
Is is the giant "W" formed by the arms of the couple?
"On a slightly dove-tailed topic...can someone tell me again why showing ID before voting is a bad idea?"
Because it reduces the likelihood of Democrat voter fraud?
Because it discourages illegal aliens from exercising their right to vote?
Because it's racist?
I think election day will be pretty intense this year regardless of early voting. We can count on the media to find a way to encourage a sense of urgency.
I virtually ever see movies anymore. I'll see a trailer on television and think, "I'd like to see that movie". But going to the theater is a pain, and I know I can watch it on DVD later, so I don't go. Then I never get around to renting the DVD.
Seems like a similar phenomenon.
On a slightly dove-tailed topic...can someone tell me again why showing ID before voting is a bad idea?
What Palladian said.
In the panel you mention, the head of the woman who is mailing the ballot looks an awful lot like an old bald man with a beard looking at the tall man behind him. It's like that duck/bunny illusion.
The back of the woman's hair looks like a Vladimir Lenin mask that's laughing at the man.
(And the man looks like an early-stage Pinocchio.)
This topic just inspires all the obvious responses.
If they allowed people to vote as many times as they could get driven to polling places, without being registered or having to produce ID, I can't imagine the NYT would even bother complaining.
Better yet, if the results show the wrong winner there should be an extension for another week or so.
I early voted on Friday, all I needed was a name. That is ridiculous.
You correctly read the zig-zag line as 'water' and so you saw a chamber pot being emptied from the window in the mansard roof.
It's next to impossible for dead voters, or voters who don't exist, to appear on Tuesday.
I early voted on Friday, all I needed was a name. That is ridiculous.
You need more than just your name to do just about anything in modern society...excepting, of course, voting.
Kudos to the UW professors for examining the subject in the first place--You can't tell much about their methodology from a NYT piece, but sounds interesting. And from what I could tell their study certainly has face validity.
will look forward to wading thru the entire study--and like many things, it may show ultimately that good intentions lead to unanticipated consequences--but will hold that thought for the time being.
I am strongly opposed to the increased use of mail-in ballots or any other form of voting at home. There is simply no way to protect voters from intimidation or coercion if voting happens outside of a controlled environment where secrecy is mandated and enforced by the poll workers.
There's nothing to stop one spouse from badgering another into voting how the dominating spouse demands, and reviewing the ballot to make sure that the vote has been cast as promised.
There's nothing to stop a union hall or a church or a business from providing voter "assistance" to all of its members or employees, and using that "assistance" to make sure that all the people are voting the "right" way.
Sure, you can pass some laws against that, but that will then depend on the victims complaining. And who is going to want to actually file a formal complaint that their abusive spouse is telling them how to vote, or that their employer looked over their shoulder to make sure they cast their mail-in ballot the right way?
Increased use of mail-in ballots (or internet voting), in the long run, means the end of the secret ballot in this country.
"The back of the woman's hair looks like a Vladimir Lenin mask that's laughing at the man."
LOL. Well put! I only saw the old-man face for a long time.
I for one don't have to know much about the local candidates.
In RI, the Democrats have run the state - and run it into the ground - for the past 75 years or so. Short of a false flag campaign, it's impossible for any Republican to be worse than the Democrat opponent.
Interesting point, although I think this year may be an anomaly what with the phenomenon of the broken-glass Republicans (they'd crawl over broken glass to vote).
Since the early voting numbers seem to be going against the Demos (apparently SEIU isn't quite filling the gap left by ACORN), some states may be willing to curtail the practice.
With early voting, absentee ballots should be eliminated or very seriously reduced. No one can credibly deny that absentee balloting is rife with fraud and abuse. Same for mail-in or online voting.
Show up, show your ID, vote. And if early voting depresses voter turnout, fine! People who can't be bothered to find time to vote over a two week period probably aren't motivated enough to become informed voters.
People who can't be bothered to find time to vote over a two week period probably aren't motivated enough to become informed voters.
And, frankly, it has never been easier, in the history of the planet, to become an informed voter. The landmines are still out there, but the info is literally at your fingertips and on demand.
Those NY Times cartoon metrosexuals are so advanced that they don't require that old retrograde privacy to fill in their ballots but do it together, in each others presence, because for one thing it's inconceivable that metrosexuals could vote for "them" and for another voting out in the open makes the whole procedure more "authentic."
Since the early voting numbers seem to be going against the Demos (apparently SEIU isn't quite filling the gap left by ACORN), some states may be willing to curtail the practice.
The dems would love it if every repub voted early. Then they'd know exactly how many phony ballots to deliver to the counting rooms on election night.
Good points, PatHMV.
The dems would love it if every repub voted early. Then they'd know exactly how many phony ballots to deliver to the counting rooms on election night.
That would certainly make good business sense from a cost-efficiency standpoint, campy, but the Democrats and cost-efficiency are about as far apart as Mike Tyson and MENSA.
"absentee ballots should be eliminated or very seriously reduced"
Let's go with seriously reduced, because I always used the absentee ballot in the military and would have been PISSED were I disenfranchised...
The dems would love it if every repub voted early. Then they'd know exactly how many phony ballots to deliver to the counting rooms on election night.
They've done pretty good without it. Witness the 2004 Washington gubernatorial election where they kept doing recounts (with "found" ballots in each new cycle) until the Democrat "won".
You might have used the absentee ballot while in the military, Calypso Facto, but do you think that it arrived in time to be counted?
Witness the 2004 Washington gubernatorial election where they kept doing recounts (with "found" ballots in each new cycle) until the Democrat "won".
Yes, and I expect we'll see that scenario repeated many times next month.
But given their druthers, getting things settled on Tuesday night would be the better way to go.
I think so, Allen--I tried to be prompt. But then, with an APO, who knows. And with most Wisconsin mail routing through Chicago I guess it's even more in doubt! I certainly would have felt better with a tracking number, but as Chip points out, even that's not surefire...
"On a slightly dove-tailed topic...can someone tell me again why showing ID before voting is a bad idea?"
I'm torn on the idea of absentee balloting.
On the one hand, it creates a perfect opportunity for voter fraud. No one is really able to validate the authenticity of the absentee ballots. It is easy to dispose of those ballots you don't like or just not send out forms to those who will not vote for your candiate (military).
On the other hand, in some locations it is incredibly inconvenient to vote locally. For instance in a nearby county (about 15 miles away from my location) the closest polling place is in the county seat, which is at least 80 miles away from one of my clients. That is 80 miles of mountainous icy roads. Voting absentee for her makes sense.
There are some legitimate reasons to vote absentee. Just being to damned lazy to go to the polls should not be one of them.
Personally I LIKE going to my polling place. I know almost everyone there and it has a social/party type of feeling to it on election days.
However, Palladian has nailed it as to why we don't verify and ask for ID. It gives the Democrats, Acorn, SEIU the opportunity to cheat and steal the elections.
Personally I LIKE going to my polling place. I know almost everyone there and it has a social/party type of feeling to it on election days.
This. I also have taken any of my children that are over 5 every time.
Other than GOTV PSA's from (somewhat) non-partisan organizations, it's best to assume than any effort to increase the number of voters casting ballots is actually aimed at enabling vote fraud.
And the candidates depress voters.
Perhaps we could compromise and have each early vote count only 3/5 of one cast on voting day?
I expect fraud on a massive scale.
Voting will be early, late, often, and multiple.
Military votes will be disregarded.
And this is how American Politico is so confident. The gubmint has decided to throw the voters out and elect new voters.
The Royal Chicken is channeling Justice Taney.
au contraire. An early vote would count 3/5 for everyone regardless of age, creed, color, etc.
I like going to the polling place, too. Secretly voting for conservative candidates while standing amongst my uniformly liberal neighbors makes me feel a bit subversive.
Though it was disconcerting the time a ran into my alderperson on the way to the optical reader. She engaged me in conversation (she knew me because a group of us had recently (unsucessfully) fought the city putting a radio tower in our park), and she went out of her way, craning her neck to read my ballot, to see if I was voting "correctly".
It begins:
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/breaking-leftist-group-finds-3000-suspect-latino-voters-to-register-vote-on-last-day-of-early-voting-in-ruth-mcclungs-district/
“A source from the Yuma County Recorder’s Office has found that 65% of the registrations have been found to be invalid!” Wrong address. Not citizens. The registrations were all dumped off at once. Now before the requests for early ballots expires, the groups are requesting early ballots.
Of course it's impossible that voter registration fraud could ever lead to fraudulent voting. Just register thousands of people on the last day and we can be absolutely certain that absolutely every ineligible person will be identified before they can vote.
I'm a judge of election in Cook County, and judges are encouraged to vote early, especially if they're working in a precinct other than the one they live in, and might not get a chance to go home and vote.
I voted early, and was required to show a state ID. Not a problem.
In our precinct voters don't "show ID", but they do have to sign the ballot application, and the signature is matched against the one we have on file. If it doesn't match (or if there's anything else not-quite-kosher about the voter) then we can challenge them, and yes, we have done so in the past. But ours seems to be a pretty clean precinct. At least in the last couple of years, nobody has tried to impersonate a dead voter, and people will show their ID even when they haven't been asked for it.
Of course it's impossible that voter registration fraud could ever lead to fraudulent voting.
Fraudulent registration is just a hobby with some people. They don't mean anything by it.
Fraudulent registration is just a hobby with some people. They don't mean anything by it.
...that being said, I wonder what the voting fraud numbers are among the Klingon speakers in San Fransisco. Pretty low, I'd bet. Dishonorable, you know.
All the talk of voter fraud is making me believe the GOP thinks the wave is merely a ripple. Dee-licious!
The back of the woman's hair looks like a Vladimir Lenin mask that's laughing at the man.
Allow yourself to see the 'beard' as 'lips'. Now what do you see?
___
I like voting on election day, not only because it makes it feel like a bigger deal and is fun to see people I know, I have also found that it's quicker. Everybody in town early votes at the same place, but there a bunch of precincts.
As for absentee ballots, there is room for fraud and room for ballots to be disgarded, and we should be careful about that, but there is also a legitmate need for absentee ballots. It's not just the military who use them, my grandparents use them because it is hard for them to get out and I used them in college because I was out of state.
There's nothing to stop one spouse from badgering another into voting how the dominating spouse demands, and reviewing the ballot to make sure that the vote has been cast as promised.
Mind your own fucking business. If I want to browbeat my wife into submission to vote MY way that's my right as her husband. I own her.
All the talk of voter fraud is making me believe the GOP thinks the wave is merely a ripple. Dee-licious!
Since you'll be swimming mouth agape through that river of piss to vote for Russ (your words) on election day, I'd too would be worried about ripples and waves.
Woman - barefoot, pregnant in the kitchen preparing the evening meal for her master.
Hey, I wasn't finding fault, just riffing on the "3/5" thing. Ol' Roger was popular in a town I used to reside in - what can I say?
No worries Ol'Grit.
I think you get a different type of turnout. I voted two weeks ago.
I think I am less subject to last minute flurries in public opinion and manipulation by the media/ professional political operatives this way. I vote more coherently based upon how I really feel. I like the fact that by the time the last propaganda-heavy mailings reach me, it's already too late.
I am more likely to vote. While I do enjoy the atmosphere on voting day, I wouldn't make it at least 50 percent of the time that I make it by permanent absentee.
I also enjoy the ability to do a lot of research and googling on the propositions as I fill out my ballot at home. Yes, I still *could* do that, but I doubt I would.
Early voting in Florida--separate from absentee voting--requires both stopping by one of a reduced number of polling places (four for my county as opposed to the election day 80+) AND production of a government-issued, photo ID.
The ballot requires voters to black-in their choices on candidates and various constitutional amendment proposals, then feed the ballot into an electronic reader.
I did wear my "I voted" sticker around for the rest of the day. As I don't have a water cooler to hang around, those who saw it at the public library, the grocery store, the restaurant at which I ate dinner all had the opportunity to be amazed and reminded that they, too, could vote!
No (WV = scler) clogging up the ballot box!
@ Stan: When I worked in US Embassies abroad, absentee ballots were the only way I could vote. I was in the US for exactly one presidential election over a 25-year span. I'd've been really, really annoyed if someone tried to take away my right to vote.
If I lived in the upper 48, I probably would not even register to vote. That is how bogus and untrustworthy I think the elections generally are.
I don't like to brag, but you should all look at how we do it here in Puerto Rico. 4 million people, 80-85% of all adults are registered. It is not a bogus thing like motor voter, either. You have to go to an office with documentation that you are a US citizen and a resident of where you purport to be.
For that you get a heavy duty, non-counterfeitable voter ID card. Without that, you can't cast a ballot. Well, you can but it gets set aside for later adjudication.
No early voting. All voting takes place on election day.
Damn hard to get an absentee ballot. Students and military can get one. Most others can't. There are some special provisions for invalids and those who can't get to the polls but they vote on the same day as everyone else.
Ballots are paper. 3 of them. Commonwealth, district and municipal offices. You mark them with a pencil and put them in an urn.
Sounds like a pretty convoluted process, no? of the 80-85% registered, we normally get 75-80% actually casting a vote.
Most races pretty close but we have ballots semi-officially counted by 7-8PM the same day. The official process takes a week or so but almost never changes anything.
We may not get any better politicians but in 40 years of voting here I've never heard anyone question the integrity of the vote.
Unlike many districts in the US. "Chicago where the dead vote" "New York, vote early vote often", NBP thugs at the polls in Philly. Poll watchers getting turned away in Houston. Computerized voting machines (do NOT get me started on them), hanging chads in Florida.
The manner of elections is up to the states but surely they could do a better job of instilling confidence. If people had more confidence in the election process, perhaps we would see more than 40% turnout. Perhaps we would not see anyone having to cajole voters into registering.
I don't like early voting at all. I don't like absentee ballots but recognize them as a necessary evil in some cases.
If people don't care enough to go to the polls on election day, fine by me. Let them sit the election out.
John Henry
I voted via absentee ballot since I will be out of state on 11/2. In Oklahoma, you do not have to show id to vote, but to mail in the absentee ballot, one of the inner envelopes have to be notorized, which means you have to show a picture ID.
But, one of the questions on the ballot is to require photo id for voting.
On the cartoon - I noticed the odd nose and the two people filling out the ballot together, but what caught my eye was the last panel where the people are shocked at the results on the tv. If the northern states are usually (D, then this map shows the majority of the states as (R)!
There also seems to be a tendency for undecideds to break heavily with the last-minute media push or polling results simply to avoid the pain of losing (imo). They seem to want to get the "right" answer and the "right" answer is the winner.
I don't know what you saw, but I was struck by the invalid vote on the ballot.
For that you get a heavy duty, non-counterfeitable voter ID card. Without that, you can't cast a ballot. Well, you can but it gets set aside for later adjudication.
Translation: if the democrats need it, it's counted.
Since you'll be swimming mouth agape through that river of piss to vote for Russ (your words) on election day, I'd too would be worried about ripples and waves.
Not 'my words', those are your words.
I dare you to link.
Agree with Anne B. about Chicago. Down at the precinct is not where the action is most of the time.
Most shenanigans are done via absentee voting which gives you more time to vote the dead or moved. Sometimes, the precinct worker will even follow the postal worker on his rounds to collect the ballots.
It's very weird here in Oregon where everything is mail-in and no more precincts or election day hubbub. But it seems very clean here.
None of this stuff matters. The Dems can erase a 3% loss with fraud, and if they turn their takers out, the demographics will kill the country.
What difference does the timing make?
I don't think it is appropriate that election officials disclose the party trends or comparative volumes of early voting. It could affect the actions of those who have not yet voted [to vote or not to vote].
Even the media has agreed to not release exit polling results prior to the closing of the polls.
The govt should be required to mail out a sample ballot to every registered voter at least 30 days before election day. That might spur interest in the election and a byproduct is the returned mail could be used to purge the voter roles.
I have suggested a couple times around here and they always answer "but the cost but the cost, we can't afford it" [they are lying pukes - they don't really want the non-faithful of either party to vote IMO].
I don't think it is appropriate that election officials disclose the party trends or comparative volumes of early voting.
Yeah, I've often wondered how this is legitamite.
Garage wrote: I dare you to link.
Start with this.
Garage, what's up with that?
Pollo said..
"Since you'll be swimming mouth agape through that river of piss to vote for Russ (your words) on election day, I'd too would be worried about ripples and waves."
10/25/10 12:38 PM
I said at the link:
"I will swim a river of piss to vote for Feingold if that's what it takes. "
It is not the voters that matter in a tyrant's operation; rather it is who counts the votes. Every time a set of absentee, mail in, early votes is added you have 3 more shells to hide the stuffed farudulent ballets under. When all vote on the Tuesday called voting day, the sides and the public volunteers are everywhere and diligently alert...heck that is hard to beat by a faked count.
Garage,
Do you really think not using "mouth agape" in your original sentence changes the context of what you wrote compared to his? Or are you trying to "what is the definition of 'is'" out of it?
Yeah, OK, E.P.R. embellished a little.
Were these guys trained by the social scientists who told us that we needed early voting to increase turnout? That was, if I recall, because so many voters were supposedly barred from voting because of other responsibilities.
I do not trust these people as a class, since their main motivation is to find grist for grants and publication.
Yeah, OK, E.P.R. embellished a little.
Granted, one would try to keep one's mouth closed if in that situation, but, let's face it...you're still swimming in a river of piss either way.
Do you really think not using "mouth agape" in your original sentence changes the context of what you wrote compared to his?
Ah yea, since I didn't say that. And I said I would "if that's what it takes". That means if that river of piss was between me and that voting booth. Not a big deal.
So if you're swimming in that river, are your eyes agape? You have to see where you're swimming in that piss, right? How about your nostrils? Since you seem to be anti-mouth agape, I'm assuming you're breathing through your nose while piss-swimming. Since you can't actually close your nostrils, I don't think "agape" counts there, but still...you're swimming in piss, correct?
Ah yea, since I didn't say that.
Agreed.
And I said I would "if that's what it takes". That means if that river of piss was between me and that voting booth.
I'd a stopped while I was ahead.
Original Mike wrote: Yeah, OK, E.P.R. embellished a little.
I embellished the psrt about the mouth but not the river, but ScottM's subsequent analysis is spot on.
@Garage: Go for the golden!
P.S. I am sorry about the embellishment because I know you never embellish anything. At all.
Yeesh.
So if you're swimming in that river, are your eyes agape?
Lot of variables to consider. Piss temperature, current speed, how wide is the river, depth, etc. If I had my preference I would try and find the narrowest and shallowest portion of the river and wade. But I suppose when you're trying to cross a river of piss and probably never works out that way.
double yeesh
So...at least we've made progress. You agree that you said you would swim, with whatever orifices agape that need be as the situation dictates, across a river of piss.
You could have just admitted you painted the original piss picture and we could have moved on with our lives.
I studied the cartoon and all I could find to wonder about is "Why did the NY Times print such an inane illustration?"
On the entertainment-level scale, it reminded me of a little cartoon in an instruction book that shows me how to put the batteries in my camera.
So...at least we've made progress. You agree that you said you would swim, with whatever orifices agape that need be as the situation dictates, across a river of piss.
I would look for some sort of flotation device option first, blown up my pants and tie them off, or look for something on shore, and if I had an axe the game changes - I would knock down a small tree. What I wouldn't be doing is swimming underwater with my eyes and mouth open that's for sure. I'm not crazy.
I teach my students that if you want someone to review your work, ask for the response tomorrow, or even today. If you give people more time, they put it off for more pressing matters; and eventually, they put it off entirely. A narrow deadline has a focusing effect.
On the other hand, the early voting undermines October surprises. Either you release them too late to affect many votes, or you release them early enough for the opposition to mount an effective response.
Still, on the whole, I would prefer votes only on election day except for narrowly limited absentee voting.
As for the cartoon... I was more interested in the last panel. That big area in the middle which has them in such a panic: is it my imagination, or is there a cross in there, and that's causing their panic?
I like the polling place 'cause there's usually a bake sale going on.
Scott,
I don't have any kids but my landlord and his wife have 4 between the ages of 5 and 11 and they make sure to take 2 each when they vote. It is about 8 blocks to the polling place and they spend the time talking to their kids about the importance of voting and what it means. Good time to pass on strong patriotic feelings to the kids. I have no idea whether they are leftists or right wingers, never asked, but they are good people and good parents whichever way they vote. Also Hispanic and really see to it that the kids are involved with the July 4 and Memorial Day and Veterans's Day celebrations.
Milwaukie guy,
How could you know how clean it is in Oregon if it is all handled by mail? What would even tip you off on it being rigged or not?
No real evidence. I still have all my Chicago cynicism but I just don't see the bad signs: abnormally high returns from selected districts, campaign workers going door to door to help out voters, etc.
Take away all the hipsters and Oregon has a very upstanding Iowa vibe.
wv: scoms: Not saying all hipsters are scoms or anything.
Post a Comment