Voting Rights

[lagerhead]

When the DMV in California went to motor voter it registered a large number of ineligible people. Registered voters are targeted by all parties while electioneering, those that are targeted and automatically registered in error may think they have the right to vote. Enrollment in motor voter should be an affirmation not automatically put on the rolls.

Colorado ranks number one in the nation in voter registration, with 90 percent of eligible Coloradans registered.

Why? Automatic motor voter registration. Which Joe Manchin has wisely included in his proposal.

Colorado also consistently ranks in the top 5 state for voter turnout.

Why? Broad no fault mail in voting and a fork ton of secure drop boxes open 24/7 for several weeks before and through ED. Which Joe Manchin has also wisely included in his proposal.

We also cut off voting at 7 pm on ED. We also count the votes as they come in. So election results are available wicked fast after the polls close and we don't have to mess around with the post-marked ballots that show up on Friday.

Colorado voters also chose several years ago to rid our fair state of partisan gerry-mandering. Manchin's proposal wisely includes this.

So if you want free, fair, secure elections, just do what Colorado does. Which is 180 degrees from what you are seeing out of the GOP legislatures these days.

Having more registered independents than Dems or GOPs definitely helps us keep the partisan rat-forking at bay.

I agree with most of CO's voting laws.

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

[Peter Brown]

Manchin's "voter ID" requirement would expand the types of government ID that can be used in elections, for example by allowing voters to cast ballots if they display a utility bill.

That's totally fine. Colorado (the best fairest voting system in the nation) has some voter ID requirements. Below are the multiple acceptable forms of voter ID. Totally fair and fine and has been for years. Stacey Abrams and other Dems/libs have been fine with that for a long time.

What isn't fine (and should not be fine) is so-called "strict photo voter ID" which has a clear and demonstrated disenfranchising effect.

Guess which version of voter ID the GOP insists upon?

The kind like in TN. A gun permit is acceptable ID to vote. But a UT student photo ID is not. GMAFB.




A copy of a current (within the last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector.
.[/i]

How do any of these prove citizenship with the ability to get them with a TIN and a drivers license that are also available to undocumented? By themselves I don’t think they stand up but as part of a point system could be used in conjunction with. In NJ you have to provide 6 points to get a DL you can get one without showing citizenship. “ Real” DL’s have been delayed until ‘23.

Remember, of course, that voting fraudulently is against the law, a felony. In Colorado, the Class 5 felony penalty is $5,000 or 18 months in jail, or both.

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/electi ... esFAQ.html

So the only way to have non-citizens voting illegally be widespread enough to move the needle is to persuade a very large number of non-citizens to risk being caught doing so. And doing so risks deportation as well.

Which is why such is so very rare.

Voting twice or in different jurisdictions, more than one of which would be illegal, is a mite easier, but also very risky for the offender. And not prevented by a picture ID.

Okay but someone voting illegally is not going to care about the penalty.
Not talking about moving the needle you need to be a citizen to vote how do those docs prove that?
I didn’t mention picture ids the additional documentation needed for the other ids does that. Why allow those forms of ID I quoted as a singular point of affirmation of voting rights?

Why do you think someone would risk $5000 fine or 18 months in jail, or both, just to register a single vote?

Note that you do need to be registered voter before voting. These forms of identity proof simply indicate that you are indeed the registered voter on the list when you show up to vote. But you can't vote if you're not registered.

When the DMV in California went to motor voter it registered a large number of ineligible people. Registered voters are targeted by all parties while electioneering, those that are targeted and automatically registered in error may think they have the right to vote. Enrollment in motor voter should be an affirmation not automatically put on the rolls.

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-a ... ation-foes

https://www.usavisacounsel.com/articles ... n-trap.htm

They found one non-citizen voter registered incorrectly out of how many???
Ohh the horror.

But sure, we don't want non-citizens voting.
But seriously, would you risk a $5k fine, 18 months in jail, deportation just to vote illegally?

Your logic makes me chuckle MD. I live in a state where in most cities the DAs won't press charges for people that committed burglary, grand larceny and criminal mischief while looting and rioting. You think these same DAs will throw the book at someone for VOTER FRAUD? Monkeys will fly out of my backside before that ever happens.

+1


MD would protest outside a DA’s home if they even thought of a jamming up an illegal alien who voted illegally. (btw, next election, I want MD sitting as a poll watcher in his Gilman tweeds at whatever voting station is next to Latrobe Homes in Bodymore...let’s see if he spots the fraud )

[cradleandshoot]

Manchin's "voter ID" requirement would expand the types of government ID that can be used in elections, for example by allowing voters to cast ballots if they display a utility bill.

That's totally fine. Colorado (the best fairest voting system in the nation) has some voter ID requirements. Below are the multiple acceptable forms of voter ID. Totally fair and fine and has been for years. Stacey Abrams and other Dems/libs have been fine with that for a long time.

What isn't fine (and should not be fine) is so-called "strict photo voter ID" which has a clear and demonstrated disenfranchising effect.

Guess which version of voter ID the GOP insists upon?

The kind like in TN. A gun permit is acceptable ID to vote. But a UT student photo ID is not. GMAFB.




A copy of a current (within the last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector.
.[/i]

How do any of these prove citizenship with the ability to get them with a TIN and a drivers license that are also available to undocumented? By themselves I don’t think they stand up but as part of a point system could be used in conjunction with. In NJ you have to provide 6 points to get a DL you can get one without showing citizenship. “ Real” DL’s have been delayed until ‘23.

Remember, of course, that voting fraudulently is against the law, a felony. In Colorado, the Class 5 felony penalty is $5,000 or 18 months in jail, or both.

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/electi ... esFAQ.html

So the only way to have non-citizens voting illegally be widespread enough to move the needle is to persuade a very large number of non-citizens to risk being caught doing so. And doing so risks deportation as well.

Which is why such is so very rare.

Voting twice or in different jurisdictions, more than one of which would be illegal, is a mite easier, but also very risky for the offender. And not prevented by a picture ID.

Okay but someone voting illegally is not going to care about the penalty.
Not talking about moving the needle you need to be a citizen to vote how do those docs prove that?
I didn’t mention picture ids the additional documentation needed for the other ids does that. Why allow those forms of ID I quoted as a singular point of affirmation of voting rights?

Why do you think someone would risk $5000 fine or 18 months in jail, or both, just to register a single vote?

Note that you do need to be registered voter before voting. These forms of identity proof simply indicate that you are indeed the registered voter on the list when you show up to vote. But you can't vote if you're not registered.

When the DMV in California went to motor voter it registered a large number of ineligible people. Registered voters are targeted by all parties while electioneering, those that are targeted and automatically registered in error may think they have the right to vote. Enrollment in motor voter should be an affirmation not automatically put on the rolls.

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-a ... ation-foes

https://www.usavisacounsel.com/articles ... n-trap.htm

They found one non-citizen voter registered incorrectly out of how many???
Ohh the horror.

But sure, we don't want non-citizens voting.
But seriously, would you risk a $5k fine, 18 months in jail, deportation just to vote illegally?

Your logic makes me chuckle MD. I live in a state where in most cities the DAs won't press charges for people that committed burglary, grand larceny and criminal mischief while looting and rioting. You think these same DAs will throw the book at someone for VOTER FRAUD? Monkeys will fly out of my backside before that ever happens.

+1


MD would protest outside a DA’s home if they even thought of a jamming up an illegal alien who voted illegally. (btw, next election, I want MD sitting as a poll watcher in his Gilman tweeds at whatever voting station is next to Latrobe Homes in Bodymore...let’s see if he spots the fraud )

Would he have to wear a bowtie?

[cradleandshoot]

I'm reminded of an episode of Dragnet. MD is playing the role of Sgt Joe Friday. He and his partner Bill Gannon were working the day watch out of the voter fraud division. It was hot in Las Angeles....

[MDlaxfan76]

Manchin's "voter ID" requirement would expand the types of government ID that can be used in elections, for example by allowing voters to cast ballots if they display a utility bill.

That's totally fine. Colorado (the best fairest voting system in the nation) has some voter ID requirements. Below are the multiple acceptable forms of voter ID. Totally fair and fine and has been for years. Stacey Abrams and other Dems/libs have been fine with that for a long time.

What isn't fine (and should not be fine) is so-called "strict photo voter ID" which has a clear and demonstrated disenfranchising effect.

Guess which version of voter ID the GOP insists upon?

The kind like in TN. A gun permit is acceptable ID to vote. But a UT student photo ID is not. GMAFB.




A copy of a current (within the last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector.
.[/i]

How do any of these prove citizenship with the ability to get them with a TIN and a drivers license that are also available to undocumented? By themselves I don’t think they stand up but as part of a point system could be used in conjunction with. In NJ you have to provide 6 points to get a DL you can get one without showing citizenship. “ Real” DL’s have been delayed until ‘23.

Remember, of course, that voting fraudulently is against the law, a felony. In Colorado, the Class 5 felony penalty is $5,000 or 18 months in jail, or both.

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/electi ... esFAQ.html

So the only way to have non-citizens voting illegally be widespread enough to move the needle is to persuade a very large number of non-citizens to risk being caught doing so. And doing so risks deportation as well.

Which is why such is so very rare.

Voting twice or in different jurisdictions, more than one of which would be illegal, is a mite easier, but also very risky for the offender. And not prevented by a picture ID.

Okay but someone voting illegally is not going to care about the penalty.
Not talking about moving the needle you need to be a citizen to vote how do those docs prove that?
I didn’t mention picture ids the additional documentation needed for the other ids does that. Why allow those forms of ID I quoted as a singular point of affirmation of voting rights?

Why do you think someone would risk $5000 fine or 18 months in jail, or both, just to register a single vote?

Note that you do need to be registered voter before voting. These forms of identity proof simply indicate that you are indeed the registered voter on the list when you show up to vote. But you can't vote if you're not registered.

When the DMV in California went to motor voter it registered a large number of ineligible people. Registered voters are targeted by all parties while electioneering, those that are targeted and automatically registered in error may think they have the right to vote. Enrollment in motor voter should be an affirmation not automatically put on the rolls.

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-a ... ation-foes

https://www.usavisacounsel.com/articles ... n-trap.htm

They found one non-citizen voter registered incorrectly out of how many???
Ohh the horror.

But sure, we don't want non-citizens voting.
But seriously, would you risk a $5k fine, 18 months in jail, deportation just to vote illegally?

How many people know the law or read the fine print?

sorry charley we are going to disagree on the sanctity of one of the most sacrosanct rights written in the constitution.

I'm not sure why you'd think we aren't in significant agreement on the importance of the right to vote. I hope you'd agree with me that it's a hugely important right, fundamental to democracy, the expression of consent of the governed, and should not be abridged or taken away by those simply seeking their own power.

Right?

I'd certainly hope we agree on that.

So, when throughout our American history all citizens have not actually been afforded that right, we'd agree that it was hugely important and good when those rights were extended?

And that the struggle to achieve those rights, which was really, really hard, was worthwhile?

So, if we do agree, then you may well also agree that those trying to make it more difficult for certain people to vote, citizens, that's a very serious issue? And one which we should be on the side of those wishing to cast their vote?

Indeed, "sacrosanct" as in 'too important or valuable to be interfered with'. Especially by those seeking to prevent the free exercise of that right for their own personal power and gain!

Perhaps the clue in you thinking we disagree is in the word "sanctity" as in 'holy, sacred, or saintly'. Not sure there's something religious about this right, but if you simply mean super important and valuable, ok, again we agree, not disagree. But perhaps you think that if a non-citizen votes, even one, that diminishes the holiness or sacredness of all other votes? Certainly one could argue that there's a dilutive impact, but unless that dilution is significant, how should we weigh these competing interests?

What's in opposition are efforts to make voting more difficult, "abridged", in the hopes of reducing the exercise of this fundamental right, and the dilutive impact of even a single non-citizen voting whether on purpose fraudulently or somehow by accident.

Easy tradeoff to me, given indeed how important this "right" is for the citizen.

But let's also examine your initial question, do you really think many people, including immigrants, actually think it's legal for non-citizens to vote? Not many countries (any?) to my knowledge allow non-citizens to vote, so why would anyone imagine such, accidentally...seems to me if there was even the slightest question I'd ask a friend, google, whatever! I sure as heck wouldn't waltz in as an illegal immigrant or even documented visa holder etc and ask for the government to look at me trying to vote!

No way, Jose.

[ggait]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

[MDlaxfan76]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

ahhh, that certainly encourages registering as an "independent"...sounds like lagerhead's state forces you into whatever box you chose for a given cycle and keeps you there unless you jump through hoops to get back to "I".

[lagerhead]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

ahhh, that certainly encourages registering as an "independent"...sounds like lagerhead's state forces you into whatever box you chose for a given cycle and keeps you there unless you jump through hoops to get back to "I".

Correct, for every primary election. Then you have to take steps to re register, after every cycle otherwise can’t vote outside of your “automatically registered” party in the next primary. So every 2/4 years I’m required to re register. I’m in NJ.

[MDlaxfan76]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

ahhh, that certainly encourages registering as an "independent"...sounds like lagerhead's state forces you into whatever box you chose for a given cycle and keeps you there unless you jump through hoops to get back to "I".

Correct, for every primary election. Then you have to take steps to re register, after every cycle otherwise can’t vote outside of your “automatically registered” party in the next primary. So every 2/4 years I’m required to re register. I’m in NJ.

Serious pain in the butt.
Colorado's sounds way more 'voter friendly'.

Here in MD, you don't get to vote in the primaries as an 'unaffiliated' voter, so if you want to switch back and forth you have to do by directly registering with that party, and can only do so during the registration window.

My dad, who voted perhaps even more reliably R than me in general elections, was always registered Dem simply so that he could vote in the Dem primaries under the theory that would have more influence on who would actually represent MD or govern the county, etc, given certain realities...I know a lot of his buddies did so as well. Probably smart. I took a different tack and registered R, somewhat as an encouragement to R candidates that there were some of us out here! I didn't always vote for the R up and down the ballot as sometimes there was someone too extreme for my taste and/or I really liked the D for some reason, but generally party line.

[Peter Brown]

I'm reminded of an episode of Dragnet. MD is playing the role of Sgt Joe Friday. He and his partner Bill Gannon were working the day watch out of the voter fraud division. It was hot in Las Angeles....

[lagerhead]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

ahhh, that certainly encourages registering as an "independent"...sounds like lagerhead's state forces you into whatever box you chose for a given cycle and keeps you there unless you jump through hoops to get back to "I".

Correct, for every primary election. Then you have to take steps to re register, after every cycle otherwise can’t vote outside of your “automatically registered” party in the next primary. So every 2/4 years I’m required to re register. I’m in NJ.

Serious pain in the butt.
Colorado's sounds way more 'voter friendly'.

Here in MD, you don't get to vote in the primaries as an 'unaffiliated' voter, so if you want to switch back and forth you have to do by directly registering with that party, and can only do so during the registration window.

My dad, who voted perhaps even more reliably R than me in general elections, was always registered Dem simply so that he could vote in the Dem primaries under the theory that would have more influence on who would actually represent MD or govern the county, etc, given certain realities...I know a lot of his buddies did so as well. Probably smart. I took a different tack and registered R, somewhat as an encouragement to R candidates that there were some of us out here! I didn't always vote for the R up and down the ballot as sometimes there was someone too extreme for my taste and/or I really liked the D for some reason, but generally party line.

Don’t you think those policies restrict voting?

[Peter Brown]

For MD and gang, voter ID laws went from “Jim Crow in a suit and tie” to “oh no they’re popular never mind” in a span of 3 months.

[MDlaxfan76]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

ahhh, that certainly encourages registering as an "independent"...sounds like lagerhead's state forces you into whatever box you chose for a given cycle and keeps you there unless you jump through hoops to get back to "I".

Correct, for every primary election. Then you have to take steps to re register, after every cycle otherwise can’t vote outside of your “automatically registered” party in the next primary. So every 2/4 years I’m required to re register. I’m in NJ.

Serious pain in the butt.
Colorado's sounds way more 'voter friendly'.

Here in MD, you don't get to vote in the primaries as an 'unaffiliated' voter, so if you want to switch back and forth you have to do by directly registering with that party, and can only do so during the registration window.

My dad, who voted perhaps even more reliably R than me in general elections, was always registered Dem simply so that he could vote in the Dem primaries under the theory that would have more influence on who would actually represent MD or govern the county, etc, given certain realities...I know a lot of his buddies did so as well. Probably smart. I took a different tack and registered R, somewhat as an encouragement to R candidates that there were some of us out here! I didn't always vote for the R up and down the ballot as sometimes there was someone too extreme for my taste and/or I really liked the D for some reason, but generally party line.

Don’t you think those policies restrict voting?

yes, though less about restricting one's ability to cast a vote than making it more difficult to vote in primaries, which is more about party control over who their candidate will be than in preventing access to a ballot or making it difficult to get one's vote cast and counted.

I like CO's rules better than NJ's or MD's, but these aren't actually voter suppression tactics per se.

But we agree that Co's rules would be better.

[MDlaxfan76]

For MD and gang, voter ID laws went from “Jim Crow in a suit and tie” to “oh no they’re popular never mind” in a span of 3 months.

Again with the stupid lies.

The "voter ID" voting suppression laws are very much still "Jim Crow", whereas the requirement to be identified when voting as the person registered has never been an issue with those wanting voters to participate more easily.

It didn't use to be R's, or mostly R's, who wanted to keep black and brown and young people from voting, but it's quite openly the case now.

I just think it's the death rattle of a party which has finally abandoned all principle in the desperate effort to maintain fleeting power and advantage as long as possible.

[lagerhead]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

ahhh, that certainly encourages registering as an "independent"...sounds like lagerhead's state forces you into whatever box you chose for a given cycle and keeps you there unless you jump through hoops to get back to "I".

Correct, for every primary election. Then you have to take steps to re register, after every cycle otherwise can’t vote outside of your “automatically registered” party in the next primary. So every 2/4 years I’m required to re register. I’m in NJ.

Serious pain in the butt.
Colorado's sounds way more 'voter friendly'.

Here in MD, you don't get to vote in the primaries as an 'unaffiliated' voter, so if you want to switch back and forth you have to do by directly registering with that party, and can only do so during the registration window.

My dad, who voted perhaps even more reliably R than me in general elections, was always registered Dem simply so that he could vote in the Dem primaries under the theory that would have more influence on who would actually represent MD or govern the county, etc, given certain realities...I know a lot of his buddies did so as well. Probably smart. I took a different tack and registered R, somewhat as an encouragement to R candidates that there were some of us out here! I didn't always vote for the R up and down the ballot as sometimes there was someone too extreme for my taste and/or I really liked the D for some reason, but generally party line.

Don’t you think those policies restrict voting?

yes, though less about restricting one's ability to cast a vote than making it more difficult to vote in primaries, which is more about party control over who their candidate will be than in preventing access to a ballot or making it difficult to get one's vote cast and counted.

I like CO's rules better than NJ's or MD's, but these aren't actually voter suppression tactics per se.

But we agree that Co's rules would be better.

You went back and read the entire thread (suppression restriction) made me think that, thanks understood.

[MDlaxfan76]

Does Colorado require some form of affirmation for auto registering? if so what? do you have real ID?

At some point, citizenship is verified to get registered to vote through DMV. I don't recall the details of how that happens.

I do know that, once registered, the default setting is that you are re-registered to vote every time you renew your license at the DMV. You are allowed to opt out of voter registration if you want (like if you want to dodge jury duty). And when you DMV re-register, the voter rolls are automatically updated for any changed information. So almost everyone is registered and the rolls are quite current and fresh.

It all is very rational and efficient. Really isn't very hard to do when you don't allow partisans to mess with the system.

Does CO have closed primaries? My state does this and I feel it is a form of voter suppression. I would have to change my affiliation every voting cycle to independent to vote for the most qualified candidate in either party, then when i vote for that candidate i am automatically registered in that party, i then have to register as indy. Silly, No?

If, like me, you are registered independent, you get a ballot for both the D primary and the R primary. But you can only vote in one primary. If you are registered D, you only get a D primary ballot.

ahhh, that certainly encourages registering as an "independent"...sounds like lagerhead's state forces you into whatever box you chose for a given cycle and keeps you there unless you jump through hoops to get back to "I".

Correct, for every primary election. Then you have to take steps to re register, after every cycle otherwise can’t vote outside of your “automatically registered” party in the next primary. So every 2/4 years I’m required to re register. I’m in NJ.

Serious pain in the butt.
Colorado's sounds way more 'voter friendly'.

Here in MD, you don't get to vote in the primaries as an 'unaffiliated' voter, so if you want to switch back and forth you have to do by directly registering with that party, and can only do so during the registration window.

My dad, who voted perhaps even more reliably R than me in general elections, was always registered Dem simply so that he could vote in the Dem primaries under the theory that would have more influence on who would actually represent MD or govern the county, etc, given certain realities...I know a lot of his buddies did so as well. Probably smart. I took a different tack and registered R, somewhat as an encouragement to R candidates that there were some of us out here! I didn't always vote for the R up and down the ballot as sometimes there was someone too extreme for my taste and/or I really liked the D for some reason, but generally party line.

Don’t you think those policies restrict voting?

yes, though less about restricting one's ability to cast a vote than making it more difficult to vote in primaries, which is more about party control over who their candidate will be than in preventing access to a ballot or making it difficult to get one's vote cast and counted.

I like CO's rules better than NJ's or MD's, but these aren't actually voter suppression tactics per se.

But we agree that Co's rules would be better.

You went back and read the entire thread (suppression restriction) made me think that, thanks understood.

[Peter Brown]

For MD and gang, voter ID laws went from “Jim Crow in a suit and tie” to “oh no they’re popular never mind” in a span of 3 months.

Again with the stupid lies.

The "voter ID" voting suppression laws are very much still "Jim Crow", whereas the requirement to be identified when voting as the person registered has never been an issue with those wanting voters to participate more easily.

It didn't use to be R's, or mostly R's, who wanted to keep black and brown and young people from voting, but it's quite openly the case now.

I just think it's the death rattle of a party which has finally abandoned all principle in the desperate effort to maintain fleeting power and advantage as long as possible.

What a .

Here’s MD’s newest spin: ‘yes, previously I accused Republicans of being racist for asking for voter identification, but now that my newest besties the Democrats have embraced voter identification (since nearly every American agrees), I’m also now pro voter identification, BUT Republicans are STILL racist because they want drivers licenses (something over 92% of American adults have).’

Meanwhile here’s the other perma race-baiting Democrat, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), now admitting he’s not simply a member of one but now two 100% white private country clubs:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rsity.html

What absolute phonies.

Democrats (and those that insist they aren’t Democrats but can’t point to one policy that would identify themselves as Republican...I swear ) are the biggest hypocrites in the universe with no close second. Never pay them the attention they crave when they accuse you of being what they themselves are actually the worst of us at, racism. Happily being members of clubs which have never accepted blacks, Jews, Hispanics...while they hypocritically rail others every chance they get.

[MDlaxfan76]

The idiocy and trolling continues.
Back to ignore.

[DocBarrister]

Rudy Giuliani’s law license has been suspended, partly for lying about the 2020 election.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/24/nyre ... e=Homepage

DocBarrister

[ggait]

You went back and read the entire thread (suppression restriction) made me think that, thanks understood.

There's no perfect rule for primary voting.

CO's rules are voter friendly and convenient. Especially for indy voters who bounce back and forth.

But you can make a good argument that only real Dems should be voting in Dem primaries, and only real Reps should vote in Rep primaries. And if you really are unaffiliated, then why should you get invited to the party of a party you don't belong to?

There's also a possibility of gamesmanship. Say the lefties all think Trump is the best opponent for Joe to run against. So all the lefties (registered as indies) vote for Trump in the GOP primary to set up the preferred match up....

But then in deep red/blue areas, the primary (de facto) is the election. So if you can't primary vote, you really can't vote at all....