Theory craft: Let's develop a new voting system, post your own system.

The2ndAmendment

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
13,220
Reaction score
3,387
Points
245
Location
In a dependant and enslaved country.
My system:

Rule #1: In person voting only.
Rule #2: 10 years of established residence in district you're voting in.
Rule #3: All voters are allowed by be armed.
Rule #4: All proceedings in the following steps are on taped LIVE and publicly viewable on the web at all times.

Step 1: Every 100 voters, in line, forms a slate.

Step 2: Every voter receives a ballot with a unique serial number, with a tear off containing a replica of the serial number, and a slate number written in by the election worker.

Step 3: All ballots in the slate are placed individually on a projector by a certified election worker, with the presence of both major party observers.

Step 4: The election worker reads off the ballot, and the tally is added manually on a physical chalkboard in public view. If any individual objects and claims they are being counted wrong, that possibly armed citizen will voice their objection and the tally will be adjusted (after the claim is matched against their serial number).

Step 5: After all 100 ballots are tallied, they then added together and transferred to a public viewable whiteboard, with a Slate identifier.

Step 6: After all voting is done, the slates are added together in public view on the white board, with a final total for the precinct.

Step 7: The results are then transmitted on a public frequency, to the district Recorder. The Recorder announces on live tv/air their received count from the precinct.

Step 8: The District Recorder then, on live recording/media, transmits to the State Recorder, who confirms the received count in public also on live record/media.

Step 9: The State Recorder tallies all Districts in public view and announces final statewide count in public view.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,374
Reaction score
13,686
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Sounds like a massively complex system... Kind of like Poll taxes and literacy tests designed to keep poor people of color from voting.

Here's what we need to do.

1) Get rid of the Electoral College
2) Replace it with a system of one - person, one vote, and if no one gets 50%+1, then you have a runoff.

See, that was easy.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,965
Reaction score
12,824
Points
2,180
  1. Mandatory 30 day early voting periods for every state and territory.
  2. Total voter autonomy to vote by mail or in person.
  3. Mail votes must be postmarked by Election day.
  4. Nationwide photo Voter ID card
  5. Standardized voting hardware.
  6. Nationwide balloting--pull up to a county court house in any state, swipe your ID card and your ballot comes up. Make your selections, and leave.
  7. Allow states to triage mail in ballots as they come in to avoid what we're seeing now
  8. Electors must be named on the ballot with a short bio of each elector (all electors).
 

occupied

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2011
Messages
25,007
Reaction score
5,691
Points
280
Seems like our current system works fine when everyone is paying attention. To develop something better first you would have to honestly say which of two options you are trying to accomplish. Are you trying to increase turnout or suppress it?
 

petro

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
8,400
Reaction score
5,090
Points
1,055
Location
The cold north
  1. Mandatory 30 day early voting periods for every state and territory.
  2. Total voter autonomy to vote by mail or in person.
  3. Mail votes must be postmarked by Election day.
  4. Nationwide photo Voter ID card
  5. Standardized voting hardware.
  6. Nationwide balloting--pull up to a county court house in any state, swipe your ID card and your ballot comes up. Make your selections, and leave.
  7. Allow states to triage mail in ballots as they come in to avoid what we're seeing now
  8. Electors must be named on the ballot with a short bio of each elector (all electors).
Except for mail in ballots, which need a better verification system, I find your list reasonable. I am surprised that you acknowledge the need for voter ID as many on the left have incorrectly demonized it.
 

wamose

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
6,506
Reaction score
5,516
Points
2,015
Location
Pennsylvania
Seems like our current system works fine when everyone is paying attention. To develop something better first you would have to honestly say which of two options you are trying to accomplish. Are you trying to increase turnout or suppress it?
Increasing or supressing vote counts are results. They should not be goals. We should be concerned about having fair and accurate elections, period. That's where everyone's legal vote counts and all illegal votes are denied. It would be easy to do without Democrat obstruction.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,965
Reaction score
12,824
Points
2,180
  1. Mandatory 30 day early voting periods for every state and territory.
  2. Total voter autonomy to vote by mail or in person.
  3. Mail votes must be postmarked by Election day.
  4. Nationwide photo Voter ID card
  5. Standardized voting hardware.
  6. Nationwide balloting--pull up to a county court house in any state, swipe your ID card and your ballot comes up. Make your selections, and leave.
  7. Allow states to triage mail in ballots as they come in to avoid what we're seeing now
  8. Electors must be named on the ballot with a short bio of each elector (all electors).
Except for mail in ballots, which need a better verification system, I find your list reasonable. I am surprised that you acknowledge the need for voter ID as many on the left have incorrectly demonized it.
We need to have robust standardized verification systems; uniform ballot structures, etc....

As for voter ID, I never bought the argument that someone cant' muster the chutzpah to go get a picture ID. As long as it is free, there is no undue burden.
 

occupied

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2011
Messages
25,007
Reaction score
5,691
Points
280
Seems like our current system works fine when everyone is paying attention. To develop something better first you would have to honestly say which of two options you are trying to accomplish. Are you trying to increase turnout or suppress it?
Increasing or supressing vote counts are results. They should not be goals. We should be concerned about having fair and accurate elections, period. That's where everyone's legal vote counts and all illegal votes are denied. It would be easy to do without Democrat obstruction.
Until the right makes some sort of case that fraud is a problem that influences the outcome of any race it's all just solutions to a problem that does not exist that coincidentally make it harder for certain groups in certain places to vote.
 

JoeMoma

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
16,525
Reaction score
4,028
Points
290
Seems like our current system works fine when everyone is paying attention. To develop something better first you would have to honestly say which of two options you are trying to accomplish. Are you trying to increase turnout or suppress it?
Increasing or supressing vote counts are results. They should not be goals. We should be concerned about having fair and accurate elections, period. That's where everyone's legal vote counts and all illegal votes are denied. It would be easy to do without Democrat obstruction.
Until the right makes some sort of case that fraud is a problem that influences the outcome of any race it's all just solutions to a problem that does not exist that coincidentally make it harder for certain groups in certain places to vote.
How can voter fraud be found without adequate checks in the system to find it? If it is easy to cheat the system, some people will.
 

wamose

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
6,506
Reaction score
5,516
Points
2,015
Location
Pennsylvania
Seems like our current system works fine when everyone is paying attention. To develop something better first you would have to honestly say which of two options you are trying to accomplish. Are you trying to increase turnout or suppress it?
Increasing or supressing vote counts are results. They should not be goals. We should be concerned about having fair and accurate elections, period. That's where everyone's legal vote counts and all illegal votes are denied. It would be easy to do without Democrat obstruction.
Until the right makes some sort of case that fraud is a problem that influences the outcome of any race it's all just solutions to a problem that does not exist that coincidentally make it harder for certain groups in certain places to vote.
That's crazy. Just because a problem hasn't been uncovered doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Democrats have been saying there is no voter fraud for decades but now that it's been proven that there is, they're saying it's only a small amount and that is acceptable. Bullshit. We should try to make our elections 100% fair and accurate or we risk losing the faith in our elections. No irregularities are acceptable when it comes to our elections. None
 

JOSweetHeart

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
14,177
Reaction score
2,915
Points
255
Location
East Tennessee
To me, those who can't get out in public to do their voting should have the system brought to them. A person like a grocery store delivery person is what I am seeing there and what they bring with them is something like a Chick-Fil-A worker uses, one of them hand held wireless register systems that they have been using lately to ring up customer's food in the drive through.

God bless you always!!!

Holly
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
39,093
Reaction score
16,524
Points
1,630
Location
Florida
I like the system that our Founding Fathers had.

Only White land owning males are allowed to voted.

That would fix a lot of things that are fucked up in this country.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,965
Reaction score
12,824
Points
2,180
To me, those who can't get out in public to do their voting should have the system brought to them. A person like a grocery store delivery person is what I am seeing there and what they bring with them is something like a Chick-Fil-A worker uses, one of them hand held wireless register systems that they have been using lately to ring up customer's food in the drive through.

God bless you always!!!

Holly
We do a census every 10 years. We can't mobilize the same folks to come to people's house? Good idea. That would send republicans over the edge
 

RandomPoster

Platinum Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
1,335
Points
970
You show up in person unless you have a rare exception, such as military personnel out in the field etc.

You have a voter ID card and provide your Social Security card as well as proof of residence.

You spit in a cup and get your picture taken.

You take a ballot into a private booth and vote.

You turn in your ballot and then walk back to the first table and get your fingerprints taken and stored with your saliva, picture, and signature.

There are video cameras with battery power backups observing the entire process and election officials from the top two parties as well as smaller party representatives mandatorily being given an option to provide observers.

I believe this would be a good start.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,374
Reaction score
13,686
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
You show up in person unless you have a rare exception, such as military personnel out in the field etc.

You have a voter ID card and provide your Social Security card as well as proof of residence.

You spit in a cup and get your picture taken.

You take a ballot into a private booth and vote.

You turn in your ballot and then walk back to the first table and get your fingerprints taken and stored with your saliva, picture, and signature.

There are video cameras with battery power backups observing the entire process and election officials from the top two parties as well as smaller party representatives mandatorily being given an option to provide observers.

I believe this would be a good start.
Again, why not literacy tests and poll taxes?

This is what you are really talking about, right?
 

RandomPoster

Platinum Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
1,335
Points
970
You show up in person unless you have a rare exception, such as military personnel out in the field etc.

You have a voter ID card and provide your Social Security card as well as proof of residence.

You spit in a cup and get your picture taken.

You take a ballot into a private booth and vote.

You turn in your ballot and then walk back to the first table and get your fingerprints taken and stored with your saliva, picture, and signature.

There are video cameras with battery power backups observing the entire process and election officials from the top two parties as well as smaller party representatives mandatorily being given an option to provide observers.

I believe this would be a good start.
Again, why not literacy tests and poll taxes?

This is what you are really talking about, right?
No. I disagree with literacy tests and poll taxes. In theory, literacy tests are a good idea, except they would be very dangerous and I would not want to see them implemented.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,374
Reaction score
13,686
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
No. I disagree with literacy tests and poll taxes. In theory, literacy tests are a good idea, except they would be very dangerous and I would not want to see them implemented.
You don't think DNA tests would be equally dangerous for the same reason? Fingerprinting, cameras, etc.

What's the purpose? To keep "Those people" from voting, of course. Because they all "Look alike" and we have to make sure we DNA test them.

We should be making it easier to vote, not harder.
 

Dogmaphobe

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
16,276
Reaction score
7,068
Points
1,095
Location
Or uh gun
The complete details of my own system are as follows:

1 -- I vote.
 

RandomPoster

Platinum Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
2,354
Reaction score
1,335
Points
970
No. I disagree with literacy tests and poll taxes. In theory, literacy tests are a good idea, except they would be very dangerous and I would not want to see them implemented.
You don't think DNA tests would be equally dangerous for the same reason? Fingerprinting, cameras, etc.

What's the purpose? To keep "Those people" from voting, of course. Because they all "Look alike" and we have to make sure we DNA test them.

We should be making it easier to vote, not harder.
We need to be able to verify a person's identity.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top