politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
What he’s talking about sounds like a mess. Single day voting on Election Day? What about people that are abroad, military or otherwise? People who can’t vote that day (medical procedure, etc). Then, having another election to decide again?! What if that one is in question? I don’t know shit about fuck when it comes to election law, but this doesn’t pass the sniff test at all.
The lack of sincerity of these candidates is becoming normalized. The same-day voting has nothing to do with what makes sense or not. What they are pitching is what historically will be most beneficial to their party. That is the real issue.
It passes the Republican sniff test and that's all that matters for this grifter.
I live in Ireland and we have voting day where all polls are open for like 16 hours with very easy access and work has to let you go to vote. It works quite well, we have a good system.
Ironically I think mail in voting would fuck our politics because we have let so many people call themselves Irish that global votes would change the whole landscape. I was abroad for the last election, suck not getting to vote but I'd rather it this way.
Unfortunately, the US is so big that I don’t think single day voting would ever work. The entire population of Ireland is smaller than Philadelphia, Pennsylvania alone. Plus, we have our military flung far and wide across the globe and they should have a vote in the which dipshit politicians fling them around the next round.
The population is irrelevant, processes scale. Besides the current undemocratic setup of US elections was designed to deal with a large and spread out populace. Maybe use the electoral college. But 112 million people watched the Superbowl and 158 million people voted in both most recent outings.
There is absolutely a possibility to have enough polling stations open for 24 in enough places that there is a reasonable expectation that everyone can make it to vote if they were willing.
I'm not strictly against mail in votes I think it is a generally good system but I have an American neighbour that has voted through the embassy for the elections that came up and has not been in America in decades.
OK, but I'm in Ireland for over a decade, would you prefer I didn't get to vote (for the democratic candidate in a swing state)?
Who you vote for is irrelevant, but yeah I don't think you should get to vote if you're not living in the consequences. What is to stop you voting for austerity under which you won't struggle but can return when things are better? Voting to cut education or mandating something you don't have to deal with, I think it is a bit self important of someone to vote for something like that.
Now obviously you could move home within the window between elections, and any other number of possibilities I know this isn't perfect but I think it is best.
well.. just to say, I'd never vote for austerity, or to cut education. cutting education in the US is partially what got us into this mess
Absolutely, I think we are probably somewhat aligned politically but you can't consider the person when you make election law only the public. Whatever allowances made for you in the hopes that you vote for a better world, with the knowledge that you would, allows for bad actors to utilise the same means impose their views.
So if you can vote remotely for an election under which you will not live, it is all well and good to vote for stronger public programmes and education and healthcare but the remote votes for authoritative lunatics will get the same weight.
I hear you. For me I don't mind, and I'm happy to be able to vote even though I don't live there. Way more left leaning people live out of the US than do right leaning people. They often don't leave their hometowns, cause, you know, cities are scary