Skip to main content

View Diary: What will happen when it's not journalists who poll workers tell they must have a photo ID to vote? (74 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It concerned me also that in Florida (8+ / 0-)

    earlier today, there was someone who wasn't able to vote because despite having cast a legitimate ballot, and despite having informed the registrar that the ballot was legitimate, they refused to count her vote, period:

    I can't imagine how this is legal. Even if it's a law that someone's signature must match, if the person in question shows up and say, "Yes, that's my signature," how is it legal that they could refuse to either count the ballot or reissue one? It's nothing but direct disenfranchisement.

    And I think they could just toss out entire districts worth of ballots claiming that signatures didn't match. This strikes me as totally potentially illegal and the kind of voter fraud which you are talking about here.

    But the lawyers in the diary were defending it?

    I don't think it would be legal though. It implicitly seems really, incredibly wrong. And how much is this happening? Who would know since they aren't bothering to inform those whose ballots they toss?

    •  I had to sign several times (6+ / 0-)

      until it "matched my drivers license".

      When I signed my license--mind you, this was my original picture with a signature dating back to 2003--there was something in the output that blocked a couple of letters out of my signature on the license.  

      She was going to disqualify me because I couldn't sign my name like that. I told her why it was like that, and she could tell right away she wasn't dealing with some ignoramus. She made me sign it five times until she was satisfied, and let me tell you, if she'd kept pushing, I would have pushed right back--there was no way she was gonna disqualify me over this shit. I stood my ground, and by the time I was done, she must have been a little flustered, because then, for a four page ballot, she gave me two "Page 1 of 2" sheets. I caught that right away and I marched right back up and told her about it. Her supervisor saw the whole thing, and so did the poll-watchers. Imagine if I hadn't caught that until I started marking the ballot?

      Anyone defending this kind of shit ought to be disbarred, I'm sorry. Those electronic pens at the DMV are not the most accurate devices for signing your name--and drivers' licenses are not the only thing sporting them these days, either. There is no flippin' way anyone should be disqualified by someone who is not in any way, shape or form a freakin' handwriting analyst from a half-assed electronic signature reproduced on a laminated card.

      God, I was pissed. But I got to vote.

      It is time to #Occupy Media.

      by lunachickie on Wed Oct 31, 2012 at 06:35:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  clarity: (4+ / 0-)

        this was IN PERSON. I don't even want to imagine what they do to absentee ballots down here.

        And I damn sure don't want to think about next Tuesday. mr. luna doesn't want to early-vote. I told him he was nuts...

        It is time to #Occupy Media.

        by lunachickie on Wed Oct 31, 2012 at 06:36:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly... 150X over, exactly (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Zinman, Cassandra Waites, cybersaur

          I also would point out someone like myself who has simply renewed my license by mail again and again so that the signature still has my maiden name on it, which isn't even what I sign (although it's so illegible that I never thought it mattered). Plus, those little electronic things that you sign? And also, my handwriting changes often because I write a ton, so if I have a hand cramp from grading papers, it will shift. What about all the people in the world with Parkinson's too? One of the symptoms of it is a shift in handwriting; should they be disqualified from voting?

          I can't believe this law hasn't been more carefully examined and protections aren't put into place to fix it, especially when someone can physically verify that they are the signee AND that they'd like their vote to be counted. A bank will sometimes hold a check if a signature needs verification, but if the person shows up and says "Yes, that's me" and has proof of that, they can't just null the check.

          This is disenfranchisement, IMHO. I don't care if the law says they can take these measures to disenfranchise people. This could be arbitrarily abused and no one would be the wiser on these absentee ballots in particular, which are the preferred ballots in many states (or states like Washington, where you mail all of them in). This just has got to be looked at. Carefully.

      •  And for the love of God (0+ / 0-)

        one shouldn't have to stand their grand to have their rightful vote counted. Is this 1915 or 2012? Every citizen has the right to vote and have it counted without being hassled like that by some dime-store handwriting assessor.

        This just riled me up like nothing else.

        People aren't all bulldogs by nature. They shouldn't have to be either to get their votes counted. How many people in the world would just back off if someone who struck them as authoritative started to challenge them? A lot. And how many people are also just too busy to deal with that kind of challenge?

        Not to mention, again, the issue of the absentee and early vote and mail in verifications.

        Ugh. Just ugh.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site