Why the long waits to vote?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rolfe

Adult human female
Joined
Sep 11, 2003
Messages
53,776
Location
NT 150 511
I don't understand all these TV pictures of people queueing for four hours and more to vote. And this, days before the official polling day?

Brewery, can't, in, pissup, a, organise, a. Arrange these words to form a well-known phrase.

I can't remember ever having to wait more then a few minutes to vote. Even in the evening, after work, at the peak times. Even in elections which posted over 70% turnout. Why is it so different in the USA?

The first thing that surprised me, actually, was the polling places being open before polling day. We never have that in Britain - while postal votes are cast in advance, personal voting is all done on the day itself.

It seemed like a good idea, although not one we could copy - most polling places are schools, and the children get an extra day off for polling day, so you couldn't really extend that. Also, the staff costs would escalate massively. However, as a way to guard against undercapacity at the polling stations, it seemed like a good idea.

So why the long delays? Shouldn't there be enough polling stations to ensure that demand can be met? Pretty questionable democracy otherwise. Even as it is, asking people to wait more than four hours to vote seems like one helluva test of voter committment.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
I did wonder about the the long queues.

I assumed it was because this was pre-election day voting so the polling stations will only be manned by a small number of people.
 
Pretty questionable democracy otherwise. Even as it is, asking people to wait more than four hours to vote seems like one helluva test of voter committment.

Rolfe.

And wide open to abuse (or the appearance of abuse which is just about as damaging) if queues are seen to be shorter in areas favouring one particular party.

I share your confusion as to how it can take so long.
 
It is primarely because only a small portion of voting stations are open for early voting. I heard numbers like 5% and the like on CNN. So everyone is funneled into one place. In cities there are voting places like every few blocks in new hampshire it seems, on election day. Plenty of room for everyone.
 
And wide open to abuse (or the appearance of abuse which is just about as damaging) if queues are seen to be shorter in areas favouring one particular party.

I share your confusion as to how it can take so long.


The Merikan friend I visited last month (who is black, and an Obama supporter) told me that last time there were huge queues in poor, black (expected to be Democrat) areas, and plenty capacity in rich, white (expected to be Republican) areas - this was Florida, I think, she was answering my question about how it was possible to rig the vote. However, I have no way to know whether or not that was just her own partisan take on the matter.

I'm just amazed that there should be queues anywhere.

Rolfe.
 
Not quite on topic but the one thing I don't understand is why results are declared before everyone has voted, that always seems wrong to me.
 
It is primarely because only a small portion of voting stations are open for early voting. I heard numbers like 5% and the like on CNN. So everyone is funneled into one place. In cities there are voting places like every few blocks in new hampshire it seems, on election day. Plenty of room for everyone.

But, at least in 2004, the queues were on election day, not for early voting.

"In 2004, some voters endured an eight-hour wait to vote in Ohio. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7686438.stm
 
Haven't read the whole thread on my tiny phone, but I'm in line right now. I've been here about 40 minutes and a little over half way through the line, which has grown considerably since I got here. I would say it has doubled but I can't see the end.
 
We have queues here, too, but mainly from 16ish to closing time, always at 20. Solely due to people getting home from work, though. You can take time off work to vote, of course.

Staff "costs"? Those who oversee an election are paid? What a horrible idea!

In Denmark, it's all done voluntarily. And, there's not a lack of people who want to participate, in both the election process and the following counting procedure.

Tedious, but then, there's the coffee and wienerbrød. What makes any democracy work.
 
My wait was 2 and a half hours, but that had me arriving there at 9 in the morning. People who arrived later waited much longer.
 
The last three times I've voted over here it's taken me about 30 minutes from parking the car to seeing my envelope drop into the box and hearing the scrutineer announce that my ballot has been cast. Here we have one polling station for the whole village (pop. ~5,000) and only two boxes for the ballots, so with that and the ID checks it does take a while. We vote on a Sunday, though, and the whole thing is very social, with almost a family-outing kind of atmosphere.
 
Part of the difference may be due to how many votes take place.

In the UK, it would not normally be more than two (general election plus local council).

My understanding is that in the US there are a lot more elected positions requiring votes plus votes on specific issues.
 
But, at least in 2004, the queues were on election day, not for early voting.

"In 2004, some voters endured an eight-hour wait to vote in Ohio. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7686438.stm

Oh i didn't know that.

I guess i'm spoiled living in Vermont in a town with 4000 people. I just walk in and grab a ballot and head for a kiosk.

Of course Obama has my state wrapped up, but there is a governer's race that i'm hope is close. I think the Republican will win easily though. I'm not too worried about it, because he's pretty moderate.
 
Part of the difference may be due to how many votes take place.

In the UK, it would not normally be more than two (general election plus local council).

My understanding is that in the US there are a lot more elected positions requiring votes plus votes on specific issues.

Yeah, I'm looking forward to voting for the weigher of coal, 105 justices of the peace, 30 appropriations of 100 bucks a peice to various organizations, ect.
 
This is, IIRC, only the second election with early voting. Our system is not prepared for high voter turnout, especially in low income areas. I was "in the cue" for 1 hour and 30 minutes last week before I voted. In 2004 I was in line for about 20 minutes. My dad has been driving the elderly and in firmed to the polls for the last week for the Obama campaign. He has encountered lines from 1-2 1/2 hrs. He is 73 and says he likes driving the "old" people around. Also, the republicans have for the last 25 years made a concerted an concentrated effort to discourage poor and disenfranchised people from voting primarily through negative ads. Because of Obamas unparalleled organized ground game he is able to turn out people in record numbers. It is a true grassroots organization. A lot has been said about Obama's war chest, but his true asset is his volunteers. The Obama campaign conceded Tennessee last week and bussed his volunteers from TN over here to NC. My dad has spent the last few days driving them around canvasing homes. This is a very exiting time to be a Tarheel. I have faith that my fellow Carolinian's will make me proud. Even the racist that owns the business next to mine told me yesterday, "Well, hopefully when that N*@#$# gets elected, business will get back to normal." It is funny that even he seems to concede that Obama will be better than McCain.

ETA-to address Jaggy Bunnet and Brendy-Our ballot is 8 pages long. The actual time spent at the voting machine was about 5-8 minutes and there were 6 machines at my polling station, our local library.
 
Last edited:
I've never waited in line more than 5 minutes to vote, but I've never done early voting.

Maybe I've just been lucky.
 
As to the long waiting lines, Dr. A. had a link to a nice article in another thread - an analysis of the voting in a Ohio district in 2004.

Basically, they had too few voting machines in most of the polling stations to service all people who showed up to vote, even when spread out over the whole day.
 
<snip> Also, the republicans have for the last 25 years made a concerted an concentrated effort to discourage poor and disenfranchised people from voting primarily through negative ads. <snip>

I'd like to hear more about this. Any links would be great.
 
As to the first question:
  1. The long lines are because there many more voting stations open on voting day than in early voting, by a factor (in Houston) of about 30. (About 900 places on election day as opposed to 30 early voting stations).
  2. Another reason is because this election has generated more interest than any in recent history.
  3. Early voting is only now becoming a popular alternative. In the past, many feared it. Also, it wasn't well advertised. This year, it was highly advertised.
  4. Poor placement of early voting stations. We went to three different ones. The lines at the first two were hours long. There was a two-minute wait at the third one, which was tucked away in a remote park not very close to many neighborhoods.
  5. The length of the ballot. This varies from place to place. In Texas, judges are voted in, not appointed, so that adds dozens of races to the ballot. Also there are school commissioners etc. Unless you're voting "straight ticket", it can take quite a while just to work your way through that list.
As to the question of why "results" are declared early, they aren't. Unofficial "exit poll" statistics are reported, but statistics aren't results. There is nothing binding about what a person says to a pollster.
 
Most of the long lines on election day occur in densely populated urban areas. There are frequently not enough voting locations in these areas to support the population.

I'm spoiled. I too live in a small town. I don't think I've ever had to wait at all for an open kiosk when I voted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom