• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Why the long waits to vote?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brendy said:
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.
Click to expand...


That's a reasonable reply, but as has been said already, we all saw pictures of some very long queues in 2004 on polling day itself, and people are already reporting long waiting times today. It certainly does suggest under-capacity.

This reply also raises another question. In Britain, you MUST vote at your designated polling station. This is an important feature in preventing personation or multiple voting. Your name is on the list there, and there alone, and will be crossed off when you have voted. So, can voters in the USA choose between several polling stations? Isn't this an open invitation to multiple voting? And doesn't it make it easier for personation to occur, as the real voter is less likely to be known by sight at all the places they may choose to vote?

This gets back to Claus's remark about polling staff being paid. I honestly don't know. Most of them seem to be retired, and it may be entirely voluntary, but I suspect a small honorarium is paid. I also imagine there will be costs relating to maintenance staff at polling places. Since the local polling place is usually the local primary school or a village hall, the chances are that most of the people voting will be known by sight to at least one of the polling staff or ancillary staff on duty, and to other voters present. However, if voters had a choice of 20 or more possible places to vote, then it would be much easier to pass unrecognised. (I voted in person on 3rd May 2007, having moved into my new house in the village - population about 1,200 - on 1st May. I got some very old-fashioned looks. I gave my name and address, which was duly noted to be correct according to the list, and I'll just bet that the polling officials, who were local, knew exactly who I'd bought the house from and were well aware that there was a new resident in it.)

I'm still marvelling at the waiting times though. If I turned up at peak going-home-in-the-evening voting time to find a sizeable queue (you know, 15 minutes or so....), frankly I'd go home, have my tea, watch TV for a bit, and go back maybe nine-ish. Polls are open till 10pm, and are usually dead quiet by then, so there's no point in waiting if you are in a position to return later. The idea that I'd better get in the queue for fear of not getting to the front of it before 10 just wouldn't cross my mind.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
...snip...

This gets back to Claus's remark about polling staff being paid. I honestly don't know. Most of them seem to be retired, and it may be entirely voluntary, but I suspect a small honorarium is paid.

...snip...
Click to expand...

As far as I am aware it's entirely unpaid.
 
Darat said:
So these are not official results: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7707667.stm ?
Click to expand...

LOL. Oh yeah. Those guys. That is their gimmick. It gets them in the newspapers once every four years.

Technically, once all possible votes are cast, you can close the polls and release the results. Obviously, it doesn't happen in many places.

After a brouhaha some years back about West Coast local races being influenced by the news from the east that the national election was a blowout (I think it was Reagan-Mondale) the major networks, as a courtesy, would hold off on calling an election until all the polls are closed. These days when everything gets into the Blogosphere, I don't know if they can do that. We'll see.
 
godofpie said:
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.
Click to expand...

8 pages? Oh my goodness! Mine was One and a half pages.

I feel stupid I forgot all the town council races are decided on Town meeting day in March.
 
Rolfe said:
This reply also raises another question. In Britain, you MUST vote at your designated polling station. This is an important feature in preventing personation or multiple voting. Your name is on the list there, and there alone, and will be crossed off when you have voted. So, can voters in the USA choose between several polling stations? Isn't this an open invitation to multiple voting? And doesn't it make it easier for personation to occur, as the real voter is less likely to be known by sight at all the places they may choose to vote?
Click to expand...

No. When I lived in New Hampshire I had to go to a specific polling place based on my address. At first I just walked down the street to the nearest polling station at a church but I found out I couldn't vote there. So I had to drive about a two miles away to another to vote.

So to answer your question at least in New Hampshire and Vermont you have to vote at a specific place based on your address.
 
I think one thing is also that many people go to vote before work, or directly after work, and so there are times where it's much more busy, and others where it's very slow.
 
Brendy said:
No. When I lived in New Hampshire I had to go to a specific polling place based on my address. At first I just walked down the street to the nearest polling station at a church but I found out I couldn't vote there. So I had to drive about a two miles away to another to vote.

So to answer your question at least in New Hampshire and Vermont you have to vote at a specific place based on your address.
Click to expand...


I'm surprised your polling place was 2 miles away, when there were polling places so near. Ours tend to be within walking distance, unless you live right out in the sticks, and usually the closest one to your house is the right one.

However, all voters are supposed to get a card with the exact location of their polling place spelled out. This seemed not to happen for all places during the Glasgow East by-election, and when we were canvassing and leafletting one of the things we did was carry a note of where the correct polling place was for the area we were working in, tell people where it was if they appeared unsure, and assure them multiple times that even if they hadn't had a card (or had lost it) they should just show up, because if they were on the electoral roll then they could vote.

This is in fact the case. Not only do you not need to produce the official card (which can easily go astray or get lost), you don't have to produce any ID at all. Just show up at the right polling station, say your name and address, and vote. The only thing preventing anyone from showing up and giving someone else's name and address (possibly culled from the electoral register, which is available for all to see) is the possibility that someone in the polling station will know the real voter by sight and know that you're not that person. And of course fear of the publicity and the criminal proceedings that would result if you were caught.

I suspect this is a hangover from the days when the probability was very high indeed that the polling officials would know everyone by sight anyway. That isn't necessarily the case any more. I think there would be a good case for making everyone showing up to vote present some form of ID. However, that might be getting too close to the thorny issue of ID cards for political comfort.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
Since the local polling place is usually the local primary school or a village hall, the chances are that most of the people voting will be known by sight to at least one of the polling staff or ancillary staff on duty, and to other voters present.
Click to expand...

This might be true in rural locations, but it certainly is not true of any place where I have ever voted. None of the staff would have had the slightest clue who I was and I seriously doubt that relying on another voter happening to recognise me (possible but still very unlikely) provides any security against fraud.
 
Darat said:
I am surprised, is this new? I know quite a few people who have worked both at the counting hall and at the polling stations and didn't get paid. (This would be in the 1997 and 2001 general elections.)
Click to expand...

Don't think so. I worked on the count in '92 and I am pretty certain I was paid then (i.e. I can't see I would have done it for free).

Thinking about it, I'm not sure that you would want the count to be left to people who were willing to do it for nothing - is that not more likely to lead to those with a keen interest in one side or the other doing the count?
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
This might be true in rural locations, but it certainly is not true of any place where I have ever voted. None of the staff would have had the slightest clue who I was and I seriously doubt that relying on another voter happening to recognise me (possible but still very unlikely) provides any security against fraud.
Click to expand...


I think you're absolutely right. I don't think there is anything at all to stop anyone from noting the name of any person on the electoral roll they think doesn't have a postal vote and isn't likely to vote in person either, and simply walking in and giving that name. And in urban areas the'd probably get away with it.

The information on who has a postal vote is available to the political parties too, I think. So it seems all too easy. I suspect maybe there are more safeguards I'm not aware of, but I'd like to know what they are.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
Jaggy Bunnet said:
Don't think so. I worked on the count in '92 and I am pretty certain I was paid then (i.e. I can't see I would have done it for free).

...snip...
Click to expand...

I've just dropped an email to one of the people I know to check that I'm not recalling what they said wrong.
 
Rolfe said:
I think you're absolutely right. I don't think there is anything at all to stop anyone from noting the name of any person on the electoral roll they think doesn't have a postal vote and isn't likely to vote in person either, and simply walking in and giving that name. And in unban areas the'd probably get away with it.

The information on who has a postal vote is available to the political parties too, I think. So it seems all too easy. I suspect maybe there are more safeguards I'm not aware of, but I'd like to know what they are.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

I'd like to think you were right, but speaking to people I know who are closer to the process, I doubt it.

Of course if there were additional safeguards, then it would make sense not to tell us what they were, as that makes them more difficult to get round.
 
there many more voting stations open on voting day than in early voting
Click to expand...

Eh.....what?

There are voting stations open on days other than voting day?

this election has generated more interest than any in recent history
Click to expand...

A wee bit early to predict longer lines because of this - hm?

Any evidence that "(e)arly voting is only now becoming a popular alternative"? That, "in the past, many feared it. Also, it wasn't well advertised. This year, it was highly advertised"?

Any evidence of "(p)oor placement of early voting stations"?

Any evidence of "(t)he length of the ballot"?

It seems that a whole lot of evidence is claimed, even though the election is still taking place.

What the hell is going on here?

This seems to me as if this election was rigged in advance. Because, how else could one claim any of the above?

Hey, I'm just asking. Come what may.
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
Don't think so. I worked on the count in '92 and I am pretty certain I was paid then (i.e. I can't see I would have done it for free).

Thinking about it, I'm not sure that you would want the count to be left to people who were willing to do it for nothing - is that not more likely to lead to those with a keen interest in one side or the other doing the count?
Click to expand...


The actual counting is usually done by bank tellers, moonlighting. I know my cousin did it a few times. And they definitely get paid. That's why they do it. Note to anyone - don't aim to carry out any major bank transaction in Britain the morning after an election. These people have been Up All Night.

However, there are also lots and lots of unpaid, partisan volunteers kicking around. All the parties have their own representatives at the polling places and the counts, watching like hawks to spot any irregularities. My main problem is that every place where I've done that, I was helping out in a strange area, and anyone at all could have got past me. I suppose my very presence was something of a deterrent to anyone trying anything on. I mean, I might have been a well-known local....

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
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.
Click to expand...
She isn't making it up if she was speaking of Florida - more news reports on that the last couple of days. It's done by putting defective/older machines in precincts with heavy democrat leaning populations and understaffing same.
 
CFLarsen said:
Eh.....what?

There are voting stations open on days other than voting day?

...snip...
Click to expand...

Yes - that's pretty much what the opening sentence in the opening post is talking about "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?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom