I voted today
 

It didn't really matter; it's not close in this state... But I happened to
be at the Urban Govt Center, and noticed that they had in person voting
going on. I had read online if you are going to be out of town, then you
can get a ballot; but when I tried that a few weeks ago it said it had to
send the absentee ballot out of state to the address you are going to be at.
I didn't know where I would be out of state so couldn't do that.... But for
the in house voting, you can just say you will will be out of town and they
say ok, and ask for last 4 of SS# and an ID and give you a ballot... They
were fairly busy, but I had no wait. Was nice to get it done with and not
have to wait till Election Day and be in a line. Everyone should be able to
do it early and when convenient!

I voted today
 

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 12:26:42 -0500, "Richard K." >
wrote:

>It didn't really matter; it's not close in this state... But I happened to
>be at the Urban Govt Center, and noticed that they had in person voting
>going on. I had read online if you are going to be out of town, then you
>can get a ballot; but when I tried that a few weeks ago it said it had to
>send the absentee ballot out of state to the address you are going to be at.
>I didn't know where I would be out of state so couldn't do that.... But for
>the in house voting, you can just say you will will be out of town and they
>say ok, and ask for last 4 of SS# and an ID and give you a ballot... They
>were fairly busy, but I had no wait. Was nice to get it done with and not
>have to wait till Election Day and be in a line. Everyone should be able to
>do it early and when convenient!
>

I just applied for our absentee ballots via computer. Within 3 days
the forms were here. We voted and I returned them via the post
office.
Loved it.
Janet US

I voted today
 

On 2012-11-05 17:26:42 +0000, Richard K. said:

> It didn't really matter; it's not close in this state...

There's also congressional, senate, state and local elections to
consider, and possibly local initiatives. So the OTHER 90% of the
ballot could certainly be "close".

I voted today
 

"gtr" > wrote in message news:2012110509413023662-xxx@yyyzzz...
> On 2012-11-05 17:26:42 +0000, Richard K. said:
>
>> It didn't really matter; it's not close in this state...
>
> There's also congressional, senate, state and local elections to consider,
> and possibly local initiatives. So the OTHER 90% of the ballot could
> certainly be "close".

you would think so, but there were about 7-8 uncontested races. A couple
circuit court judges. House seat up, but the Republican in the race never
even aired an ad and only raised a few thousand dollars. Wasn't much on the
ballot this year. But I did my civic duty.

I voted today
 

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:41:30 -0800, gtr > wrote:

>On 2012-11-05 17:26:42 +0000, Richard K. said:
>
>> It didn't really matter; it's not close in this state...
>
>There's also congressional, senate, state and local elections to
>consider, and possibly local initiatives. So the OTHER 90% of the
>ballot could certainly be "close".

Really! If you care at all about either side, the Senate and
congressional candidates are as[more?] important as/than the top of
the ticket.

[In my case we have an interesting State Assembly race- and some
justices to consider.]

Jim

I voted today
 

"Jim Elbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:41:30 -0800, gtr > wrote:
>
>>On 2012-11-05 17:26:42 +0000, Richard K. said:
>>
>>> It didn't really matter; it's not close in this state...
>>
>>There's also congressional, senate, state and local elections to
>>consider, and possibly local initiatives. So the OTHER 90% of the
>>ballot could certainly be "close".
>
> Really! If you care at all about either side, the Senate and
> congressional candidates are as[more?] important as/than the top of
> the ticket.
>
> [In my case we have an interesting State Assembly race- and some
> justices to consider.]
>
> Jim


It's looking like the presidential race may not be decided for a while... I
heard there may be 200k provisional votes in OH that may take 10 days to
count.

Maybe someone should start a poll on when the race will be officially
sanctioned... Doubtful it will be Tuesday night. Could be hours, days,
weeks! And if it is really is as close as they say, there will recounts and
lawyers involved.

I voted today
 

On 2012-11-05 19:55:55 +0000, Doug Freyburger said:

>> There's also congressional, senate, state and local elections to
>> consider, and possibly local initiatives. So the OTHER 90% of the
>> ballot could certainly be "close".
>
> I wondered about that. With so many offices on the ballot I wondered
> why there were so few in parties other than the big two.

In many of our elections (school board and such), party affiliation is
not listed.

> We expected to be out of town this week so we did absentee ballots.
> Some hoops to jump through to get them to our regular address but it
> worked and we sent them in. Then it turns out the trip got cancelled
> and we could have voted in person. Hindsight is 20-20 ...

I've voted absentee for about 15 years. So my voting has become very
regular. We sit at the kitchen table and read or skim collected
articles, particularly on all the highly funded initiatives (here in
SoCal). I try to really understand which are out to help the populace
and which are intended to limit, hurt or generally screw us.

It may be a civic duty, but it's also self-serving grunt work.

I voted today
 

gtr wrote:
> Doug Freyburger said:
>
>>> There's also congressional, senate, state and local elections to
>>> consider, and possibly local initiatives. So the OTHER 90% of the
>>> ballot could certainly be "close".
>
>> I wondered about that. With so many offices on the ballot I wondered
>> why there were so few in parties other than the big two.
>
> In many of our elections (school board and such), party affiliation is
> not listed.

In Illinois I was surprised to see judge candidates list their party
affiliation. Some states (California and others) have voters declare
their party in advance on the registration form. Some states (Illinois
and other) have voters declare party affiliation by asking for that
party's ballot in the primary (first not most important, very confusing
name) election.

There's a fun bug in California. Voters declare their party in advance.
Primary ballots list the candidates of all parties. Federal regulations
say the votes of party members are counted but not the votes of others.
In California this forms a sort of literacy test. California voters can
voluntarily cast ignored ballots by voting for candidates of other
parties in the primary election.

>> We expected to be out of town this week so we did absentee ballots.
>> Some hoops to jump through to get them to our regular address but it
>> worked and we sent them in. Then it turns out the trip got cancelled
>> and we could have voted in person. Hindsight is 20-20 ...
>
> I've voted absentee for about 15 years. So my voting has become very
> regular. We sit at the kitchen table and read or skim collected
> articles, particularly on all the highly funded initiatives (here in
> SoCal). I try to really understand which are out to help the populace
> and which are intended to limit, hurt or generally screw us.
>
> It may be a civic duty, but it's also self-serving grunt work.

I voted today
 

"Doug Freyburger" > wrote in message
...

> In Illinois I was surprised to see judge candidates list their party
> affiliation. Some states (California and others) have voters declare
> their party in advance on the registration form. Some states (Illinois
> and other) have voters declare party affiliation by asking for that
> party's ballot in the primary (first not most important, very confusing
> name) election.
>
> There's a fun bug in California. Voters declare their party in advance.
> Primary ballots list the candidates of all parties. Federal regulations
> say the votes of party members are counted but not the votes of others.
> In California this forms a sort of literacy test. California voters can
> voluntarily cast ignored ballots by voting for candidates of other
> parties in the primary election.


In NC, you can mark a straight party ticket. But it does not register for
president if you do that! That is awfully misleading. Anyone from NC that
can verify that? I saw it on some news show the other day.
http://www.ncvoter.net/straightticket.html

Newspaper here still does endorsements, but hear that is becoming less and
less common. Or maybe it's because there are fewer and fewer newspapers and
the few left are being gobbled up by conglomerates.

I voted today
 

Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
>In Illinois I was surprised to see judge candidates list their party
>affiliation. Some states (California and others) have voters declare
>their party in advance on the registration form. Some states (Illinois
>and other) have voters declare party affiliation by asking for that
>party's ballot in the primary (first not most important, very confusing
>name) election.

I just voted two hours ago, wasn't confusing at all, couldn't be
easier. Stepped up to the table marked with ones town where one is
Id'd and signs and signatures compared and handed a paper ballot.
Actually I didn't see anyone ID'd, hereabouts everyone knows everyone
by sight. Stepped into a curtained booth with the paper ballot one
marks by blackening in a circle next to each candidate of ones choice.
Each row of canditates from top to bottom was clearly identified by
party affiliation... all on the same line from left to right were the
same party party affiliation. After marking the ballot is slipped
into a computer slot that actually grabs if from your hand. A big
screen says "Processing". Then the screen shows the ballot with ones
marks displayed and asks to touch Accept or Reject. Mine showed
correctly so I touched Accept. The screen said Thank You For Voting.
I've no idea what happens if one presses Reject. The entire process
took maybe five minutes. Outside the building most folks socialized
with townsfolks for a few minutes. No one discussed the election,
farm folks mostly mention weather or merely grunt at each other as
acknowlegement.

I voted today
 

On Nov 5, 9:40*am, Janet Bostwick > wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 12:26:42 -0500, "Richard K." >
> wrote:
>
> >It didn't really matter; it's not close in this state... *But I happened to
> >be at the Urban Govt Center, and noticed that they had in person voting
> >going on. *I had read online if you are going to be out of town, then you
> >can get a ballot; but when I tried that a few weeks ago it said it had to
> >send the absentee ballot out of state to the address you are going to be at.
> >I didn't know where I would be out of state so couldn't do that.... *But for
> >the in house voting, you can just say you will will be out of town and they
> >say ok, and ask for last 4 of SS# and an ID and give you a ballot... *They
> >were fairly busy, but I had no wait. *Was nice to get it done with and not
> >have to wait till Election Day and be in a line. *Everyone should be able to
> >do it early and when convenient!
>
> I just applied for our absentee ballots via computer. *Within 3 days
> the forms were here. *We voted and I returned them via the post
> office.
> Loved it.
> Janet US

Vote by mail here in Oregon. Don't even need a stamp as there are drop
off boxes...you can mail it if you want. No wait, plenty of time to
read the voter's booklet. Easy peazy!

I voted today
 

In article >, Brooklyn1
says...
>
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
> >
> >In Illinois I was surprised to see judge candidates list their party
> >affiliation. Some states (California and others) have voters declare
> >their party in advance on the registration form. Some states (Illinois
> >and other) have voters declare party affiliation by asking for that
> >party's ballot in the primary (first not most important, very confusing
> >name) election.
>
> I just voted two hours ago, wasn't confusing at all, couldn't be
> easier. Stepped up to the table marked with ones town where one is
> Id'd and signs and signatures compared and handed a paper ballot.
> Actually I didn't see anyone ID'd, hereabouts everyone knows everyone
> by sight. Stepped into a curtained booth with the paper ballot one
> marks by blackening in a circle next to each candidate of ones choice.
> Each row of canditates from top to bottom was clearly identified by
> party affiliation... all on the same line from left to right were the
> same party party affiliation. After marking the ballot is slipped
> into a computer slot that actually grabs if from your hand. A big
> screen says "Processing". Then the screen shows the ballot with ones
> marks displayed and asks to touch Accept or Reject. Mine showed
> correctly so I touched Accept. The screen said Thank You For Voting.
> I've no idea what happens if one presses Reject. The entire process
> took maybe five minutes. Outside the building most folks socialized
> with townsfolks for a few minutes. No one discussed the election,
> farm folks mostly mention weather or merely grunt at each other as
> acknowlegement.

Here in RI, Providence to be specific we got a three ballot package.
There was the first which had President/Vice President in addition to
state representative and senator. Next up was state questions ballot,
then finally city questions ballot.

Caused no end of confusion - partly because the ballots have both
Spanish and English on them. I object to this because it carves out a
specific group. Now I know technology is advanced enough that you could
have a laptop and a printer capable of handling 30lb stock and you could
print ballots in any one of several different languages. Imagine that,
no more cramming two languages on any single ballot. And Google's
translate tool is getting better and better so no reason ballots
shouldn't be in Cyrillic, Kata Kana, Simplified Mandarin, etc.