With apologies to our many friends and posters outside the United States... it's time for another one of these! Culture war thread rules apply, and you are permitted to openly advocate for or against an issue or candidate on the ballot (if you clearly identify which ballot, and can do so without knocking down any strawmen along the way). "Small-scale" questions and answers are also permitted if you refrain from shitposting or being otherwise insulting to others here. Please keep the spirit of the law--this is a discussion forum!--carefully in mind.
If you're a U.S. citizen with voting rights, your polling place can reportedly be located here.
If you're still researching issues, Ballotpedia is usually reasonably helpful.
Any other reasonably neutral election resources you'd like me to add to this notification, I'm happy to add.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
How do you in-person voters... remember anything meaningful? Grew up in Oregon and opted for a mail-in ballot even here in conservative Utah purely for the convenience. I actually love being able to dedicate a little time one evening to reviewing the mailers I've set aside, the websites of a few candidates, and making sure I could remember the background behind things. Do you just quickly Google stuff? That sounds kind of dangerous as the #1 result isn't always a holistic or accurate portrayal.
Which (voting by mail) was almost incredibly useful this year. I don't know how much y'all may or may not have heard about this, but the Utah Legislature tried one of the most blatant and anti-democratic power grabs in memory, trying to give themselves power to effectively ignore or rewrite ballot measures even after they pass -- which isn't great IMO to start with, but the wording they put on the actual ballot measure/amendment to give themselves this power was an EGREGIOUS misstatement of the actual content of the measure (basically, a bald-faced lie). This happened with not one but TWO measures, both struck down by courts for being misleading to voters (though the second was less overt) -- but weirdly, this decision came too late to reprint the ballots, so votes on both will not be counted but will still appear. (Even worse, the whole thing wasn't prompted by anything understandable -- it was specifically because an anti-gerrymandering ballot measure passed that the legislature didn't like and got caught ignoring)
My point? Although the system worked in this case, if the courts hadn't managed to rule in time, or dropped the ball, a ton of voters right there in the booth may have been confused which one out of the four was the lie, which one was the exaggeration, which one was the one everyone likes, and which was the one that is probably useless (formalizing the election of county sheriffs, which... is already the case?)
But if you take home the ballot, and get to research as you vote, this becomes much, much easier. Professional politicians, hot take, take unfair advantage of voters, even well-informed ones, when voting in person. Vote by mail!
I go over the sample ballot, make my choices, and either mark them down on the sample ballot or print them out.
Then I bring that in as a cheat sheet and just follow it.
I used to write it down on my phone, but the state I'm in disallows phones while voting, so, paper solution.
More options
Context Copy link
Typically for the general I just remember races where I won’t vote straight r and no on the propositions. In primaries I fill out a sample ballot(regular Republican primary voters get them mailed by numerous orgs where I live, I just mark one up to select the local far right candidate).
More options
Context Copy link
What is particularly difficult for you? I understand that perhaps your referendum are poorly (perhaps intentionally) worded, but what else is so hard? It is perfectly fine to simply not vote in races where you dont know or dont care enough to know. I know most of the judges, so I vote on judges. I care about schools and law enforcement so I take time to make my choice. I don't particularly know about water reclamation so I tend to abstain. Perfectly acceptable.
A typical ballot contains anywhere from 15 to 25 positions/questions, and anywhere from 20 to 40 candidates (not exact, totally spitballing based on previous experience). That's a lot of names. Hard to keep them all straight, yes?
Are you deliberately abstaining because you view yourself as not sufficiently educated, or are you not bothering because it's not practical to retain all of that information between when you roughly decide and the actual voting booth? I'd say the former is fine, even if I disagree, but the latter is exactly proving my point -- you could have contributed to the democratic process, but didn't, largely because you didn't have a paper ballot to consult at home with plenty of time to consider your options.
As an additional note, if ranked choice/IRV is implemented this becomes an extra important point -- because now you can potentially concern yourself with previously ignorable decisions.
Not really if I care about them.
We had 3 statewide advisory questions. Easy enough to remember. 1 State and 2 federal. A few LE-related questions. A school board choice. And about 30 judges to vote on, all that I remembered. There were also 2 local advisory questions, again easy to remember. The remainder were niche like water reclamation.
Whether I am deliberately abstaining, or not bothering is kind of subjective. My opinion is its not worth my time to educate myself about water reclamation not just because its so niche a subject, but also because I don't think any of the sources will be particularly trustworthy. If you wanted to, of course, for most of these niche questions you can vote party line and expect a pretty average result from whatever party you favor.
In any case, if you want to you can always get a sample ballot at home, fill it out and copy it at the booth.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Since I'm registered to vote, my county provides a sample ballot in my e-mail. I do my research online, then write down my selections on a text file. In previous years I would put the text file in my Kindle and open it at the voting booth. This year I went with the lower-tech solution of simply copying my choices into a notebook. Never had any trouble with either.
Interesting but makes sense. Do you think most in person voters do this?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I solve this problem by typing up my selections as I research them, then I bring the notes to the polling place. This usually works out fine for me, but unfortunately during the first election I owned a smartphone, I had my notes on it and I had a little trouble because the poll workers didn't want anyone to get out any device with a camera. I hurriedly memorized things outside for that election and then I switched back to paper printouts afterward. These days the printouts don't seem to be necessary, because "a camera could enable someone to coerce your vote" is a joke in an election where a third of ballots are mailed in.
When I looked into it, a supermajority of voters solve this problem by selecting "party line R" or "party line D". This seemed like a reasonable button for voting machines to use to filter out people who shouldn't be voting, but it turns out that poll tests are illegal and the machines actually record those votes, so basically in non-off years we're just picking all our winners based what each local district thinks about the Presidential candidate from the same party.
To be clear I do quite like the option of in-person voting, if for nothing else to give an opportunity for a theoretically-coerced individual to overrule their mail-in ballot, just in principle. Seems to me to be the best of both worlds if in-person is still available but the system is set up for and encourages mail-in ballots as the primary method. But if most people end up voting party line straight down that strikes me as fairly problematic. It's not uncommon for there to be at least one bad egg in a party-line bunch, as it were.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
...more anti-democratic and blatant than anointing Kamala the Democratic nominee without a primary process?
Do they have any choice, really? Referendum voting is terrible, and often saddles legislatures with impossible choices. People are in general pretty happy to increase spending and cut taxes forever, and the process is inevitably infected by special interest groups looking for ways to manipulate a gullible electorate into false consensus building.
Admittedly, I have a much bigger problem with "power grabs" than with "anti-democratic." As someone once apocryphally said--the best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
So here's the language voters see, and I've bolded the most problematic parts:
The impression is clear: a voter who trusts the descriptions to be accurate would get the impression that the initiative process is currently weak, and that the legislature doesn't have to follow ballot initiative intent. In reality, the exact opposite is true!
Again I note that the issue is not that there was a few ballot initiatives that failed miserably. Most of the ones that make it to the ballot at least in Utah are typically just fine or even good -- the amendment that made them mad was literally an anti-gerrymandering one, which most all regular people agree is a good idea. It would be something else entirely if there were any cases of actual disasters or actual foreign influence (even proponents admitted this had never happened).
More options
Context Copy link
I don't understand this complaint. The nominee is formally selected by convention, and has been since the 1830s. Primaries played no role in the selection of delegates prior to 1972; prior to then most states didn't even have them, and the ones that existed were mere "beauty contests" to demonstrate voter preference to the actual delegates. There was a brief period when Democratic delegates were bound to the candidate they had been selected for unless the candidate formally released them, but that hasn't been the case since 1984. When Biden dropped out of the race, the same delegates who were selected in the primaries were the ones who participated in the convention. They could have voted for anybody, but nobody besides Kamala made any serious play for the nomination.
If Donald Trump's assassination attempt the Saturday before the convention had been successful, do you seriously think that the Republicans would have postponed the convention so they could hold anything remotely resembling new primaries in all 50 states? As presumptive vice-presidential nominee and with Biden's endorsement, at least Kamala was an obvious choice. The GOP didn't have this luxury, and Nikki Haley, Ron Desantis, and anyone Trump had talked to about possibly being vice president would have all been jockeying for position. You're also talking about a party that's still hanging on to a caucus system that nobody outside of the relevant states seems to understand.
You get that it's not 1972, right?
Do you really not question why literally no-one in the Democratic Party has addressed this issue by going on to CNN and saying "What gives? The Party decides the nominee, not the voters; why do you all care so much how badly we're rat-fucking you?"
Voters expect the parties to put forth the candidates they voted on, not whoever they selected behind the scenes. This isn't "let's get together and decide the nominee behind closed doors in a cigar smoked room" anymore.
More options
Context Copy link
Sure, those are all very pragmatic reasons to do undemocratic things.
That's just my point, though. There are a great many reasons to not fret if the democratic process of referendum elections gets disrupted.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
A legislative veto is one thing but rewriting the referendum is just ridiculous.
Legislatures are usually the ones proposing spending related referenda anyway IME, so it's kind of a case of "stop hitting yourself".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You can just write it down on paper and take it in, or even put it in a note on your phone
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link