Before you write-in Paul, check your local state rules

[Dr.3D]

It probably will be.

Regardless, this is a microcosm of other "go along to get along" type of moves.

If voting is as serious as the establishment would have you believe, then you could no more alter your vote "make it count" any more than you could betray your family.

If your eyes have been opened, there is no other moral choice than to write in Ron Paul.

Unless voting is bullshit.

Sometimes I wonder if it's all a show.

 

[liberty2897]

Well, you saw how they cheat and change the rules for the primary, I guess it's no wonder they feel they can change the rules for anything they want, any time they want.

It would be interesting to have two elections, one official and the other unofficial and everybody who votes in one, votes in the other and see how closely they match.

Yes. What I want to know is why we can't vote online? I'm pretty sure that most people care more about the security of their online banking and other online personal information MUCH more than they worry about someone fraudulently voting in their name. Why is it that we can't vote online? Is it because every online poll that Dr Paul was ever showed him magnitudes of order ahead of everyone else including the incumbent? Something is very strange about this to me, but then again I am the paranoid, un-trusting of government type.

 

[Travlyr]

Well, you saw how they cheat and change the rules for the primary, I guess it's no wonder they feel they can change the rules for anything they want, any time they want.

It would be interesting to have two elections, one official and the other unofficial and everybody who votes in one, votes in the other and see how closely they match.

Not too much new except they no longer have to pretend they are something they're not. It is all predetermined now days. Technology is cool.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dbb4U8v3YQ

 

[Dr.3D]

Yes. What I want to know is why we can't vote online? I'm pretty sure that most people care more about the security of their online banking and other online personal information MUCH more than they worry about someone fraudulently voting in their name. Why is it that we can't vote online? Is it because every online poll that Dr Paul was ever showed him magnitudes of order ahead of everyone else including the incumbent? Something is very strange about this to me, but then again I am the paranoid, un-trusting of government type.

Heck, I can renew my automobile license plate online at the SOS, I can't see why they can't do the same thing with voting. The thing is, there still isn't going to be any kind of paper trail and thus if a recount is called, it would be impossible to do so.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Sometimes I wonder if it's all a show.

The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.

- Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

 

[CPUd]

To go to online voting, they need infrastructure. Back when everybody was using dialup, ATMs had been using it for almost 20 years. The systems within the banks were using fibre channel, and we won't even have that in our homes for another 20 years (unless you live in KC).

 

[liberty2897]

To go to online voting, they need infrastructure. Back when everybody was using dialup, ATMs had been using it for almost 20 years. The systems within the banks were using fibre channel, and we won't even have that in our homes for another 20 years (unless you live in KC).

Sorry, but I design communications equipment for a living and I honestly don't understand your argument against online voting. Are you saying the bandwidth isn't available? That wouldn't be true in the slightest. With the current infrastructure, voting could be done by every US citizen in a matter of minutes without any kind of burden on the infrastructure. If I didn't understand your argument, then sorry in advance.

 

[CPUd]

It's not the bandwidth, with the banks, they had a dedicated infrastructure. It's about control over the infrastructure; the reluctance to do it over the WWW has more to do with the fact that the ones who would make that decision don't understand how a secure system can be built. Even with strong cryptographic methods, their experts will tell them that it is still theoretically possible to compromise the system. The authentication methods probably scare them as well. Their worst nightmare would be to have such a voting system, and on election day, have 3x as many voters as what they have in their registry.

 

[pcosmar]

Many states allow write-ins, but will only count them as "undervotes". Just because a "write-in" spot is there does not mean it will actually get counted in the end.

So what?
Let me make that a statement rather than a question.
So the fuck what !

I won't be writing him in because I think he can win.

I will be writing him in so I don't give my vote (or any legitimacy) to the others.

 

[liberty2897]

It's not the bandwidth, with the banks, they had a dedicated infrastructure. It's about control over the infrastructure; the reluctance to do it over the WWW has more to do with the fact that the ones who would make that decision don't understand how a secure system can be built. Even with strong cryptographic methods, their experts will tell them that it is still theoretically possible to compromise the system. The authentication methods probably scare them as well. Their worst nightmare would be to have such a voting system, and on election day, have 3x as many voters as what they have in their registry.

I see what you are saying now. I still say that the vast majority of people trust online security to do their business via https over the net including banking, shopping, etc. Why not voting? I would feel much more secure about my vote online than I do with some 80-year-old lady at the local precinct throwing my write-in vote in the trash because I didn't vote for her candidate. Then again, I think all this stuff with "Anonymous" lately is just another fear tactic to keep the general public scared of the "internets"

 

[CPUd]

It doesn't look like the "your vote won't be counted" argument against write-ins is going over very well at RPF.

I won't be voting for President, either. When I tell people this, the reaction is incredulity, which I take as a sign that if this were to be done en masse, it would make the strongest statement.

 

[CPUd]

I see what you are saying now. I still say that the vast majority of people trust online security to do their business via https over the net including banking, shopping, etc. Why not voting? I would feel much more secure about my vote online than I do with some 80-year-old lady at the local precinct throwing my write-in vote in the trash because I didn't vote for her candidate. Then again, I think all this stuff with "Anonymous" lately is just another fear tactic to keep the general public scared of the "internets"

Yeah, I agree that it could be done, but there is enough fearmongering going on that the people who have to make those decisions (legislatures, city councils, etc.) are afraid to do it.

 

[liberty2897]

It doesn't look like the "your vote won't be counted" argument against write-ins is going over very well at RPF.

I won't be voting for President, either. When I tell people this, the reaction is incredulity, which I take as a sign that if this were to be done en masse, it would make the strongest statement.

CPUd, if you are replying to my last post, I want to make it clear that I WILL be writing in Ron Paul unless he endorses Mit Romney. I just want to know why we don't push for online voting? Ron Paul RULES online. He is the (online-politically-active) peoples choice.

[edit]
I probably just answered my last question... they are afraid of the people's choice.

 

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

Ha ha. My vote has never counted before so why not vote for Ron Paul?

Thank you, Travlyr, for giving such clear voice to my own thoughts. Well said.

I believe, however, that barring a third party run, or a merge of Ron Paul with Johnson on the LP ticket, the wisest move for myself would be to follow through with my rejection of all things GOP. I re-registered, having just moved, as a Libertarian. Johnson is no Paul, but god damn it, he is no Robamney. This makes me comfortable in supporting GJ - warts and all.

It's a crying shame things have come to this. Let's get past the 2012 elections and keep moving forward as a movement. As the world comes crashing down upon us all over the coming years, the ideas of Liberty, waking up those who are unwilling to accept the true nature of the powers governing global affairs, and a return to our founding principles, will become less difficult. But it will never be easy.

Thanks, Dr. Paul, for helping me find my way. I'd vote for you on the LP ticket, I'd vote for you as an Independent, and I'd vote for you on a whatever-the-hell-you-want-to-call-it ticket. I'd prefer to not have my vote invalidated.

Googling for a map of some kind to post in this thread; something along the lines of "is a write in valid in your state..."

 

[CPUd]

CPUd, if you are replying to my last post, I want to make it clear that I WILL be writing in Ron Paul unless he endorses Mit Romney. I just want to know why we don't push for online voting? Ron Paul RULES online. He is the (online-politically-active) peoples choice.

[edit]
I probably just answered my last question... they are afraid of the people's choice.

That particular post was more "in general".

It's probably too late in the season to push for online voting for this cycle. Guessing something like that would take a year or 2. Another giant obstacle is the contracts the states/municipalities have with the voting machine vendors. If it looks like those are in jeopardy, companies like Diebold will most certainly react via their lobbyists. If we can get past that, we might have a shot.

 

[mport1]

An individual vote is meaningless anyway. If you want to vote for Ron Paul, do it. Who cares if it is counted or not?

 

[liberty2897]

An individual vote is meaningless anyway. If you want to vote for Ron Paul, do it. Who cares if it is counted or not?

Good point. I guess I already knew that, but I forget sometimes. Voting in the Nov election is kind of pointless. I did participate in the GOP primary, but I realized that was pointless too when they said "If you are Libertarian, then you should probably just get up and walk out now". I can't prove it, but I KNOW RP votes were just thrown out in my county. I could see it in their faces.

Regardless, I will do the RP write-in. Supposedly it does "count" in my state even if it is just a popularity vote. Politics is so depressing sometimes. I don't know how all of you die-hard people do it day-in and day-out. Respect.

 

[Origanalist]

Thank you, Travlyr, for giving such clear voice to my own thoughts. Well said.

I believe, however, that barring a third party run, or a merge of Ron Paul with Johnson on the LP ticket, the wisest move for myself would be to follow through with my rejection of all things GOP. I re-registered, having just moved, as a Libertarian. Johnson is no Paul, but god damn it, he is no Robamney. This makes me comfortable in supporting GJ - warts and all.

It's a crying shame things have come to this. Let's get past the 2012 elections and keep moving forward as a movement. As the world comes crashing down upon us all over the coming years, the ideas of Liberty, waking up those who are unwilling to accept the true nature of the powers governing global affairs, and a return to our founding principles, will become less difficult. But it will never be easy.

Thanks, Dr. Paul, for helping me find my way. I'd vote for you on the LP ticket, I'd vote for you as an Independent, and I'd vote for you on a whatever-the-hell-you-want-to-call-it ticket. I'd prefer to not have my vote invalidated.

Googling for a map of some kind to post in this thread; something along the lines of "is a write in valid in your state..."

I think so... I'm color blind though.

//

 

[agaiziunas]

It doesn't look like the "your vote won't be counted" argument against write-ins is going over very well at RPF.

Again, I am not arguing FOR or AGAINST writing in Ron Paul. Everyone should vote the way they want and whatever makes them happy.

There are some people, however, who want their votes counted and reflect the fact that they are disgusted with the choices. In Illinois where I live, for example, write-in votes are NOT COUNTED unless the candidate has filed an intent to run as a write-in. They don't get counted as "undervotes", they don't get counted as "other", it is simply as if you didn't vote at all. Writing in Ron Paul would make me feel great personally, but in Illinois it would be absolutely meaningless.

I understand the arguments that in Illinois it's meaningless anyway -- Obama will win the state no matter what. But I WANT MY VOTE COUNTED and I want it to reflect the fact I despise both choices. For those who are like-minded, I am just spelling out the rules and advising them to look up their own state & regional election rules.

In my case, I haven't decided yet whether to leave the POTUS vote blank and have it count as an "undervote" or vote 3rd party.


I am not arguing FOR or AGAINST any course of action -- I am simply trying to make sure everyone is INFORMED before they make their decision.

 

[CPUd]

Again, I am not arguing FOR or AGAINST writing in Ron Paul. Everyone should vote the way they want and whatever makes them happy.

There are some people, however, who want their votes counted and reflect the fact that they are disgusted with the choices. In Illinois where I live, for example, write-in votes are NOT COUNTED unless the candidate has filed an intent to run as a write-in. They don't get counted as "undervotes", they don't get counted as "other", it is simply as if you didn't vote at all. Writing in Ron Paul would make me feel great personally, but in Illinois it would be absolutely meaningless.

I understand the arguments that in Illinois it's meaningless anyway -- Obama will win the state no matter what. But I WANT MY VOTE COUNTED and I want it to reflect the fact I despise both choices. For those who are like-minded, I am just spelling out the rules and advising them to look up their own state & regional election rules.

In my case, I haven't decided yet whether to leave the POTUS vote blank and have it count as an "undervote" or vote 3rd party.


I am not arguing FOR or AGAINST any course of action -- I am simply trying to make sure everyone is INFORMED before they make their decision.

I wasn't really directing that at you - it was just an observation that a lot of posters here are saying they will WIRP regardless.