Active Users:348 Time:14/07/2025 12:13:38 AM
It is an appallingly large number. Joel Send a noteboard - 05/11/2012 07:40:47 PM
That seems like a high number/percentage...but given people's propensity to procrastinate (wow) I am hoping enough will be received in the mail and in person today and tomorrow to make the potential provisionals due to this small enough not to matter.

It's true the absentee ballot applications got sent to almost everyone, but people still had to go through the effort of requesting the absentee ballot (and the application informed them that if they did that and then chose to vote at the polls they would have to vote a provisional ballot). That warning was also repeated in at least 2 places in the packet containing the ballot for those who actually requested them. All this to say that I can't believe anywhere close to 400,000 people were frivolous enough to follow through on requesting the ballot and then change their mind and decide to vote in person anyway...(Although I will say that I was put off when I received my absentee ballot...the mailing envelope to send it back very clearly communicated the contents, and that made me nervous enough not to want to send it through the mail. Fortunately dropping the ballot off in person at my local county BoE was convenient for me. But if it hadn't been, I'd have seriously considered voting in person anyway. I'm probably more cynical than most, though.)

Nearly 10% of the 2004 (granted that was eight years ago,) enough to easily leave the election in limbo for two weeks before provisional ballots are even opened. If even half those people decide to vote it is still 175,000 votes. Hopefully, those who vote at this late date just fill out the absentee ballot; I believe it can be submitted on election day as easily as provisional ballots, but with less risk election officials say, "tell me who they voted for so I know whether the ballot is legal...."

Personally, I am more and more inclined toward how WA and OR do it: Mail everyone an absentee ballot whether they request or not, and just have everyone vote by mail. The "turnout" numbers have been truly impressive (80-90%,) but most importantly there is a verifiable paper trail. Which is true with provisional ballots, too, but OH has a bad recent history of summarily trashing all provisional ballots, which are never seen again. Federal law notwithstanding, my distant impression is that provisional ballots simply do not count up there.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
This message last edited by Joel on 05/11/2012 at 07:45:43 PM
Reply to message
Could Ohio Kill the Electoral College? - 05/11/2012 04:43:48 PM 703 Views
what? directly vote for president? COMMUNISM! - 05/11/2012 06:01:00 PM 280 Views
Um - 05/11/2012 06:04:12 PM 258 Views
Ugh. - 05/11/2012 07:23:37 PM 365 Views
It is an appallingly large number. - 05/11/2012 07:40:47 PM 259 Views
A simple solution: proportional allocation of electors from each state with 15 votes or more. - 05/11/2012 08:34:08 PM 267 Views
I like that idea, though I have long felt Larrys idea of using Congressional Districts is better. - 05/11/2012 09:22:49 PM 392 Views
So you undermined your own argument from the start... - 05/11/2012 10:01:07 PM 242 Views
i've always favored district lines by ZIP code myself - 05/11/2012 10:05:59 PM 322 Views
Um... WHAT? Republicans have 9/13 CDs in NC. - 12/11/2012 07:52:16 PM 362 Views
But why do people bleive big states need more power? - 06/11/2012 06:31:22 PM 275 Views
I was not asked but will answer anyway: They do not. - 12/11/2012 07:45:26 PM 389 Views

Reply to Message