Well, I am not sure if I am getting it right here, but I have this feeling that there is so much more behind all that ado about casting your vote:<\/p>\n
For once: what an assumption must that be, when a political party in Wisconsin says: a lot of voters for the opponent must be doing it in an illegal way. Democrats tend to be less law abiding? Democrats are all rogues?
\n
How can such an important thing as the right to vote be organized so inconsistently in every state, county by county? If this is the case, in a way these folks in Wisconsin are even right, when the are suspicious about abuse\u2026 Why not marking your drivers licenses once you get registered and the second mark once you cast your vote i.e.?
\n
Also, what I don’t get: suppose I am not entitled to vote and I show up in a polling place: don’t they check if I am on the list of registered voters and only in case I am on it I get a ballot? And once I cast my vote, my name is check marked and I couldn’t go for a second time, right? So how is it possible that Reps in Ohio say there would be a mass abuse of votes? I don’t really get it\u2026
\n
On top of that: assume for one reason or the other there is a loophole: do you really think that it is this stereotypical “black underprivileged and poor” guy from the liquor store on the corner, who puts all his wit and energy in stealing votes to get somebody like Kerry elected? Give me a break\u2026
\n
If voting will be such a pain in the US from now on, why not moving forward to a clear popular vote for the presidentials? Why are states clinging on to that anachronistic system of the electoral college? It might have had its historical justification, but in my eyes that’s not the case anymore! <\/p>\n
Voting should be so easy! That’s what I ask for the next election: Paper ballots with a simple list of names, easy to check, no costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Well, I am not sure if I am getting it right here, but I have this feeling that there is … <\/p>\n