Re: OT Politics Re: Three Body Problem

On 26 Aug 2024 21:09:17 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:

On 2024-08-26, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On 25 Aug 2024 19:16:49 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
>

On 2024-08-25, Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/24/2024 3:37 PM, BCFD 36 wrote:

...
Only if that is how the election laws were written. I think it would be
wildly impractical to hold multiple national elections.

>
Why? Lots of countries have elections with multiple rounds. France just
had one.

>
Many things would have to change here.  Security procedures require
months of preparation now.  The voting/tallying period is now approaching
a month between early voting and delivery of mail ballots.  It certainly
won't allow a quick second round.

>
Which is why I suggested moving things back /two/ months.
>
And did you really mean to suggest that French elections are somehow
less secure than ours?

>
French elections are *much* simpler than ours.  Except in unusual
circumstances, a voter in France: goes to their designated polling
place on voting day, presents their official photo id, and casts one
or two votes.  No early voting.  No mail voting (deemed too subject to
fraud). No drop boxes. No online voting (except overseas). No
provisional voting. No absentee voting, though you can go through the
legal system and designate a friend to vote in person for you (no way
for you to verify they voted the way you wanted). Very few voting
machines; most places are completely manual which works because
everything is right there in one place in front of the counters.
>
Probably the big difference is that the French do not have to deal
with the complexity of our ballots.  They cast a couple of votes at
most normally.  I think there were over 20 votes in my last ballot.
Ensuring a completely correct ballot form takes time.
>

The French, to be sure, are very strange: a few years ago, one of
their traffic officers gave a ticket to a Muslim woman because her
veil covered her nose (not her eyes) and so prevented her from seeing
well enough to drive.
>
I have, of course, long been aware that the French are famous for
talking through their noses, but this is the only time I have heard
that they see through them as well.
>

Locally, all schools are closed on election day and even the day before
this year due to schools being polling places.  It's tough to have an
indeterminate calendar for schools.

>
Locally, schools tend to close whenever it snows. If they can do it
for snow, they can do it for elections. It's not tough to have an
indeterminate calendar for schools at all.

>
Baloney. School districts would not give up their snow days for an election;
they are too precious. I lived in upstate New York and had to go to school
on spring break holidays to make up for too many bad weather days. The school
calendar would need to be extended by a day (unless global warming gets rid
of snow days!)

I never said they would give up their snow days.

What I /did/ say is that it is /not/ tough to have an ideterminate
calandar for schools, as shown by the very /existence/ of snow days.

Of course, an all-mail system (with minimal physical places for voting
[1]) elminates the problem of schools being polling places.

>
It's not clear your two months would be enough then, depending on
what elections had two phases (just Presidential might be doable).

The only "problem" is reprinting the ballots to include only the races
in question with /only two candidates in each race/. And, BTW, most
States and Counties have computers to produce their ballots, so you
can forget about how long that would take. It would take about two
seconds to identify the affected races and determining the two
candidates, and maybe another second to format the ballots. The
printing, after the result has been checked for accuracy (as I believe
a few counties in States whose Republicans-in-Charge played the
gerrymander game a bit too hard have found out), would, of course,
take a bit longer, depending on how that is done.

OK, "two seconds" may not be entirely realistic. But it wouldn't take
very long at all. All the data needed, after all, is already there and
need merely be explored. Two months (for mail-in) should be plenty of
time. For actual polling places, one month should be enough. The
contract signed by the poll workers would, of course, have to obligate
them to attend if such an election became necessary.

[1] One per county, I think. These are for people who need assistance,
and people who decide to register and vote on voting day itself
(those, of course, cast provisional ballots which are counted once
their registration is validated).

--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"