Posted on 11/02/2006 4:19:16 PM PST by dfwddr
We need to publish the names of which REPORTERS/Newspaper owners who did not vote.....and if we can, what party they are.....
But DID they?
were these JUST democrats?
were these JUST people of color?
How did they decide WHO to publish?
It seems unless they printed everyone there is some kind of voter intimidation violation.
Yep, same here. So, were the reporters allowed to sit there after polls taking the names of those who didn't vote; copying these? Or photocopying the polling "rolls"? That's what I'm wondering.
Agreed, although the down side of a law suit is some lower than whale $hxx lawyer will make money.
All good questions that come back to motive. In the olden days a mob would have burned down the paper; now, this is the stuff that makes lawyers rich and infamous.
The reporter needs only to ask anyone that is checking off names for a copy of the registered voter (public) list/ Re:activity, after the polls close.
But then, in my opinion, if you (not you personally) don't vote, don't complain. Now, if they published for what candidate one voted, that would be poaching on the privacy of the "closed curtain".
Amazing how in Iraq, people walk miles to the polls risking their lives to vote; but in America, a registered voter may often even brag he(she) didn't vote and now I am expected to feel sorry for any of them?
But neither would I take the time to read the names 70% of the townspeople who did not show up to vote. We have the right to vote or not to vote.
Tell me if I am wrong in my thinking. However, right or wrong, is how I feel on the matter.
This is outrageous...never, ever in my life did I think this could happen in our country. HOW DARE THEY.
This being the case, maybe Papers should, in the interest ov balance, have to publish the names of those who voted who are already dead, live on vacant lots, are felons, etc. This should work both ways.
Tell me what paper is interested in balance. I'll subscribe. Whether we vote or not should be as private as whom we voted for.
I don't think the dead will care . . . .
I'd seriously consider that Harold Ford or his crooked family had something to do with this. Seems to match his style.
Because a non-vote is the de facto vote for "none of the above". You don't publish a person's choice if they do vote - why should their choice to not vote be published? It's as personal a decision as any other vote.
Dim Nazi strategies. Tune in tomorrow for even more of how the Dims view the rights of the people, as in "You voted, but you voted the WRONG WAY so now we're going to shame you once per week for the next four years. Maybe then you'll get it correct. Now go to your cell!"
Mailing lists of voters who voted, registered voters who didn't vote, sex, age, ethnicity, etc. can be purchased legally. Much of the mailings we receive in the mail are from these lists.
I don't think the right to vote equates to a mandatory "draft", and I don't think those not voting are equivalent to military going AWOL.
On the positive side, however, personally I am just the wretch who wears her "I voted" sticker all day long. I am also the one who asks folks if they voted. I like knowing who didn't vote, and are crabbing about this that or the other; those who did vote (and for more taxes) crabbing about how hard it is to save a dime; or those who did vote and are aware of the rich legacy of this country and its diligent and vigilant fight for freedom.
When I meet people and find myself in conversation with them, I often ask right up front if they vote. I do not ask who they voted for; I wait and let them tell me that. This serves as my screening list for future conversations. :)
I know about all kinds of mailing lists. But from whom, exactly, do reporters or others get the lists of names and addresses of those who did or did not vote? It's gotta be the Secretary of State's office, no?
Photocopying at the polls from the registrants desk? This seems a very BAD practice, if so. Gives me the heebies.
I would imagine the lists were of registered voters that didn't vote in the last election(s) that were posted in the paper. You go the the couthouses and you either xerox page after page of the open books or or handwrite the names. The data is then entered at a mailing house. (This was my first job in LA and I HATED it).
Well, the political page on their website seems to have been taken down. If I can find out anymore about this, I'll let you all know.
No one should have their name published in the paper because they did not vote. that is ridiculous......gimme a break. Some people could have legitimate reasons for not being able to vote, perhaps they're sick or maybe their parents are on the verge of dying.
Your point is right-on:
Some people could have legitimate reasons for not being able to vote, perhaps they're sick or maybe their parents are on the verge of dying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.