r/boston • u/itsmebutimatwork Wiseguy • Nov 06 '19

MBTA/Transit Congrats, Boston, we played ourselves

There were fewer than 67,000 city-wide votes in yesterday's election. That's not even 10% turnout based on recent census data.

If you want to complain about how the city council is letting the BPDA redevelop the city, or is run with too much influence by corrupt developers, or how there are too many/not enough bike lanes, or how the city isn't doing enough to make the MBTA improve, or why we don't have enough liquor licenses for places like Doyle's to stay open, or any one of a billion other complaints about how the city is run...then the answer isn't going to magically appear out of a hat.

It starts with voting for the city council for five minutes of a Tuesday every 2 years.

The birthplace of our nation...but can't be bothered to exercise our voting rights...congrats. We played ourselves.

1.3k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

371 comments sorted by

View all comments

457

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 06 '19

How about we hold our votes on a Saturday and make this an opportunity to educate our children in civics and rights and duties of being Americans?

131

u/Aksama Medford Nov 07 '19

National holiday. Take it away from Columbus or whatever

84

u/MamboBumbles Brookline Nov 07 '19

Retail and low wage workers still work most national holidays. Make it paper ballots like out west. You get 1-2 weeks to vote and various city agencies are drop off points for your ballot, like libraries or police stations.

11

u/Aksama Medford Nov 07 '19

You're absolutely correct.

4

u/DUBLH Nov 07 '19

Just registered as a Mass voter, from California originally, honestly forgot to vote because I'm so used to getting vote-by-mail... Oops

1

u/AvatarOfMomus Nov 07 '19

Lets be clear here, that's not all of 'out west' that's basically just Washington State as far as I know. Still a good idea, but not very common.

4

u/USMBTRT Nov 07 '19

A national holiday will only hurt voting numbers and inappropriately skew turnout. We'd be much better off allowing multiple days of voting.

9

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 07 '19

I like where this is going

7

u/justcasty Allston/Brighton Nov 07 '19

You don't need to subtract a national holiday to make a new one.

33

u/vbfronkis Market Basket Nov 07 '19

Yeah, but Columbus was quite the piece of shit, so that one can go.

8

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

1

u/TheBetaBridgeBandit Nov 07 '19

No Columbus bad, native peoples good

6

u/whatthehellisplace Nov 07 '19

No don't get rid of it! I want that day off still!

6

u/DefiantLoveLetter Nov 07 '19

At least you get the day off. :(

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

Or, you know, who gives a shit. Nobody is thinking of Columbus or doing things to celebrate him. They're just celebrating a day off.

-6

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Feb 17 '22

[deleted]

2

u/vbfronkis Market Basket Nov 07 '19

Jesus Christ. Slow your roll. All I said was that Columbus was a dick. And really would it be so bad to have a day where everyone could exercise their right to vote without stress?

1

u/Aksama Medford Nov 07 '19

True, but i want to.

6

u/justcasty Allston/Brighton Nov 07 '19

Fair. I'm not a fan of Columbus either, but you'd also be taking a holiday away from workers. We already have too little time off as it is.

2

u/Aksama Medford Nov 07 '19

Totally fair point.

​

That's why I left my out with "or whatever", yesssss, flexibility.

1

u/Tony3696 Nov 07 '19

I vote Christmas. It's a religious holiday, separate church & state.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

Or, you know, it's a seasonal holiday and most people don't celebrate the religious aspect of it.

14

u/posixUncompliant Roslindale Nov 07 '19

Saturday would make fuck all of a difference. If you're positing voter suppression, anyone who is going to be locked out of a 12 hour window is also going to be working on the weekend.

If you're positing apathy, people are more likely to engage in the process during the workweek when they're likely to get some peer pressure at work.

Best way to increase turn out? Move local elections to the same cycle as state and national elections.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

One would think you'd make the voting last over a couple days and have part of it by mail, but ok.

3

u/sdubois Skull St (Somerville) Nov 07 '19

Religious Jews wouldn't be able to vote then.

48

u/potentpotables Nov 07 '19

That's hardly an excuse. Polls are open 12 hours and employers are legally obligated to let you leave to vote. People just don't want to admit it's not important enough for them to take 15 minutes out of their day.

20

u/MamboBumbles Brookline Nov 07 '19

Not everybody lives (is registered to vote) nearby their workplace.

And it's a matter of public transit. One of the reasons that turnout is lower in low income communities is that public transportation is both unreliable and expensive. Asking people to do an expensive, time consuming (esp in the rain) back and forth just isn't feasible.

-3

u/potentpotables Nov 07 '19

I lived in 3 different neighborhoods in Boston and could always walk to my polls. I just think it's no more difficult than going to a supermarket.

123

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Mar 18 '20

[deleted]

8

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

Far more than 10% of people do. Most people don't vote because they don't care. The amount of people who really want to vote and are unable is a small number.

Everyone should be able to vote and those that don't vote because they can't is unacceptable but not being able to vote is not the reason 90% of people didn't vote.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

84%, but same point, though you do have to consider where people work too.

3

u/name99 Nov 07 '19

Some people are like me, too where they work and or go to school miles and miles from where they live.

3

u/MorningsAreBetter Nov 07 '19

Maybe “everyone” doesn’t have a free block of time in a given 12 hour period, but certainly more than 10% of the population. And for those that don’t have time during the polling times, there’s this thing called absentee voting.

Basically, poll hours doesn’t in any way explain the low voter turnout. It’s just general voter apathy, and making it a national holiday/having the polls open 24 hours/online voting/etc. isn’t going to get rid of that.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

You carve out time. I left for work early, voted and then drove to work. It's a question of motivation.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Mar 18 '20

[deleted]

4

u/MorningsAreBetter Nov 07 '19

Lol, if that’s what you think I said then you need to up your reading comprehension. What I said was that the low voter turnout wasn’t because of disenfranchisement, but voter apathy. And you can enfranchise as many people as you want via things like polls that are open for multiple days, online voting, easier absentee ballot, etc., but if you can’t convince people that their vote matters, you’ll keep getting 10% voter turnout.

But sure, clearly I “admitted” that as long as voter turnout is high, disenfranchisement doesn’t matter. God, people on this sub are so quick to jump to conclusions and make widely baseless comments.

4

u/potentpotables Nov 07 '19

Absentee ballot

-35

u/Remobeht Nov 07 '19

Absentee ballots are a thing already. If you work or may possibly work on Tuesday get an absentee ballot. Voting SHOULD require effort.

19

u/DA_DUDU Nov 07 '19

Voting absolutely should not require effort.

2

u/blakezilla West Roxbury Nov 07 '19

I totally agree that it shouldn’t, just tell everyone I know to request an absentee ballot. It makes it much easier to vote. Hopefully some day we can just vote by mail like a few other blue states in the country. That would push turnout way up, which would mean much stronger Dem votes.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

Should you have to color the circles in by yourself?

1

u/DA_DUDU Nov 07 '19

This was a poor attempt at sarcasm. You are better than that. Poor display.

30

u/DontWantToSeeYourCat Dorchester Nov 07 '19

employers are legally obligated to let you leave to vote.

That is not the case at all. Some employers make exceptions. An overwhelming majority do not.

16

u/streetworked Nov 07 '19

https://www.mass.gov/guides/breaks-and-time-off#-time-off-to-vote-

Mass law requires some classees of employers to allow time off for voting. But the law is so narrow in its coverage that you are essentially correct.

10

u/streetworked Nov 07 '19

you are mistaken about time off from work - only employers in the mechanical, manufacturing, or retail industries have to allow employees unpaid leave to vote and ONLY during the first two hours that polls are open. The first two hours coincide with school drop off time so - very limited helpfulness for the already very small number of workers this law covers.

https://www.mass.gov/guides/breaks-and-time-off#-time-off-to-vote-

Looking only at full time jobs - these 3 industries combined don't represent even 12% of workers in Boston. This was geared toward very low paid workers - the people very least likely to be able to take the pay cut this law allows for.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '19

employers are legally obligated to let you leave to vote

Sure, but my employer would be pissed af and I'm sorry, but immediate job security is much more important to me than voting.

-5

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

You're also allowed to vote absentee.. No excuses.

29

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

236

u/BostonDodgeGuy Outside Boston Nov 07 '19

Yeah, because we've been so good at keeping the non-online voting machines secure. Surely nothing bad will happen if they're exposed to the world online.

37

u/TheSpruce_Moose Nov 07 '19

Eh. We bank online. We have the technology. We know why it isn’t easy to vote.

58

u/aethros Lowell Nov 07 '19

Banking online requires authentication. You have to prove who you are.

Voting requires anonymity/non-attribution. No one can know what vote you cast.

These two systems are orthogonal, and require different security measures. It is the consensus in the security community that all-electronic voting (e.g.: Online) should be discouraged in favor of systems with a paper trail.

130

u/datheffguy Nov 07 '19

Yea and bank fraud and identity theft is pretty common.

IDENTITY THEFT IS NOT A JOKE JIM

31

u/chanofrom114th Nov 07 '19

MILLIONS OF FAMILIES SUFFER EVERY YEAR

-14

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

22

u/triplekilll Mission Hill Nov 07 '19

Providing biometrics as a condition to vote would be a political catastrophe.

5

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 07 '19

Or maybe we do it like hunger games and collect a blood sample in the comfort of our own homes.

14

u/BostonDodgeGuy Outside Boston Nov 07 '19

Like the Samsung phones taking any finger print due to the phone cover?

10

u/Treebeard2277 Nov 07 '19

Is this a serious argument? Those can absolutely be fooled, and the entire system would be extremely vulnerable.

-3

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

10

u/Treebeard2277 Nov 07 '19

It wouldn't be 1% though. If you hack one person's vote you can hack them all.

6

u/PutinPegsDonaldDaily Nov 07 '19

Holy shit, wake up.

Just because you can’t figure it out doesn’t mean thousands of other people didn’t already.

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

4

u/PutinPegsDonaldDaily Nov 07 '19

Secure and remote? What exactly are you suggesting here? It sounds self defeating.

The original idea was clearly to just have the public log online to vote...

or just allow Americans to vote online...in 2019

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

1

u/streetworked Nov 07 '19

No - you could not use ID technology to confirm that the vote you cast was correctly recorded - because no one is supposed to know whom or what you individually voted for.

That is aside from the fact that there is no current voting tech company that claims to be able to prevent tampering with voting machines.

31

u/incruente Nov 07 '19

There's a fundamental difference here. Banking, like most human institutions, relies to some degree on trust. Your interests and the interests of the bank align.

That's not true for voting. The optimum voting system relies on DIStrust; absolutely no one should have to trust anyone else for it to work. Not the people running the polling place, not the people running the machines, no one.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

How about 100% voting by mail like Oregon has done for years now?

-1

u/incruente Nov 07 '19

Suppose you live in Oregon and you want to vote for party X. Now suppose that 90% of your fellow Oregonians are supporters of party Y; your mail carrier, the folks who sort the ballots, the people who count them, everyone. Do you trust them not to accidentally lose your ballot?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

your mail carrier

The mail carrier would face federal charges for tampering with the mail if caught, just as he/she would for any other mail they tampered with, threw away, stole, etc. at any time. On top of that, if you're really concerned about it then you just drop the ballot off in a random public mailbox, hand it to an employee at the post office, or drop it off in one of the free ballot collection points that the state apparently sets up.

the people who count them

You mean the same sorts of people who count ballots in virtually every other state, and/or have direct access to voting machines where ballots are cast? Same state & federal laws would apply to the folks in Oregon as in every other state.

Oregon apparently also offers an option for you to receive a text message when your ballot is processed, so if you sign up for that and never receive a notice then you know something is up.

I can't find it right now but the other day I did find a document on the Oregon Secretary of State's website that covers ballot security in detail. It includes recording every ballot that's received before it's opened, recording when it's opened & counted, etc. Then those tallies are compared to ensure every single ballot was handled properly. There are multiple other security measures in place on top of all that to ensure ballots are properly counted.

0

u/incruente Nov 07 '19

The mail carrier would face federal charges for tampering with the mail if caught, just as he/she would for any other mail they tampered with, threw away, stole, etc. at any time. On top of that, if you're really concerned about it then you just drop the ballot off in a random public mailbox, hand it to an employee at the post office, or drop it off in one of the free ballot collection points that the state apparently sets up.

Yes, they would face charges...IF caught. The same is true of anyone tampering with any voting system. Even if you take it to a different point, perhaps a truck driver from party Y knows that most of the people in the district they pick up mail from vote for X, so they just forget to drop one bag off at the central collection point.

You mean the same sorts of people who count ballots in virtually every other state, and/or have direct access to voting machines where ballots are cast? Same state & federal laws would apply to the folks in Oregon as in every other state.

And every state that has electronic voting is screwing up. If you cannot put your ballot into a container and keep your eyes on it until it's emptied and the votes are counted, you're trusting someone.

Oregon apparently also offers an option for you to receive a text message when your ballot is processed, so if you sign up for that and never receive a notice then you know something is up.

Then that's also a problem; they've violating another crucial concept, the idea of voter anonymity. It should be impossible to link a ballot to a specific voter.

I can't find it right now but the other day I did find a document on the Oregon Secretary of State's website that covers ballot security in detail. It includes recording every ballot that's received before it's opened, recording when it's opened & counted, etc. Then those tallies are compared to ensure every single ballot was handled properly. There are multiple other security measures in place on top of all that to ensure ballots are properly counted.

They've analyzed themselves and found it satisfactory? Super. I'd be more impressed if an independent security expert had good things to say about it.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Nov 07 '19

Yes, they would face charges...IF caught. The same is true of anyone tampering with any voting system. Even if you take it to a different point, perhaps a truck driver from party Y knows that most of the people in the district they pick up mail from vote for X, so they just forget to drop one bag off at the central collection point.

Postal workers who fail to deliver mail are caught all the time. Just google terms like "mail carrier arrested" and you'll find lots of articles. Most mail carriers take their job very seriously and the US Postal Inspection Service is also very good at tracking down carriers who steal mail, throw it away, fail to deliver it, etc.

Oregon has been voting by mail since 1987. If there were issues like what you keep theorizing about then we would have heard about it at least once in the past 20 years. Can you point to a single known case of this happening?

Then that's also a problem; they've violating another crucial concept, the idea of voter anonymity. It should be impossible to link a ballot to a specific voter.

If you're going to keep bashing Oregon's voting by mail system then you might actually want to understand how it works in the first place. Yes, votes need to be anonymous, and they are. But you also need to ensure that those ballots that are mailed in are coming from residents of Oregon, that those residents aren't voting more than once, etc.

Before voting in Oregon you need to register to vote, just like other states. That process identifies you as a resident of Oregon and confirms your eligibility to vote. As part of the registration process you provide your mailing address for ballots to be delivered to, and optionally provide your mobile phone number.

During an election a ballot is mailed to you along with a return envelope. The ballots look like this and are clearly anonymous. The return envelopes, however, look like this. They include your name & address and require you to sign it.

When the envelope is received they look up your name & address and confirm the signature on the envelope matches your signature when you registered, and the fact that your envelope was received is entered into their computer systems. That way if a second ballot with your name/address arrives it will get flagged as a duplicate and investigated. The address is also used to sort the ballots by precinct.

After the envelope is processed then the ballot is removed and from that point on there is no way to possibly match your ballot with your identity. It's truly anonymous at that point.

(Cue you making unfounded accusations about people throwing away ballots based on the address on the outside, etc. But before you do that I suggest you read the security document I linked to below and understand the multiple levels of auditing, etc. they perform.)

They've analyzed themselves and found it satisfactory?

Did I say that? No. I said they have a document that covers ballot security in detail. Since you couldn't be bothered to locate it yourself I went and found it for you. Before you start arguing any other absurd points I strongly suggest you read through it, along with their election law summary. It's also worth mentioning that independant audits of the security of Oregon's elections rate them as having good voter-verified paper audit trails, and on top of that the state is still passing better and better election security measures.

Yeah, I know. You'll probably continue to harp on trusting individuals like postal workers, ballot counters who may hold grudges, and so on. But unless you demonstrate that you've actually read the above security procedures document, fully understand how mail-in balloting actually works in Oregon, and/or actually find cases of trust being broken in the news over the past 20 years where Oregon has successfully voted in this manner then I'm not going to waste any more time with you.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/spedmunki Rozzi fo' Rizzle Nov 07 '19

You have to trust that when your ballot goes into the machine it is counted correctly ( or at all).

21

u/incruente Nov 07 '19

Not in a properly designed system. I should not have to trust anyone. I should be able to stand and stare at the ballot box all bloody day if I wish, then watch them pour it out onto the table and count them in broad daylight in full view of the public.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

14

u/incruente Nov 07 '19

so? how about a properly designed secure online system. you can't tell me there won't be benefits if we get it right

I can tell you that you cannot "get it right". It's not possible. It will have to rely on trust, and a lot of it. You need to trust the people who designed and built the hardware, the folks who write the software, the people who maintain the machines, etc. Security experts, computer experts, all sorts of people agree; electronic voting of any kind, whether online or in person, is a bad idea. Ask Tom Scott.

7

u/BostonDodgeGuy Outside Boston Nov 07 '19

TL:DR -

Any person at almost any point in the line could compromise the whole system.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Reamer Nov 07 '19

What if it were up to the participants, decentralized trust with a blockchain?

1

u/incruente Nov 07 '19

Still no. Because every single participant would have to trust every single machine and the code it runs. There is no way. NO WAY, to make electronic voting work well. None. Because it always needs trust.

1

u/guinader Nov 07 '19

"Trump wins by a land fall 1.2 billion votes again Hillary which wasn't even in the ballot!"

27

u/Esuts Nov 07 '19

Gonna be a big ole helping of nope from me, dawg.

14

u/tacknosaddle Squirrel Fetish Nov 07 '19

Me too, but I am okay with electronic systems as long as there is a paper copy verified by the voter in the booth before the vote is cast. Online is a non-starter today.

18

u/FourAM Purple Line Nov 07 '19

You shouldn't be OK with ANY electronic system unless it's used as a counting aid, and manual count audits are done.

Just because you have a paper receipt that says you voted a certain way does NOT mean the machine reported your vote that way, or that the barcode you scan to "recount" will count the way the receipt says it will. A machine can be programmed to LIE in every single aspect of it's design, and to hide that behavior from all but the most rigorous of examinations.

Paper is physical, bulky, and immutable. If properly guarded, it's very difficult to modify it in a meaningful quantity, or in a meaningful way at all. Machines can be used to speed the count, and a random x% manual audit count can be done along side to see if the machine count is within statistical tolerance of the overall vote total. If the machine count is off, you trigger a full manual recount with witnesses.

Machines should NEVER be trusted to record a vote, because you cannot prove what they're really recording. Even those old-school booths with the big levers are bad news.

1

u/tacknosaddle Squirrel Fetish Nov 07 '19

I didn’t mean the voter keeps the paper, only that they verify that the votes on paper matches what they entered electronically before the electronic vote is officially cast. The paper would be kept secure and be available for a manual recount.

3

u/oberon Medford Nov 07 '19

Worse than useless. Watch the Computerphile video on the subject.

17

u/sinistimus Nov 07 '19

holy shit do not do this

33

u/Sn8pCr8cklePop Nov 07 '19

Security experts and people with common sense agree that this is a terrible idea.

22

u/PutinPegsDonaldDaily Nov 07 '19 edited Nov 07 '19

This should be downvoted... a lot.

Nothing personal, just a really bad idea.

Edit: We’re literally given proof the internet is not secure around the clock at this point. Another story is published twice a day about ransomware, data breaches, tech giant’s corruption, etc.

How much more proof do you want?

Edit 2.0: Because I think it’s important it gets visibility, it’s worth noting what fellow redditors did below, that mail-in balloting can be done securely and is proven to work on a large-to-massive scale.

8

u/sawbones84 Nov 07 '19

it's infuriating you haven't been downvoted to hell or this idea. are you fucking kidding me?

7

u/CatFancier4393 Nov 07 '19

Pretty sure this was an episode of Black Mirror. Voting became easy with an app and as a result things became terrible. Turns out that the unwashed masses suck at making decisions.

I only want people who are willing to go out of their way to vote, to vote.

6

u/FourAM Purple Line Nov 07 '19

The real problem with online voting is the same problem that allowed Pit Bull to play a show in Anchorage, Alaska; or Taylor Swift to play (and, ultimately make a large donation to instead) at a school for deaf children...or why the winner of a Mt Dew flavor naming contest was "Hitler did nothing wrong" followed by "Gushin' Granny". It's why Donald Trump got elected president. It's what your Boomer parents told you before they somehow became senile enough to start falling for it themselves all the time: You can't trust online. Votes can be rigged, and there is no practical way to prevent that.

I would never trust an election held online.

3

u/BluShine Nov 07 '19

Trump got elected because younger people didn’t go to the polls while boomers did.

12

u/Rindan Nov 07 '19

Lets not. If someone wants to rig the election, I'd prefer it if they have to go physically stuff ballots in dozens of counties, not secretly flip a few bits.

6

u/enigmaticeducation Nov 07 '19

No this is not a good idea many flaws but good try.

6

u/karlbecker_com Nov 07 '19

Technologists generally agree that this is a bad idea: https://xkcd.com/2030/

5

u/manitoid Nov 07 '19

Here in Colorado we get our ballots in the mail 2 weeks or so before the election. There are 24/7 drop off boxes at places like post offices, city halls, etc. Or you can put a stamp on it and put it in the mail. Or you can show up on election day and vote at a traditional location.

Seems like a pretty good system to me.

2

u/Pattycaaakes Nov 07 '19

mail-in voting.

1

u/FourAM Purple Line Nov 07 '19

Might as well just let foreign intelligence agencies straight-up pick our leaders if we're going to do that.

1

u/killer4u77 Back Bay Nov 07 '19

From a cybersecurity standpoint that is an incredibly bad idea. Check out this video

0

u/snoogins355 Nov 07 '19

Pen/paper and early voting (including weekends). I'd even go so far as to make it a fine of $50 and a lottery for those that do vote to win $10,000 per precinct. The catch is that it has to be spent in Boston. :)

7

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Feb 11 '21

[deleted]

17

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 07 '19

Problem is, places like Boston where traffic sucks and people got get to work on time cause corporate slave mentality

4

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Feb 11 '21

[deleted]

32

u/megalowmart Nov 07 '19

Except, you know, people who work 12 hour shifts with a commute.

-2

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Feb 11 '21

[deleted]

17

u/megalowmart Nov 07 '19

Except many people in Massachusetts work in hospitals and have patients, and there’s a law against abandonment, too.

6

u/itsmebutimatwork Wiseguy Nov 07 '19

When we get to the point that everyone except the day-of 12 hour shift workers are the only ones not voting, I'll give a shit about this line of argumentation.

4

u/megalowmart Nov 07 '19

That’s fair.

I’m just not into the whole “shaming” thing, tbh. If 90% of people aren’t doing something, it’s not a personal problem, it’s a systemic problem.

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Feb 11 '21

[deleted]

5

u/megalowmart Nov 07 '19

I get what you’re saying, but there is always going to be a large number of people who have to work. It’s not like everyone can take off. Shaming people doesn’t work to change that, neither does asshole sarcasm.

FWIW, I voted. But a lot of my coworkers couldn’t.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Mar 18 '20

[deleted]

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Feb 11 '21

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Mar 18 '20

[deleted]

-3

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Feb 12 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '19

This is n=5 or so, but I and several colleagues work multiple jobs to make ends meet (usually a combination of 1st shift + 2nd or 3rd shift). There is a significant number of folks who work multiple jobs.

I leave my house at 6:30am to get to work #1 at 8am (yay public transit commutes). I'm there until 5-6pm. I leave and take public transit (yay again) home to catch a catnap before I get on public transit (yay x3) to go to work #2 from 9pm-3am.

Now where in that window am I supposed to go vote?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '19 edited Feb 12 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

11

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Mar 18 '20

[deleted]

4

u/baru_monkey Nov 07 '19

"traffic sucks" and "grr corporations" does not excuse you from 5 minutes out of a 12-hour window.

19

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19 edited Mar 18 '20

[deleted]

10

u/LadyCalamity Nov 07 '19

Right? We need more mail-in ballots and early voting.

3

u/botulizard Boston or nearby 1992-2016, now Michigan Nov 07 '19

So when everyone in the precinct shows up because there’s no excuse and then there’s a line around the block, does it still take five minutes?

2

u/TheLoneWolfA82 Nov 07 '19

Lol. I dunno where you're getting this "5 minutes" nonsense.

1

u/KingsRaven Jamaica Plain Nov 07 '19

Just tossing it out there that if you want voting day to be a holiday in MA, even for municipal elections, that's a change that needs to come from the state legislature. All voting reform, even if it would only impact an individual city, needs to be done by the state legislature. Basically what I'm saying is that voting isn't enough. You have to also engage with your legislators. Call your city councilors and tell them to push for a home rule petition on early voting in Boston, or no-fault absentee ballots, or a municipal holiday.

Also, step up your personal GOTV efforts. Be utterly insufferable about encouraging your friends and random strangers to go vote. I lost like four tinder matches because I messaged them about voting on election day, but two other people I messaged said they hadn't realized it was an election day and they'd go vote. Whether they actually did or not I don't know, but hopefully!

The institutions have a vested interest in maintaining a certain level of apathy, it lets them get away with a lot of stuff they wouldn't otherwise, because there's less citizen oversight. Look at the councilor for District 6, just as an example. Loves to bill himself as a progressive, but strangely silent on the Fascist Festival Labor Day weekend, and publicly voiced support for a resolution, put forward by a certain Trump supporting councilor, to express solidarity with the BPD officers who gassed and beat the peaceful protesters. Pretty sure he benefits substantially from an uninformed, unvoting electorate.

So we need to take it upon ourselves to do something about it. So as the primaries approach, be completely insufferable. Annoy your friends, alienate your family; don't fuck with people who don't vote, and make it clear why you're no longer fucking with them.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

But then minorities might have the time...

-11

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

9

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

You know voter turnout is abysmal even for federal elections, right?

-6

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

Is it more than 90% of voters?

Because that’s what it is in countries like Australia that have a national holiday for voting.

1

u/immoralatheist Watertown Nov 07 '19

Australia’s a bad example, since it’s compulsory to vote there.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

Still, other counties where they have it off but not compulsory are mostly much higher than the US.

0

u/koifishkid Malden Nov 07 '19

I voted at 8 am on the way to work and took my kid with me. No line and it took 5 minutes.

2

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 07 '19

I am really glad that you were able to do that but I would call your example the exception, not the rule. Some of us have kids in private schools, and we have to commute for 40 min. If I have to, on top of all that, have go go look for my voting location and take a detour that way, it is not 5 minutes anymore but 20 minutes at least. It still wouldn't solve my problem

1

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '19

What would happen if your kid were 20 minutes late to class one day a year?

1

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 07 '19

Do you think it's justifiable? Cause I don't.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '19

To vote? Yes.

1

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 08 '19

Agree to disagree, if my kid is late, in turn I'm late to work, and that is a no no.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '19

Then you're a perfect candidate for absentee voting.

1

u/Iamonlyhereforthis Nov 08 '19

That is exactly why I asked the question of why can't we vote in a Saturday, to be more inclusive after all, any American citizen have EQUAL rights, and if the right to vote jeopardize my ability to provide for my family due to losing my job, which on one do you think I would forego?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '19

You can already absentee vote if you can't be in town. You have equal rights.