43
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 59:
Line 59: +
→How exactly does it disenfranchise?
:Not "more sancrosanct," but more informed to vote on [[Election Day]]. If 99% of the electorate vote early before campaigns are over, then the conscientious voter who does his due diligence by voting on Election Day has been disenfranchised from his vote being meaningful. To the extent early voting is less than 99%, the degree of disenfranchisement scales accordingly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:19, 22 November 2012 (EST)
:Not "more sancrosanct," but more informed to vote on [[Election Day]]. If 99% of the electorate vote early before campaigns are over, then the conscientious voter who does his due diligence by voting on Election Day has been disenfranchised from his vote being meaningful. To the extent early voting is less than 99%, the degree of disenfranchisement scales accordingly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:19, 22 November 2012 (EST)
::You keep claiming that those who vote on Election Day are more informed, but that's hogwash. Campaigns are largely meaningless, you know who you are going to vote for by and large before the conventions. Anyone who hasn't formed an opinion by the time most early voting takes place probably isn't paying close enough attention to make an informed choice by the time Election Day rolls around. And really, how many of those who vote early are going to change their mind? I would probably say almost none, and therefore it's hardly "disenfranchising" for the results to be moved up a month. Seriously, your whole argument is based on the flawed premise that large swaths of people change their minds in September and October. For the VAST majority (I can confidently say at least 80-90 percent) the decision isn't changing, so why shouldn't they be allowed to vote early? [[User:SteveSpagnola|SteveSpagnola]] 21:34, 22 November 2012 (EST)