Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

LisaL

(47,507 posts)

30. I can see the potential for havoc.

Reply to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #29)

Tue Oct 30, 2012, 11:36 AM

Oct 2012

But if there is a state of emergency in that state, what is the alternative?
If they are out of power and not ready to vote-then that state should postpone election.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do you think the election should be delayed? [View all] Democratopia Oct 2012 OP

it won't be scheming daemons Oct 2012 #1

Well, we can't predict the future in terms of whether they will be TroyD Oct 2012 #2

It hasn't happened. Some wanted to delay the election of 1864 during the WI_DEM Oct 2012 #26

I don't know about NYC and NJ RoccoR5955 Oct 2012 #3

NYC voting means walking three blocks away brooklynite Oct 2012 #6

No GETTINGTIRED Oct 2012 #4

Either way we will win ashling Oct 2012 #5

No. RevStPatrick Oct 2012 #7

Should be, at least for a few days...But probably won't be Armstead Oct 2012 #8

No, of course not. bowens43 Oct 2012 #9

No way. DCBob Oct 2012 #10

Hell no alcibiades_mystery Oct 2012 #11

The states primarily affected are Democratic strongholds anyway, so it's not like Repubs in those politicaljunkie41910 Oct 2012 #12

No Democat Oct 2012 #13

You Can't Have Different States Voting At The Same Time For Obvious Reasons DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #14

We already do that with early voting. LisaL Oct 2012 #24

Let's Say Forty Nine States Have Voted And All The Results Are In, Not Just Early Votes, DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #29

I can see the potential for havoc. LisaL Oct 2012 #30

No, and it can't be anyway obamanut2012 Oct 2012 #15

No. I do not want to give Romney time to gain ground. I want this election over! nt helpisontheway Oct 2012 #16

N*O!!! 66 dmhlt Oct 2012 #17

No zebe83 Oct 2012 #18

Article II, Clause 4 of the Constitution thevoiceofreason Oct 2012 #19

Not entirely true. LisaL Oct 2012 #22

That means the elctoral college votes, not voters obamanut2012 Oct 2012 #35

Legislature of that state presumably could direct they vote later than on Nov 6. LisaL Oct 2012 #37

Sorry... no. FBaggins Oct 2012 #47

Congress would look pretty crappy for refusing to relieve treestar Oct 2012 #33

They would look partisan, period obamanut2012 Oct 2012 #36

No rock Oct 2012 #20

HELL to the NO! RomneyLies Oct 2012 #21

No modrepub Oct 2012 #23

No. Was it delayed during the Civil War or WWII. These things happen WI_DEM Oct 2012 #25

If by these things you mean hurricanes in the end of october? I don't think so. LisaL Oct 2012 #27

Exactly correct. FBaggins Oct 2012 #48

My opinion: LisaL Oct 2012 #28

You cannot do that -- it gives an unfair advantage to one state obamanut2012 Oct 2012 #39

If qualified under Board of Election Rules and state and local laws treestar Oct 2012 #31

It's unprecendented. LisaL Oct 2012 #32

No. reflection Oct 2012 #34

So how is a state going to vote if it has no power? LisaL Oct 2012 #38

The election isn't today, it's next Tuesday obamanut2012 Oct 2012 #41

If a state has no power, and no backup paper plan, reflection Oct 2012 #44

The electors would be chosen by the legislature if no election is possible davidn3600 Oct 2012 #45

No but I'm worried about turnout budkin Oct 2012 #40

Absolutely not. The only reason to delay is if there are curfews due to bushisanidiot Oct 2012 #42

Everybody should.... RichGirl Oct 2012 #43

No, CL&P here in CT said they should be able to take care of most people Jennicut Oct 2012 #46