2016 Postmortem

reflection

(6,287 posts)

44. If a state has no power, and no backup paper plan,

Tue Oct 30, 2012, 12:22 PM

Oct 2012

then I suppose precedent would have to be set, and the election delayed. But I would expect everyone involved in such an ill-prepared farce to be run out of town on a rail when the election was over, no matter what side of the fence they fall on.

But yes, I concede the point that if there truly is NO WAY to vote, then the election should be delayed in those areas.

I just hate to give the Republicans extra time to tinker with the machines while we wait late voters to get their game plan in effect.

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