Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

OpelSmith t1_isak69z wrote

I still can't believe we voted this down in 2014, we don't do too many wtf things as a state, but that was one of them. Thankfully though if i recall it was 49-51 margin, and the climate seems much better this time around

66

AuntJemimasHoney t1_isayjm2 wrote

Wording was too confusing in 2014. No one knew what it meant unfortunately

23

sjsmac t1_isa7j7b wrote

Not surprisingly, the only people against it are Republicans.

50

Nyrfan2017 t1_isbqe1x wrote

I’m a independent and I’m against it opens the door for more tampering with things and I know I’ll get that don’t happen but yet there is a ton of articles about people from both sides getting in trouble for it

−14

Kodiak01 t1_isbrmcq wrote

You realize that anyone who wants to vote early already can do so by simply stating they will be out of town during all voting hours, right?

Lived in CT since 2016. Voted in every election, 2020 general election was the only time I had to race to the polls at the end of the night from work because my absentee ballot never got sent.

This past primary election I went to the clerk's office 3 weeks before the election, got my ballot, filled it out on the spot and handed it right back to them.

In order to even get my ballot I had to show ID and get cross-checked against the active voter rolls. You don't just waltz in and grab a handful of ballots.

14

Nyrfan2017 t1_isc2we2 wrote

I get that so why we wasting money pushing it more having boxes outside places to put the absentee in .. you realize if someone wanted to tamper with things they damage the box somehow .now how did they know who’s votes were in there .. I just seen too many issues at a city level and don’t trust the people in charge and don’t think it can be done legit .

3

Kodiak01 t1_isc5g63 wrote

> you realize if someone wanted to tamper with things they damage the box somehow

Vernon tried putting their box inside the town hall so it could be protected and got sued for it...

6

Nyrfan2017 t1_isc65dk wrote

Wonder if inside the post office would be better. I’m gonna guess the lawsuit was based on that is was stored in a political building where officals can influence people? Like how people can’t be within 75 ft of the polls

0

Kodiak01 t1_iscclcu wrote

The town hall is not a polling place. They literally wanted it just inside the door, in the main hallway. People sued because there wasn't 24/7 access.

3

CT_Real t1_isdysc8 wrote

Wait till you hear about absentee ballots then!!!

1

TheOkayestName t1_isb4vkv wrote

Or democrats in 2016 lol

−38

sjsmac t1_isb55cm wrote

Smoke some more carpet fibers, dude.

23

TheOkayestName t1_isb5u4z wrote

Careful, Russia might meddle in that too

−26

yukumizu t1_isbento wrote

Projection: the auto comeback of republicans and abusers

11

bdy435 t1_isbr5xk wrote

Russian interference in our electoral process has been well documented.

If you think your comment was a put down, it only reflects on you.

7

TheOkayestName t1_isc117j wrote

Yea just not in the 2020 election tho. Can’t even question that one. Lmao.

−2

Darondo t1_isc7nwb wrote

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. There was a mountain of proven Russian meddling in the 2020 election. It just didn’t affect the final result of the presidential election.

4

EarthExile t1_isbxkp8 wrote

You seem to be implying that Democrats opposed early voting in 2016. Why?

4

TheOkayestName t1_iscx4qt wrote

Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t. What they did do however, for four years, was question and protest the election.

−3

molleensmrs t1_isbua9q wrote

It’s nutty that we only have one 14 hour window to vote, on a workday/weekday. I’m voting YES for early voting.

32

interiorcrocodemon t1_isbydny wrote

Simple, one party knows that poor people who have more difficulty taking time off work, finding transportation, etc. are less likely to vote for them, so anything they can do to make it more difficult for them to vote tilts the odds in their favor.

When they can't win democratically, they will abandon democracy.

19

jpagano664 t1_isc8086 wrote

This state is majority democrat and could have put this law in effect in 2014, wtf are you talking about

1

spmahn t1_isdocue wrote

The one party with only half as many registered voters as the other? The one party that hasn’t won a statewide race in over a decade? That’s what you’re going to blame it on?

0

AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_iseujj1 wrote

Yes because despite losses, they still have unlimited dark money, no marriage with truth, and a willingness to use political violence. This is also nationwide.

2

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isemy1l wrote

It’s nutty that you can’t find time in those 14 hours

2

molleensmrs t1_isew6ai wrote

Vote no then. There’s 37 states that permit early voting, hopefully CT will be next.

4

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isewjt1 wrote

Hopefully they will be next, and I’ll be voting yes. Just don’t understand why it is so hard for people to find a few minutes out of fourteen hours when Election Day is always the second Tuesday of November. It’s not like it’s a secret day revealed hours before.

1

Sparkle_Glitters t1_isb5sl8 wrote

One thing that I loved during the height of the pandemic was absentee ballots. I wouldn't mind if that stuck around.

27

Aildari t1_isb8p08 wrote

A change was made earlier this year that allows anyone to vote absentee using sickness as the reason as long as there is covid present in the community. I agree though, other states have been doing no excuse absentee for decades without issue.

What I would love to see is those booklets that get sent to every voter educating them on the candidates and issues on the ballots that some states do.

https://portal.ct.gov/SOTS/Press-Releases/2022-Press-Releases/Reminder-Absentee-Ballot-Voter-Eligibility-Expansion-Includes-November-Election

14

asspirate420 t1_isbs1qh wrote

Doesn’t even have to be covid. It can be any community health concern. Flu, cold, cooties, you name it.

8

CA_319 t1_isehgbo wrote

Yes! I lived in Denver and the booklets they send out are amazing. It gives people a chance to understand each issue more thoroughly and the fact that you pretty much HAVE to vote absentee in Colorado meant I was filling out my ballot with my booklet and Google in front of me. Definitely felt as if it were the most informed decision making I’ve done.

3

Sparkle_Glitters t1_isb9new wrote

I read through that a couple weeks ago. I took that as if you are sick or autoimmune compromised you can use that as a reason to get an absentee ballot.

Also, I agree, I would love to see a bit of information regarding what's on the ballot. In as simple terms as possible. I think it could be really helpful to a lot of people.

1

Schu69 t1_isau3qk wrote

what’s the big reasoning for a push for early voting? is it to allow better access/flexibility so more people can vote? apologies in advance for my lack of knowledge on the topic. i skimmed the article but didn’t see much on it

19

Athrynne t1_isav4ip wrote

Not everyone can easily get time off to vote on a Tuesday, so early voting helps people that would be otherwise too busy. So yeah, better access/flexibility.

57

Nyrfan2017 t1_isbqjgv wrote

Voting goes from 6am -8 pm how many people working that time frame that can’t get to vote?

−21

Athrynne t1_isbrdk6 wrote

People that work multiple jobs, have kids, etc.

Early voting doesn't affect me at all, but I see no reason why we shouldn't have it. Do you have an argument against it?

23

Nyrfan2017 t1_isc25pf wrote

Yes cause of fraud .. I know I know that’s a trump thing your gonna say….. I have seen things at a city level that comes down to a lot of incompetencey . But I think will cause huge issues .. like every yeah always seem to hear of an issue we’re oops one poll station had the wrong ballets or ran out of ballots. Also now with early voting there are more times of handling ballots where they can get lost one year the person checking ID they never crossed my name off . I know of an issue where absentees ballots where miss placed.. also I feel with more days there is more chance of if people want to mess around they can . Before trump year after year state or federal level you hear of some issue with the polls . I just feel in general we need to revamp the system . And I don’t think just doing early voting will help

−13

Athrynne t1_isc48vs wrote

I think the counterargument to that is to look at all the states that have enacted early voting. It's quite a lot of them, and they mostly did it before it became an issue colored by people's opinions about Trump. There was very little voter fraud going on. There still is very little voter fraud going on. Sure, there's the occasional mistake like you said, but that's why we have audits and recounts when it's close.

There's also the other option of doing what Oregon does, which is universal mail in balloting. That works great for them, and I think is probably even less prone to fraud and mistakes. But that's not what we're voting for this year.

12

Nyrfan2017 t1_isc5vw3 wrote

My biggest think is to I don’t trust any of the politician either side .. and I just get very suspicious when there so much talk of fraud and cheating and both sides are trying to change things with voting. honestly I had more faith in the old machines that you went in pulled the level and it just rolled the counter . Seems like since we got away with those you hear of more issues

−6

blumpkinmania t1_iscadj7 wrote

There aren’t more issues. There really aren’t any issues. It’s all Republican lies.

10

Nyrfan2017 t1_isctcp5 wrote

They both are shady.. remember pre trump everyone said all politicians are shady don’t trust them .. than 2016 came and they turned into sports teams and everyone acted like the dems are the saviors but yet they the same Shady group that’s always been there .. the same people that say they want open boarders but sent heavy armed men into a house in Florida to take a little kid back to Cuba.. they all lie and flip flop on there views depending on the votes they need.. yes the republicans are really bad right now but let’s stop acting like the dems are angels

2

blumpkinmania t1_isd0o3j wrote

Did you just say Democrats what open borders? Honestly, you seem like a nice guy so I don’t want to insult you, but that is total, absolute, 100% delusion.

And Clinton returned Elian Gonzales to his father who was back on cuba.

2

CT_Real t1_isdz363 wrote

>than 2014 came and they turned into sports teams

Ahhh yes the presidential election of 2014, who could forget!!!

2

CT_Real t1_isdz0f2 wrote

Classic sequence of

1.) Make bad take

2.) Get rebutted

3.) Listen man both sides are bad!!! Please don't hound me on my bad take

4

imjustasaddad t1_isc6mf8 wrote

Fraud isnt a thing. This has been studied time and time again.

You’re nearly more likely to be killed by a shark while voting than for actual voter fraud to occur.

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

9

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isenfe1 wrote

Nobody is voting in the ocean to get killed by a shark. On the other hand, while quite rare, voting fraud does happen.

1

imjustasaddad t1_iseqb6f wrote

Im sure you understand what Hyperbole is.

2

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_iseqv1x wrote

I do understand hyperbole. This isn’t it. You used an example that could never happen. Hyperbole would be saying getting hit by a meteor or struck by lightning.

1

imjustasaddad t1_iserlxb wrote

“A hyperbolic expression has to be something that is not literally possible and shouldn't be taken literally either!”

https://www.twinkl.com/teaching-wiki/hyperbole

You’re a dork, pick a different hill to die on, arguing figures of speech on your Saturday morning is hilariously sad.

1

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_ises8s9 wrote

hy·per·bo·le /hīˈpərbəlē/ Learn to pronounce noun exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

Seems like you don’t understand hyperbole. Sorry, not sorry.

1

imjustasaddad t1_iset3sx wrote

Yes, so the claim “You are nearly more likely to be killed by a shark” is hyperbolic, and not something literal. There is no requirement for likelihood. Congrats, you’ve defended me. Stop being weird.

1

AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_isew2md wrote

>Yes cause of fraud .. I know I know that’s a trump thing your gonna say….. I have seen things at a city level that comes down to a lot of incompetencey . But I think will cause huge issues .. like every yeah always seem to hear of an issue we’re oops one poll station had the wrong ballets or ran out of ballots. Also now with early voting there are more times of handling ballots where they can get lost one year the person checking ID they never crossed my name off . I know of an issue where absentees ballots where miss placed.. also I feel with more days there is more chance of if people want to mess around they can . Before trump year after year state or federal level you hear of some issue with the polls . I just feel in general we need to revamp the system . And I don’t think just doing early voting will help

Early voting is a major revamp.

The reason for those problems you describe is that we're trying to cram this massive thing into just 14 hours.

There's no live training. No soft open.

If you spread it out, it doesn't matter if you run out of something or the staff buckles, there's time for trained public employees to address the problem.

For example, right now on election day the Sec State's office is spread so thin, they have to rely on actual conscripted lawyers,deputized over the phone, to administer elections, in a pinch.

If there's a few days the actual lawyers who know about this stuff and who are paid public servants can address inevitable problems. It would be much better for the public.

1

Kodiak01 t1_isbryh2 wrote

Me, for one.

On Tuesdays I'm out the door at 5:15am. I don't leave work in MA until 7pm, sometimes later. All it takes is one traffic backup, one accident, one string of red lights, or even being held 5-10min late taking care of a customer and I can't make it to the polls.

The one time I had to vote in person, I sped the whole way and managed to walk in the door of the polling location at 7:58pm.

12

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isenk8l wrote

Tell your employer you will be late or are leaving early. Employers can’t punish employees for missing time due to voting.

1

Kodiak01 t1_iseptjp wrote

It is my normal schedule, and I work out of State. I am the first one in and the last one out on Tuesdays. This is why I cast absentee ballots.

The town clerk's office is open until 7PM on Thursdays. Instead of requesting a ballot by mail, I now show up in person and fill out my ballot on the spot after work that day.

2

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_iseqpn8 wrote

It’s one day a year. It won’t affect your normal schedule at all.

0

Kodiak01 t1_isersw3 wrote

Why are you so against people having alternative options when casting their vote?

One has to wonder if you're even old enough to have ever voted for something other than 7th grade class president...

3

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_iseslg2 wrote

I’m not against early voting, there’s nothing wrong with it. My point is employers, like yours, can’t punish employees for missing work time due to voting. I’m old enough to vote for myself as president and have done so since 2012.

0

sjsmac t1_isbzptt wrote

Enough. That’s all that matters. Everybody should be able to vote.

9

Nyrfan2017 t1_isc2cix wrote

Never said they shouldn’t beable to . Just seems last few years all of a sudden it’s been such a issue one day voting when no one raised a eye brow about it in the past

1

sjsmac t1_isc4yxo wrote

Yeah, it’s almost as if one of the two main political parties tried as hard as they could all over the country to make it harder for people to vote.

Weird huh?

7

AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_iseuvh9 wrote

Every now and then you sound very reasonable but then you go say things like this.

1

CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH t1_isb3m2n wrote

Why not allow people to have early voting?

It is fairly easy for something to come up on a Tuesday that makes it hard to come in to vote on election day. Maybe you or your kid gets sick, or something happens at work that suddenly and unexpectedly makes you have to be out of town that day. Or maybe there is a big storm.

Voting early removes the risk of anything happening that would otherwise prevent you from voting. And once again, there is no downside to allowing people to vote early. If you want to wait until election day, as a majority of people do in states with early voting, you can!

Also, if you vote early then political campaigns will stop contacting you, as they know who has already voted.

25

mylastdream15 t1_isb80rt wrote

I never understood why early voting wasn't a thing. You would think you'd want to encourage as many people to vote as possible if you wanted a truly democratic process. (And I totally get some absolutely do not want that and their odds of winning decrease if more people vote.) I can't think of a single thing in government where they say you HAVE to do it this day and you can ONLY do it this day. Imagine if they said all taxes could only be paid on ONE day and if you don't you're in trouble. It's crazy. In big elections, lines to vote can get pretty lengthy in some towns and cities as well. If you had say a couple weeks (or more) to vote including weekends. There really wouldn't be nearly as much of an excuse. I feel like wanting to discourage early voting is a tactic to just... Discourage voting in general. Tuesday is just an annoying day to vote on for me. I have to go late and then it cuts into time I'd rather be doing other things (that said, I personally vote every year. ) Now. If I could vote on a weekend. Or a friday. That would be far nicer.

9

CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH t1_isd6zb4 wrote

In CT our state constitution has prevented us from having early voting. The CT state constitution is oddly specific about voting procedures and says which day people must vote, unlike most other state constitutions. It isn't clear to me if this was done intentionally to prevent early voting, as early voting wasn't really a thing anywhere when the state constitution was written in 1965.

We tried to amend the constitution in 2014, but the ballot language was confusing and it didn't pass. Hopefully it does pass this year.

1

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isenq80 wrote

Did you know ahead of time you or your kid will get sick on Election Day? Early voting won’t help in that situation.

1

CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH t1_iseu9g8 wrote

If you knew ahead of time you can just vote by absentee ballot. My point is that since we can't know ahead of time for some of these things, it is better to give people many opportunities to vote early to prevent unexpected obstacles from getting in their way. And that people who think that they likely will be able to vote on election day will still vote early to prevent an unexpected obstacle from stopping them.

1

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isevcl8 wrote

If you don’t know ahead of time, how will you vote early?

2

CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH t1_isewcsg wrote

Early voting is when the state allows all voters to vote early. Usually the town/city hall acts as the early voting polling location and all voters can come in and cast their ballots.

The point of this ballot measure is to make it so that you don't need an excuse to vote early. People who likely could vote on election day will choose to vote early. Millions of Americans have already cast ballots for the 2022 election in the 46 states with early voting. Most of those voters don't know if they could have voted on election day, but decided to vote early anyway.

2

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isewsar wrote

Right, and there’s nothing wrong with that. No excuse absentee voting would accomplish the same thing and should also be considered.

0

CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH t1_isex6wr wrote

Allowing No Excuse Absentee Ballots will likely be on the ballot in 2024, assuming that Democrats retain control of the CT General Assembly.

To get something on the ballot it needs to be passed by the CT General Assembly twice in 4 years, and the passed a measure to allow no-excuse absentee voting in 2021 and Democrats have said they will do it again in 2023, in time for the 2024 election.

1

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isexir5 wrote

Excellent.

The way we do things in this state is backwards sometimes. Why in the world would it have to be voted on twice? Or at all? The procedure to get questions on the ballot should be simplified.

1

Patton445 t1_isaw549 wrote

Anecdotally, I volunteer as a poll worker but due to personnel needs I am not at my polling location. I can either vote absentee or vote early; I cannot go in person as I can't leave the location I'm working at. Early voting removes the need to vote absentee for me and saves the envelope/ postage.

10

Kodiak01 t1_isbs3f8 wrote

You can also just drop off your ballot at the clerk's office, or use the drop boxes if your town has one.

3

Patton445 t1_isbu1yc wrote

For sure - I'm just using my experience to illustrate an occurrence when early voting is very useful. Drop boxes are safe and secure (if conducted properly) and the tallied votes end up at the registrar of voters anyway, so dropping off your ballot is essentially saving someone dropping it off later.

Thanks for spreading ways to help folks vote and have their ballot counted, every vote is important!

4

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_iseo402 wrote

How does it save envelope/postage? Will there be a machine and poll workers on station at all polling locations for the entire early voting period? Or will you just put your ballot in an envelope and mail it with a stamp?

2

Patton445 t1_iseqjiw wrote

Here's a list of all the states that allow early voting.

As an example, Mass allows for

"Early voting sites, which includes the local election office.

Additional locations may be provided at the discretion of the city or town registrar"

Many others allow you to vote early at the registrar of voters in your town as a rule, do you wouldn't necessarily need locations set up and staffed.

1

waterford1955_2 t1_iscqztf wrote

>is it to allow better access/flexibility so more people can vote?

Yes.

3

kayakyakr t1_isaweae wrote

Good. Was surprised as hell to find out that CT didn't have early in-person voting.

About the only extant vote gathering system that makes more sense to me is universal mail in voting (see: Oregon, Washington, Colorado).

I could see digital voting becoming a thing just as soon as we figure out how to secure it.

14

qawsu15 t1_isbisbv wrote

I moved from CT to WA and it’s crazy how easy it is to vote with universal mail in. It’s so nice to have it done a few weeks before Election Day and then not have to make extensive plans around when I’m voting.

4

CANOODLING_SOCIOPATH t1_isb4bn9 wrote

Vote yes on this ballot measure!

There has not been nearly enough campaigning on this issue. In 2014 a similiar ballot measure failed in CT, largely because not enough people knew what the ballot question was asking or what it would do. This measure just allows in person early voting. In 2024 there will be another ballot measure allowing on allowing no-excuse mail absentee voting.

I think it is also relevant that this ballot measure did pass the CT general assembly with some bipartisan support. It passed the CT state house with Republican support, but in the CT state senate the Republicans opposed it.

Tell your family and friends to vote in favor of this ballot measure!

14

platocplx t1_isc5xiq wrote

Early voting should be a thing everywhere in the US. Encouraging turnout shouldn’t even be a political issue.

5

Jenaxu t1_isc0hwa wrote

Hopefully it passes and we can add ranked choice next

1

rhythmchef t1_isdkxj2 wrote

Any chance the people get to vote on it?

1

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_isep3zv wrote

Yes. Go vote in November. Read the question on the ballot. Use your voting marker thing to shade in either yes or no. Congratulations, you have successfully voted on this.

1

zgrizz t1_isa8xzh wrote

Even less surprising, the people for it are all Dems.

Haven't they destroyed enough yet?

−70

Prestigious-Tie2049 t1_isabl2u wrote

Idk early voting has worked fine for the last 16 years. Why would it be a problem now?

2008 was the first time i heard of it being used, and Im sure it happened prior to then as well.

Did you complain when people early voted for trump?

20

giant_toad42 t1_isatdxp wrote

What's the problem with that? Nothing.

I don't agree with Dems on everything, but I agree with them on nearly all issues - except fiscal responsibility. My own ideas of fiscal responsibility differ greatly from that of a "conservative" (free college, childcare, higher paid teachers, graduated assistance for higher income folks on state aid, eliminating welfare leins, etc - these are my idea of fiscal responsibility) Populism and getting more people involved in the civic process is how we advance as a society. We need to include all, know their stake in the game.

Looking at a label + being standoffish based on that label - that's ignorance. Pure and simple.

15

CalligrapherDizzy201 t1_iseorro wrote

All those things you mentioned, while desirable, are very expensive. That’s hardly fiscally responsible.

1

[deleted] t1_isavy9h wrote

How will this destroy things? Explain. Provide cogent opinion and provide sources.

12

cncamusic t1_isaq5nf wrote

Genuinely curious; aside from quite literally just voting on an earlier date than “normal”, what else does “early voting” imply? From a layman perspective it would seem voting at a time where inclement weather is less likely is a plus. More people get out to vote, the populous is represented more accurately. Do you see any downsides to this? Perhaps my understanding of “early voting” is incorrect.

Edit: I guess the previously shot down amendment also intended to make changes to absently ballots, where this one does not.

“The 2022 amendment would authorize in-person early voting but not an expansion of absentee voting like the 2014 amendment.”

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2021/TOB/H/PDF/2021HJ-00059-R01-HB.PDF

9

beanie0911 t1_isbmrgp wrote

Weird that places like Texas and Florida, which are "Free States" according to conservatives, have offered early voting for years. But if it allows more liberals to vote in a place like CT, conservatives don't like it.

6

EarthExile t1_isbxzro wrote

More people being able to vote = Destruction?

I'm perfectly well aware of where this feeling comes from, but I'm curious what your excuse is.

5

ProInvestCK t1_isbddal wrote

I don’t see it as a partisan thing. Why would any party not want to encourage voting and make it more accessible. We can then be assured that the vote represents the will of the voting population. Instead of saying “well if only this group of people would have voted, there would be a different result.”

There’s no reason that we can’t do it fully digital so everyone can vote on their mobile with multiple security and verification features to make it more trustworthy than even coming in person.

2

bdy435 t1_isbpzga wrote

I think right wing disinformation propaganda has destroyed some peoples ability to think critically.

It wouldnt be polite to mention them by name tho.

1