In Oregon???

Absolutely true.

The government shouldn't be given more and more power that it can misuse

I voted by mail for the first time and received a note from the County Clerk's Office, that said, 'Your vote has been counted!' I thought that was a good thing to know!

True of all voting systems short of getting all voters in a room and raising of hands...

So, then, what is to prove that the number of ballots cast were actually the real number of ballots cast? We have seen how easy it was in Broward county fake votes by the thousands. What stops someone in a County office from substituting 400 democrat votes for republican ones, or for specific ballot measures, because they "believe in the cause" or are bought out? How would you know? I do NOT trust ANYONE in government after the last 8 years...

Oh, I am not arguing that point LB, it is like everything else about government, open to abuse. Look at Kalifornia wanting to take Medicaid we all pay into with our medicare taxes, and give it to ALL illegals. That itself is probably a gross violation of federal law. I was just pointing out it was used to fund the states early on, then hung on, as no politician gave give up money they can blow...looting is in their DNA...

But just look how it can be misused.

The vote by mail fraud is usually the result of the voter not protecting their ballot. OR for instance seems to have a pretty good security system devised to keep the voter from being careless.

Being absent is ok, that is why we had absentee votes, but even that got stolen too, lots of states allow absentee votes to be used as "early voting" and even report the results before election day. Add vote by mail and the whole system is corrupted. That is their goal, they can then control the next election.

"A poll tax is a tax levied as a fixed sum on every liable individual. Although often associated with states of the former Confederacy, poll taxes were also in place in some northern and western states, including California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Wisconsin.[1] Poll taxes had been a major source of government funding among the colonies which formed the United States. Poll taxes made up from one-third to one-half of the tax revenue of colonial Massachusetts. Various privileges of citizenship, including voter registration or issuance of driving licenses and resident hunting and fishing licenses, were conditioned on payment of poll taxes to encourage collection of this tax revenue. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_ta...

While true it was used to suppress specific groups, the "black" claim is not valid, in that it was used against all poor people, women and had some wrinkles in it to ensure it focused on stable, wealthy people.

As a volunteer force -- and especially as a drafted force -- having soldiers, sailors, airman and Marines have the vote makes tremendous sense. Being mature enough to carry out that responsibility does NOT come just from having 18 years of life experience. It comes from specific developmental maturational experiences (Basic Training, life within an important organization)Thus, repealing the 26th Amendment makes great sense. Allowing those who have more "skin in the game" as BHO liked to say, to to me makes sense and, with my personal respect for the men and women in the service I feel sanguine giving them a "up close and personal" vote. These votes would be, of course, only for President/Vice President, Congress persons and Senators -- the federal offices most relevant to the foreign policy initiatives service personnel are closest to. Of course, some of my enthusiasm for this ides stems from Albert "the sky is falling" Gore's effort o eliminate the votes from active duty military personnel. The more military based votes their are the more I personally feel the best voted upon answers can be reached.

Two votes?! I can't go along with that. But I do think it was outrageous to draft them wifhout allowing them a vote.

Yes, and to counter those arguments I would give the vote to anyone in uniform on election day (at the federal level -- states could decide separably;l( Yes, any active duty military member who was also 21 or older would get two votes. To me that is a win-win for the country (as the military trains their folks how to think and make adequate rational decisions and as they have the right to die for their county -- have more skin in the game -- getting a vote for being active duty is just fine with me.

The poll tax served to keep blacks from voting; they were poorer than whites.
As to the 18-year-old vote, these young men were being enslaved and sent off to maybe die without any voice in the matter.

I am against "vote-by-mail. Too many chances of fraud.
It is reasonable, in a republic, to expect that when citizens want to vote in an election, they will bring their bodies in and vote in person. If it's not that important to them, they shouldn't vote.
Now there may be reasons for some exceptions: being away on military service, for instance (I voted that way once, in boot camp), being bed-ridden at home, etc. But it shouldn't be just allowed to everybody without a specific reason, across the board.

great minds think alike...so for starts, you and I get to vote...maybe one more for a tie breaker..lol

Excellent point, and very true. The midwest would be left out of everything.

Now, think about who and why did the 26th get passed for? Part of the plan to indoctrinate the little buggers then let them loose as a way to take elections? There is a reason they use to have a poll tax, one, fund the process and govt, and 2, make you pay for the privilege so maybe you would have a value to it. Heinlein pushed the idea of value as much as Rand did, and he equated something that did not cost you, was equally worthless and treated that way.

Bingo! mia, right on target...

consider what constitutes 50.1%....if those who vote were the ones who earned the right to vote...i.e., not on welfare or taxpayer subsistence...who passed a test on what the constitution actually stands for...maybe we might get objective results...not tyranny of an ignorant majority...

If anything we need to make voting more difficult. First we repeal the 26th Amendment -- 18 year olds brains are not yet ready to be making important logic derived decisions. Eliminate automatic registration. Any one who is too lazy to get down to the courthouse in a two year period is too lazy to make important decisions. The rolls should be purged after each election so only the living, residentially appropriate and interested have the opportunity to vote (much less likely to have their opportunity to vote stolen).

democracy has to be more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. The point of the Electoral Collage is to make elections "fair" It is one way and a brilliant way at that to do it, but so we change to a system where each county in the country gets one vote for President. If that was in place trump wins approximately 80/20. If the electoral collage did not exist America would have fallen apart a long time ago.

The ordinary citizen does have the right to disagree with forced vaccinations in Oz. (Did you even read the article?)

But if you are in the position of leading the public (nurse/midwife as stated) then you have already given up that "right" because you are in an enhanced position with regard to believability. At the very least, they should be forced - if taking this stance - to back it up with actual facts and statistics, just as any doctor/nurse/midwife in favor of the vaccines should (and can) back their endorsements up by statistical means.

So if one is against vaccines they should be exclused from a medical setting, and then they can espouse killing children with neglect to their heart's content.

Exactly. Rule of thumb: Any law or rule change that is sold as "making it easier" is inevitably to make it easier to do their corrupt activity. Therfore it is bad and should not be allowed. Yet, in the last 60 years, the number of them is staggering, and I have no idea how to ever calculate it, but between states and Fed, it must number in the millions. Given that no one can track all that crap, is it any wonder the deep state evolved and took over?OUC is correct, voting SHOULD be hard, and if you do not have the ability to get to a voting poll station, THEN they system and volunterers should assist, even to the point of having deputized poll takers who can go to people unable to get there. The system could work, and all the excuses were just that, excuses, to enable to deep state to manipulate it. Look at their proposal "Automatic Registration"? Hello?