Washington State To Allow Voter Registration Over Facebook 61
Posted
by
Soulskill
from the now-your-cat-can-vote dept.
from the now-your-cat-can-vote dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Associated Press reports that the state of Washington will soon have an application available on its Facebook page that will let residents register to vote. Washington and other states already allow online registration, but this is the first time it will be allowed over Facebook. The state's co-director of elections, Shane Hamlin, said, 'In this age of social media and more people going online for services, this is a natural way to introduce people to online registration and leverage the power of friends on Facebook to get more people registered.' Facebook won't have access to the State's database, and Hamlin says Facebook won't collect any of the personal information with which it interacts."
Lovely (Score:5, Insightful)
Nah, no chance for vote fraud there.
Why make voting easy? Why not make it hard? That makes sure only people who care enough to at least truly believe in who they're voting for, instead of making elections a shallow beauty contest.
Re: (Score:1)
No possibility that Facebook will track voters. No constitutional issues at all. Nothing to see here, move along.
Re: (Score:3)
I think they only register on Facebook don't actually vote there, although with America and their evoting machines you never know. As for unnecessarily complicating the voting process to scare off undecided voters, that may not have the effect you are hoping for. You see, the more you know, the less you trust all the bullshit the parties are feeding to you, or that elections really have an effect on your life. The people who will go to an election no matter what are the radicals.
Re:Lovely (Score:5, Insightful)
I think they only register on Facebook don't actually vote there, although with America and their evoting machines you never know. As for unnecessarily complicating the voting process to scare off undecided voters, that may not have the effect you are hoping for. You see, the more you know, the less you trust all the bullshit the parties are feeding to you, or that elections really have an effect on your life. The people who will go to an election no matter what are the radicals.
It makes a difference from the "hanging chad", people saying "I didn't vote I just clicked "like" on a picture of a kitten and it registered as a vote for Mitt Romney"
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
>> I just clicked "like" on a picture of a kitten and it registered as a vote for Mitt Romney
The opposition slogan could then be "Kill a Kitten for the Big O".
Re: (Score:2)
I just clicked "like" on a picture of a kitten and it registered as a vote for Mitt Romney
The opposition slogan could then be "Kill a Kitten for the Big O".
Roy Orbison is running for the Democrats? That's pretty impressive for a guy who's been dead over 20 years...
Re:Lovely (Score:4, Informative)
The people who will go to an election no matter what are the radicals.
"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal" —Emma Goldman
Re: (Score:1)
Your correction is correct, but you weren't correcting a run-on sentence.
The problem with being a grammar Nazi is that an Obergrammatikfuhrer will come along to point out your mistakes. Then a Hauptgrammatikfuhrer will point out his errors, and so on until Grammar Hitler ends up rewriting the whole language in his image.
tl;dr your a failure
Re:Lovely (Score:4, Funny)
> tl;dr your a failure
should read
> tl;dr your'e a failure
Sincerely,
Hauptgrammatikfuhrer
Re: (Score:1)
Sincerely,
Oberhauptgrammatikführer
Re: (Score:2)
The whole idea of "register to vote" is, IMHO, a scam meant to reduce the number of voters.
That's pretty obvious. Maybe it wasn't intended as such, but it is quite convenient for the existing political class. I never understood why there is no broad movement against this in the US.
If Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela had been American, they would both have been denied both a right to vote and a right to run for office.
It did happen to both of them in South Africa.
Re: (Score:1)
I almost missed the point on first reading there ...
I'm guessing the implied problem is suggesting that compromised facebook accounts give the possibility for the step in fake voter registrations which can be then used for vote fraud?
Or is was a troll attempt and I read meaning into something that had none.
Re: (Score:1)
"Why make voting easy? Why not make it hard?"
This is correct, except there is no reason to make it hard. It should not be easy and convenient, but what it must be is secure and reliable.
If you know IT you will know that these qualities are not compatible, convenient and easy will by definition not be reliable and secure.
This is purpose driven you understand, the statist needs fraud to win elections.
Just as with border security - they can do it if they wanted to yet they do not. Ask yourself why this might
Re:Lovely (Score:4, Insightful)
Who is John Galt?
here in Scotland John Galt [wikipedia.org] was a novelist and has a primary school named after him in Irvine, North Ayrshire ;)
Re: (Score:3)
Not from the US.
Why do you need to register to vote anyway?
Isn't any adult automatically allowed to vote and doesn't government already have a list of every adult?
Re: (Score:3)
People keep migrating, so the states cannot keep track of the residents. Also lot of things makes you ineligible to vote. The registration gives the states time to verify eligibility. From what I understand, all countries register voters for this reason. Is it different in your country?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, no chance for vote fraud there.
Voter fraud is the distraction to the real issue - electoral fraud.
Voter fraud is low-reward, high risk. It makes no sense to stand in line more than once to vote, after standing in line for an hour each and travelling between towns to hide it. So say in an afternoon, you get to pull off 3 votes - 1 real vote, and 2 frauds. Woop de doo. You didn't affect an election much at all unless it's a squeaker. But you just committed two felonies, for which you can go to jail.
Getting people out to vote in the US is a good... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
because it's usually associated with disenchantment, indifference or contentment. None of which is good. Also, a high turnout is generally perceived (globally) as an estimate legitimacy of the current voting system ... unless it's mandatory of course.
And making it easy to vote just means you get disenchanted and indifferent people casting votes, votes based on nothing of substance.
Why would that be good?
If voter disenchantment and indifference are problems, figuring ways to inflate voter turnout just to get a pretty number doesn't address the problems.
Re: (Score:2)
What is this, the 1600s again, every citizen (within reason) has a RIGHT to vote, it's not a PRIVILEGE reserved for those not disenchanted/disenfranchised. People have the RIGHT to vote based on nothing of substance. Personally, I think every citizen has a RESPONSIBILITY to vote.
Voting gives people a chance to feel that they have the power to make a difference in who makes decisions ... and that makes all the difference because it holds the elected accountable. Low voter turnout suggests to the elected that
Re: (Score:3)
I think every citizen has a RESPONSIBILITY to vote.
I don't think forcing people at gunpoint to throw a dart and select a random crook is the goal you were aiming for. Also voter intimidation for no candidate is only slightly less reprehensible than voter intimidation for a specific candidate.
Voting gives people a chance to feel that they have the power to make a difference in who makes decisions
Key word is "feel". No REAL impact. The aristocracy will select two of its own princes, as a prole you get to "feel" you can "make a difference" by selecting one crook or another. Maybe that'll "feeling" will stop you from rioting. If so its done its job of being t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Every vote matters. Votes from lazy ones, indifferent ones, sadistic ones, anarchists, autistic ones, geeks, high IQ ones, low IQ ones, everything matters.
What could possibly go wrong? (Score:4, Insightful)
This seems like an incredibly bad idea, for several reasons:
1. People use bad passwords on Facebook
2. People get their Facebook accounts compromised all the time
3. Giving Facebook (the company) access to this kind of information scares the shit out of me.
Re: (Score:2)
Giving what information scares you?
It just pre-populates the existing voter application with your facebook info (like name and date of birth) ... end of story - you don't vote online and still have all the other registration steps outside of facebook
The sock-puppet party (Score:3)
too stupid to be allowed to vote (Score:2)
I thought California had a lot of aerobic encephalitis cases, but the Supreme Court should simply void all elections in Washington if they're really stupid enough to involve FaceBook in the voter registration process. There's less chance of valid registrations there than when Daley's precinct wardens would gather names at the cemeteries.
That's awesome. (Score:2)
Why both registration and voter id laws? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if states require voter-id with the current address on them, why require registration too?
Its not a bad idea. The problem is we Americans love to disenfranchise people, which is a $5 word for "stop citizens from voting". Depends on state, etc. Speaking very generically, felons often get a lifetime ban on voting (also usually firearms "right" is taken away, sometimes restricted to live in certain areas, etc).
The overly bureaucratic belief is only 100% accuracy is permissible so you can't just half ass this and get it 99.9% right. So you'd need all ID to contain/display a legally verifiable pr
Criminal background check (Score:2)
People with valid id should be able to register and vote on the same day, right?
As I understand it, the waiting period after registering to vote serves the same purpose as the waiting period for buying certain kinds of deadly weapon: a criminal background check.
Bold Statement of the Month (Score:4, Insightful)
Hamlin says Facebook won't collect any of the personal information with which it interacts
Riiiight
Wilma!!!!!!! (Score:3)
Facebook?
Really?
Are you fucking nuts?
I feel like watching a bad episode of the Flintstones where Fred gets one of his stupid ideas.
Doh!!!!! (Score:1)
I was thinking the Simpsons, personally, since Homer's ideas are WAY worse than Fred's ever were. But we're on the same page, I think.
Re: (Score:2)
Voting for change is just as stupid as clicking "like" to cure cancer.
Reminds me of Good Omens... (Score:1)
"Facebook won't collect any of the personal information with which it interacts."
"Whoo-ee," said Crowley. "Where have you been?"
Communists, Nazi, Mossad, KGB, Facebook, Google+ (Score:2)
Communists, Nazi, Mossad, KGB, Facebook, Google+.
What else is there?
BTW, what is the name of the paranoia kings in China?
There is not even a small voter fraud problem... (Score:1)
It is infinitesimally small. And whatever infinitesimal amount there is won't be solved by tougher voter ID requirements.
Pundits will ask how the "John" vote will swing (Score:2)
John Bigboote, John Careful Walker, John Chief Crier, John Coyote, John Fish, John Fledgling, John Guardian, John Icicle Boy, John Jones, John Kim Chi, John Littlejohn, John Many Jars, John Mud Head, John Nephew, John O'Connor, John Omar, John Parrot, John Rajeesh, John Ready to Fly, John Repeat Dance, John Smallberries, John Take Cover, John Thorny Stick, John Two Horns, John Whorfin, John Ya Ya . . .