What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.Sponsored by Best Buy
Meet Antoine: Best Buy Chicago meets Best Buy New York. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - One Chicago employee makes Best Buy’s holiday campaign cut.
821 Comments
- thehighpriestss, on 02/06/2008, -18/+301I'm in Los Angeles and this happened to me and my husband! They first gave me a libertarian ballot. When I protested they said they couldn't find me on the list. I literally looked over their shoulder and found my name before they gave me a ballot. I think incompetence is a major factor.
- sollycardy, on 02/06/2008, -14/+260"you can't film here"
"Can I ask why?"
"BECAUSE I SAID SO!!"
wtf? who does that guy think he is? the president? - merdiesel, on 02/06/2008, -13/+197Same thing happened to me.
It was the same place I've voted at for the past 2 elections. My parents were on the list but for some reason me and my sister were left off.. AND THIS IS HAPPENING ALL OVER THE STATE!?! This is *****. Completely unacceptable. - kaelyiesta, on 02/06/2008, -29/+186The only thing proven on this video is the issue of the man not being allowed to film what was happening. I have no doubt these things are happening, but I'd like a bit more substance when a digg submission claims proof. While there are things in the video that make me suspicious of the people in charge, we don't know if the voter truly had registered republican, nor do we know if it was intent or incompetence that caused him to be miscategorized if he had. We can only take the voters word for it, and that isn't enough for me. If you want skeptics like myself to be convinced, then give us evidence, not unverifiable stories.
- ConradDanger, on 02/06/2008, -24/+161Democracy: The illusion of choice.
- KraftDinner101, on 02/06/2008, -21/+153So wait, you guys have to tell your government which party your 'with' before you even vote or else you're not allowed to vote? That's messed up.....
- MentorMatt8, on 02/06/2008, -26/+143Similar thing happened to me except I didn't film it:
"At my voting place they almost had me vote Non Partisan N/P because my
affiliation was showing Non Partisan in their books. That despite me
registering Republican 1/18/2008 and getting a postcard showing that I am
good to vote after 2/1/2008.
I was offered to vote provisional which I declined and finally was able to
vote Republican, for Ron Paul. - Killer13, on 02/06/2008, -26/+138This is democracy?!
- doggitydang, on 02/06/2008, -13/+102The same things happened to my friends today who tried to vote for Ron Paul, but they weren't allowed to. It almost happened to me too.
- TaniaDerveaux, on 02/06/2008, -13/+93The fact that many people are commenting on this happening all over the state is disturbing, this needs to get front page.
- honemasterT, on 02/06/2008, -11/+86California
California has a clear ban on photography and videography: “No person shall, with the intent of dissuading another person from voting, within 100 feet of a polling place, . . . [p]hotograph, videotape, or otherwise record a voter entering or exiting a polling place.” (Cal Elec Code § 18541.) It’s not clear whether this applies to the media.Only voters engaged in voting can stay within the “voting booth area.” (Cal Elec Code § 14221.)
Cal Elec Code § 18541: Prohibited activities within 100 feet of polling place; Punishment for violation. (a) No person shall, with the intent of dissuading another person from voting, within 100 feet of a polling place, do any of the following: (3) Photograph, videotape, or otherwise record a voter entering or exiting a polling place.
Cal Elec Code § 14221 (2006): Persons permitted within voting booth area. Only voters engaged in receiving, preparing, or depositing their ballots and persons authorized by the precinct board to keep order and enforce the law may be permitted to be within the voting booth area before the closing of the polls.Cal Elec Code § 14224 (2006): Occupation of voting booths or compartments. Voters shall not remain in or occupy the booths or compartments longer than is necessary to mark their ballots, which shall not exceed 10 minutes.
citmedia.org/blog/2006/11/06/state-laws-vary-on-polling-place-photography - xoomac, on 02/06/2008, -8/+70You'll get your HARD EVIDENCE doubting thomas, because the CA campaign director for Dr. Ron Paul is on this already, and it's worse than anyone can imagine.
How do I know? It happened to my wife and I and I am the precinct captain for RP in my precinct in L.A. County, and have voted @ this same polling place with the same couple running it out of their garage before.
They were adamant about NOT allowing me to vote REPUBLICAN and even handed me an INDEPENDENT ballot insisting I had to vote according to how I showed up in their voter register, which still had me as "Independent."
The lady in charge was NOT nice about it either and insisted she had been told by the L.A. County Registrar/Recorder's office that I would have to vote as recorded in their log.
I produced the "sample ballot" I incidentally only had received 2/4/08, yesterday in the mail, that was stamped "REP 015" as proof positive the same L.A. County Registrar/Recorder's office, which had issued me this new sample ballot to replace the original one I had received last month with "AL, GRN, LIB & PF 015" stamped on it had ALREADY CHANGED and CONFIRMED my party affiliation IN TIME thank you very much as REPUBLICAN.
She, the lady in charge, still kept up with her insisting I had to vote INDEPENDENT and L.A. County had already cofirmed that...blah blah blah...but I asked them to call and they said they had a direct line to the county registrar/recorder's office, and her husband, who was the poll co-worker, kept telling me while they were checking and had him on hold, and afterwards that this had already happened earlier today (we voted in late afternoon).
He finally gave the registrar/recorder's office my name and info. right off my sample ballot they had mailed me and about 5' later after going back and forth he finally said they told him it was o.k. and to give me a REPUBLICAN ballot.
Problem was I had already signed the register that states in writing incorrectly I was registered "INDEPENDENT" and so the WRITTEN record does NOT match my VOTING record!
They also made my wife vote PROVISIONALLY which obviously didn't do a whole lot of good in Louisiana!
This is way too coincidental to just be random and accidental or mere incompetence.
I have filed a grievance with the Ron Paul campaign headquarters and when the LIST comes out doubting thomas I believe the evidence of VOTER FRAUD in CA will be staggering!
Further, CA is reported to have MORE people voting for Giuliani than Dr. Ron Paul, and he is NOT even running anymore. Who would be stupid enough to vote for him anyway, esp. since he's NOT even running anymore?
I smell a big FAT RAT! - inactive, on 02/06/2008, -3/+64Wait till you hear about their electoral college
- KipEvil, on 02/06/2008, -5/+66Pick a card any card... out of my 2 card deck!
- Pebcak, on 02/06/2008, -42/+102This is incredible. People need to see this.
- Journeywithinn, on 02/06/2008, -23/+79This is horrible. All over the US people even reported that Ron Paul was not on their ballot to vote for him! This was in small precincts. How can people NOT see what is going on with the media and election fraud?? Ron Paul is our best chance to save America.
- qwertydvorak, on 02/06/2008, -5/+58welcome to the youtube generation. a million monkeys with a million video cameras, and only so much shakespeare to go around.
- Eivo, on 02/06/2008, -7/+59I am all for exposing fraud in our completely ***** up voting system, but this is hardly proof of anything besides the fact he went to the polls. Proof would be recording the telephone conversations with the office, or showing a copy of the paperwork he filled out to switch parties, at least. Get someone to make a statement other than, "You can't film here."
- luke16, on 02/06/2008, -11/+49"You can't film in here"
"Why not"
"Because i said"
What an ass - Aqueous, on 02/06/2008, -20/+58A great glimpse into the system. This is what we've come to....
- mattassin, on 02/06/2008, -11/+47THIS IS SPARTAAA!!!
- Wugie, on 02/06/2008, -10/+39I'm more pissed they wouldn't let him film
- gONZObLISS, on 02/06/2008, -24/+53This Country better WAKE UP!!!!
- jaybo1001, on 02/06/2008, -39/+67And it was soooo close too. The damn system screwed RP, he would have won for sure if it weren't for all the people out to get him and holding the back the 850k voters who were obviously trying to get their votes in for him.
McCain , John GOP 952,409 42%
Romney , Mitt GOP 765,355 34%
Huckabee , Mike GOP 260,447 12%
Giuliani , Rudy GOP 114,888 5%
Paul , Ron GOP 96,300 4% - swrostmore, on 02/06/2008, -3/+27I don't know about the rest of your rant, but if someone was stupid enough to vote for Rudy in the first place, I wouldn't be surprised that they were also stupid enough to vote for him after he dropped out of the race.
- borez, on 02/06/2008, -7/+31Wait...so in America you have to register as a Republican or a Democrat before you vote?
In the UK we just go to a polling station and vote, all the candidates are on the same ballot paper.
Somebody explain to me why this is please? ( sorry for being a bit naive, but I genuinely don't know ) - davidrools, on 02/06/2008, -4/+27Yeah, a change of party got messed up. Total conspiracy.
Party affiliation mixup != FRAUD
In other news, the Republican party decided not to allow DTS (declined to state/unaffiliated) voters to vote in their primary. They must have known they would have all voted for RP! Conspiracy! please -_- - TheKorn2, on 02/06/2008, -1/+24I hate to say it, but quite literally incompetance is THE REASON why I became an election judge. You know the old saying, if you want it done right, DO IT YOURSELF.
THAT'S THE MORAL OF THE STORY HERE, PEOPLE! We have a not-brain-dead-simple (though I would say it isn't rocket science, either) voting sytem with a lot of intertwining rules. We NEED SMART PEOPLE as election judges!
The best antidote is to GET ACTIVE! Stop hanging on digg/reddit/stumblewhatever and GO BE AN ELECTION JUDGE!
Seriously, I caught a bunch of mistakes and CORRECTED them. And not in the "oh, you *really* meant to vote for XXY" kind of correction, as in the "oh, you're not on the rolls. YES you can vote, but you have to vote provisionally. HERE'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO TO MAKE SURE YOUR VOTE IS COUNTED" kind of way.
If more people (BESIDES SENIOR CITIZENS!) got off their ass and did something, we wouldn't have half the problems we do! (I'm not naiive; we'd still have some problems. :) ) - slapded, on 02/06/2008, -17/+40im moving to canada.
- gummih, on 02/06/2008, -1/+23Young voters = Bad for some
- CraigJ, on 02/06/2008, -2/+24Not correct. Read it again: "“No person shall, with the intent of dissuading another person from voting, within 100 feet of a polling place, . . . [p]hotograph, videotape, or otherwise record a voter entering or exiting a polling place.”"
So, you are not allowed to videotape voters going in or out *if* your intent is to dissuade them from voting. so some filming is illegal, if you have intent. Clearly, filming the guy behind the table is not "“No person shall, with the intent of dissuading another person from voting, within 100 feet of a polling place, . . . [p]hotograph, videotape, or otherwise record a voter entering or exiting a polling place.”"
It would be really nice if people posting references as proof actually understood what they said... - dagnabbit, on 02/06/2008, -7/+28Haha, get out of here with your "facts". This thread is for blind outrage and nothing more!
- visculent, on 02/06/2008, -27/+48A bit concerning -- I'm trying to share this with friends and digg is populating "Clinton wins MA" story. I've tried it several times directly from the share feature and it keeps bringing up the Clinton digg to email.
Hmmm. - airiox, on 02/06/2008, -11/+31Which place would you prefer, Japan or New Zealand. Thinking about moving to either one after McCain or Hilary wins. This America I have begun to know is a corrupt corrupt place and I feel there is nothing we could possibly do without armed revoultion and they will lull the rest of the idiots in this country into thinking they are safe, into thinking they have freedom, but when in fact they are no more free than the slaves in China.
- CraigJ, on 02/06/2008, -4/+24I'd have told him to ***** off and offered him my cell phone to call the cops. It is perfectly legal to take photos, etc in a public polling place, but this is just a ***** CA bureaucrat, WTF does he know anyway? And if he touched me in any way I'd have pressed assault charges.
- molecool, on 02/06/2008, -5/+25I would have continued filming. Would have been quite some footage if they would have tried to tackle me or take my camera away...
- 298th_Scat, on 02/06/2008, -2/+22Primarys are like that.. But not the actual presidential vote.. But I agree it is way stupid.
- MindTrigger, on 02/06/2008, -4/+23Can someone explain to me why the election/voting process in this country is not down to a science at this point in our history? Given that the elected President represents our very powerful country and is leader of the supposed "free world", should this process be anything less than a simple, secure, well oiled machine complete with people being held accountable for ***** IT UP? Hell we should *at least* have security and procedure on par with that of what we have to go through for air travel.
What we are seeing here makes me think of elections in 3rd world countries, complete with dye to dip our fingers in. Hell, that election in Iraq was probably more accurate than any we have had here for generations.
Mind you, I am one of those people who believe that one vote DOES make a difference, but If I cannot have confidence that my vote is going where it's supposed to be, then why should I bother even trying? - flefster, on 02/06/2008, -0/+18I'm curious as to why he had a video camera in the first place? Did he know ahead of time this was going to happen?
- sollycardy, on 02/06/2008, -3/+21Not true. This would be true in your home, or anywhere else were you'd expect privacy. But NOT in a public area, where privacy is not expected nor is consent needed to film. You can't expect nor demand privacy in a public place.
- noahhoward, on 02/06/2008, -0/+17I think what they are trying to stop is democrats voting for a weak republican in the republican party in an effort to weaken the opposition. I don't think they should even have the damn primaries let everyone run let us vote on the entire field of candidates. If the party doesn't like who ends up representing them so what? This nation does not belong to parties.
- MasterIamNot, on 02/06/2008, -16/+33Video or photography in a public place is legal in California, even without consent, but under California law it is illegal to video/film/photograph inside or within 100 ft of polling places. People have the right to vote without being photographed or taped. See http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/11/06/state-laws-var ...
- madfrogurt, on 02/06/2008, -38/+55So the newest conspiracy says that people who switch from Democrat to Republican in California where being excluded from the voting process. Since these conspirators probably couldn't read your mind and since statistically speaking McCain attracts more independents and party switchers than Ron Paul (who polled at less than 10% in CA), don't you think you should be worried about how theres a conspiracy impacting McCain?
Of course not. It's unfathomable that Ron Paul could be rejected by people. The only way he couldn't have won a single state is if massive nationwide voter fraud covering everything from voting machines to voter registration excluded him. That makes much more sense than the possibility of a local polling station having a benignly incorrect voter misinformation in hopes they could enact their dastardly plan to make this kid use a provisional ballot. They must have been in on it too. - CPoe, on 02/06/2008, -1/+17Yeah me too, regestered Rep. on the 19 of jan, three days before the deadline and they had me under NP. Had to vote provisional....
- hawkspur, on 02/06/2008, -12/+27Because the US has a corpulent, stupid voting system devoid of common sense.
- Kotelic, on 02/06/2008, -2/+17and why are all these guys with video cameras such jerks. When the guy asks for your name why can't use just tell him your name? There's no need to get a holier-than-thou attitude as it just makes your situation worse. The people there are obviously in charge so if you help them to understand your problem it will be a lot easier than fighting them the whole way. And are we supposed to be scared that some unidentified, random worker (probably not unlike those in the video) thinks that "something is going on with the election" ?
- hawkspur, on 02/06/2008, -5/+20It's not just about Ron Paul. The point is there is massive numbers of people who are being excluded from voting due to clerical "errors". On both party sides.
- _skin_, on 02/06/2008, -2/+17We are all awake... Now what? Oh, Surf the internet!
- Groovemaster, on 02/06/2008, -11/+26Something that's very clear to me is that when Americans experience the corruption that is rife in their system, they always put it down to incompetence.
It might be more comfortable to look at it that way - if it was down to incompetence it would mean that you live in a fair, decent, moralistic society, but someone just accidentally goofed up - but you have to ask yourself if you're being realistic. - emmeron, on 02/06/2008, -4/+18Don't be dumb. The point of the video is that there is a problem. No one said it is corruption, no one said it was a full out conspiracy. It is a problem. People are being disenfranchised. This is not a full representation of the people. If that isn't a problem to you, you don't belong here.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 827 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is