Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CharacterBrief9121 t1_ivjj3en wrote

Reply to comment by ZombiZeke in was asked to confirm my address before voting. not a big deal but never heard of that by rogerjohnson11111

Address verification at polls is to ensure that the voter is at the correct polling place the book was covered to prevent someone from using another name and address that isn’t theirs to vote illegally.

−2

ell0bo t1_ivjjmlp wrote

that's... not how it works. I've worked polls, that's not protocol. Only time you have to check is if it's their first time voting, and that's by seeing their ID.

2

ZombiZeke t1_ivjjx32 wrote

No one is contesting that? OP specifically said that the poll worker asked for their name, poll worker found name, poll worker covered address from OP’s view and required they say the address to them before receiving the ballot. That is what is being discussed.

Read the OP’s posts. If you feel it’s fine, then so be it. But it’s abnormal for a worker to do this.

1

CharacterBrief9121 t1_ivjkcxm wrote

No it’s perfectly legal. Op post states he was being challenged, address check is a challenge, which is legal and correct.

Can my right to vote be challenged?

Yes, but only for certain reasons and by certain people. An election official, poll watcher, or other voter may only challenge a voter on the grounds that the voter does not live in the precinct or the voter is not the person the voter says he or she is.

The voter may still vote normally by signing a challenge affidavit and producing a witness to vouch for him or her. Call the Election Protection Hotline at 866-OUR-VOTE (866-687-8683) if you need assistance.

hey look I used the internet to find what I was looking for

How hard was that everybody?

2

ZombiZeke t1_ivjnrks wrote

Did you even read the source you gave?

“Yes, but only for certain reasons and by certain people. An election official, poll watcher, or other voter may only challenge a voter on the grounds that the voter does not live in the precinct or the voter is not the person the voter says he or she is.”

OP stated this was not the case for them. And you are blatantly overlooking the fact that the poll worker said to them “Its a new thing we are trying this year” Re-read the posts, re-read your own sources. Re-assess.

3

CharacterBrief9121 t1_ivjojqj wrote

What do you mean? Ops address was challenged, the book was covered to prevent fraud, op answered the challenge and nothing further was needed from the election official. I’m not sure what part of that you’re not understanding.

Are you not understanding why the election official would ask for name and address?

Are you not understanding why that official covered the book?

Do you not understand what a challenge is in this context?

Help me understand what you think is wrong and I’ll explain how it was perfectly legal and correct.

1

CharacterBrief9121 t1_ivjor33 wrote

I reread ops post and his address was challenged he didn’t use those words but that’s exactly what happened and as for why the person said it’s a new thing, it’s not. It’s easier to explain it away to idiots though.

2

ZombiZeke t1_ivjpi3x wrote

The context is he was challenged for no reason other than “We are trying something new this year.” That’s the context we were given. And I don’t know where you get the goose stepping angle from in your other replies. From what I can read, you and I are on the same side of this debate and you seem to be operating under the assumption that we are all “MAGA snowflakes”. The situation, as they described it, is odd. It’s noteworthy based on the election rules that even you posted here and that many of us are already aware of.

3

CharacterBrief9121 t1_ivjq49o wrote

No he was challenged, it doesn’t matter why. I can see you at a polling place and challenge you for no reason other than I haven’t seen you before. It isn’t new, I just said that.

And this part(the challenge) isn’t political but I am tired of dumb asses who won’t read, won’t research, and push the same bullshit lies.

Look it up your self so you stop pushing bullshit. That’s why I’m mad.

0

ZombiZeke t1_ivjr6q1 wrote

But that’s not what the rules say. You can’t be challenged for any reason, why you’re being challenged DOES matter. It says it very clearly in the election rules you keep posting and that I’m already familiar with. I’m not claiming stolen election or fraud. But OP’s scenario is not in line with the rules. That’s all.

I understand your frustration, I have it too from the last few years of insanity. But if someone is willing to do anything even a little out of line, then they may be willing to do something else. It’s noteworthy is my only point.

2