Obligatory preachy part: my view of our world does not include a government group; I actually view them as parasitic criminals for the most part. I no longer vote as the very act of casting a vote is an endorsement of this corrupt system. The reality is, voting is only that: system endorsement. Evidenced by the very actions of scores of politicians over the decades, it is clear that the recipients of those votes care very little about who cast them and why. Staying employed at the public trough is the name of the game. Of course further up the societal food chain we find most politicians all managed by the same handlers anyway . . .
How not to run a railroadFor better or worse, we currently live in a world that contains government. This consensual system puts small groups of individual humans in authority over the population at large. Looking back throughout history, actions and decisions emanating from this group have resulted in blatant rights infringement, hardship and death being inflicted upon this same population over and over and over and at scales that almost defy comprehension. To make matters more acute, this has been going on for centuries. It is absolutely astounding then that any society claiming to be a democracy, republic, et al tolerates anything less than an as close to perfect election system as is humanly possible with the only true wildcard being chance happenstance, a natural disaster for example.
I don't have the time nor the desire to figure out how many elections have been run in the last 100 years in countries that have 'em but I would wager it's more than one. I mean seriously, from a political/societal point of view, there are few systems and actual events that get as much workout as the election process. WhyTF then is any of this voting anomaly happy crappy allowed to occur? There is no wiggle room here: to be sure perfection does not exist, at least as far as humans are concerned, so there will never be a perfect election process and subsequent execution of same, but there is no excuse for not absolutely insisting that perfection is the goalpost being aimed at. Clearly this was not the case with US2020 but a quick hangout on your favourite search engine will reward with many instances of election mechanics muckery and screwups pretty much globally.
This rail rant is not about types of elections, 'first past the post', 'ranked ballot' and so on, that is a different but equally important discussion. What I'm talking about here are the mechanics, the execution of an election process, the policies and procedures. I'm also going to pick on the US as it's a fresh example but again, it's all across the (country) board. Last general point: given the inarguable importance of election integrity, money is no excuse, especially in a country that allows its government to spend amounts closing in on a trillion dollars a year on so called 'defense'.
- this first question should be a starter and stopper; again, astounding how this is tolerated. Speaking for both Canada and the US: given the aforementioned inarguable undeniable importance of the election process, of integrity, transparency and fairness, whyTF do we allow the very people who benefit the most from this system, politicians and their handlers, to craft and draft the policies and procedures governing how it operates? Saying this is utterly ridiculous is being too kind! The election process (including 'type') should be completely and totally separate from the govt group. Any politicians attempting to exert any influence whatsoever are disqualified from running, ever.
- covid was used as the excuse/tool to crack open the mail-in balloting nut but as more and more evidence is showing, common sense does too, this form of voting is simply too ripe for fraud to be a reliable voting method on a wide scale. Limited to overseas citizenry perhaps however technology can also provide a reliable solution vs mail-in in that scenario as well.
- why are mail-in ballots just lumped into the in-person pile or at least why are they not distinguishable in their markings?
- why are there people 'cleaning up' ballots so they can be read by the scanner? The only person who should ever put even a single mark on a ballot is the voter. If they fill it out incorrectly, too bad then, it's invalid and they only have themselves to hold responsible. Built in motivator here for the general public to ensure care when voting.
- utilizing whatever technologies that suit the purpose(s), why is there not a fully recorded chain of custody from voter to ballot box to return centre to tally? Video cameras are a dime a dozen in 2020.
- why are tally centres not one big camera? Casinos spot a massive amount of potential and actionable shenanigans. IMHO, it would actually be easier to setup full surveillance in a temporary tally centre when there are no customers to worry about (how it looks) and, in many cases, there are no ceilings to contend with. For example, simple metal frames sitting top counting desks with cameras pointing straight down for example, every single ballot visualized and recorded.
- there are only two sides to an election process: the ballot marking and the tally/recording of what those marks are. For preliminary counts, why do ballots travel anywhere beyond the place they were cast? There is no need for this, ballots should be tallied on site and then, under the best security money can buy, be transported to a central repository for storage in the event of recount and such.
- why is even the suggestion of accepting a late ballot tolerated? Advance voting renders any reason for late ballot moot with the possible exception of medical but unfortunately that still needs to end up in the rejected pile.
- "we don't have enough people" or "we just use high school and college students" - so what? All this indicates is the election process is not being treated in the manner in which it should be. Not having enough people or enough money in a country of over 150 million adults which routinely spends well over half a trillion dollars annually 'defending' threats that don't exist…except when that same defence industry creates them itself…is an excuse rooted firmly in the shit of the bull.
…and this is a mere surface scratch…
Looking at Canada:
- why do we tolerate the govt group deciding what kind of election system is going to be used and when any changes to that system will be permitted? As far as deciding what system(s) are to be used and when, politicians should have the exact same input as the rest of the country: 1 vote.
- in the case of Ontario: recall legislation has been proposed at least twice in the last two decades, unsurprisingly shot down by the sitting politwits of the day. Stands to reason: they are simply protecting their parasitic cushy little jobs, but guess what? This is NOT their choice to make it is ours. Here's a media headline from 2013: "Does Ontario need recall legislation?". The issue of recall is not a question, ludicrous to even suggest same. Not having the ability to ‘fire’ those govt group individuals who demonstrate incompetence and malfeasance, well, it doesn't get much dumber than that. The current residents of Queen's Park in Ontario have given the residents of this fine province more than enough evidence of incompetence at the very least.
[aside: using covid and all that has been done, all that has transpired as the example backdrop, why do such headlines exist:
"Ontario's Doug Ford says he relies on COVID-19 experts, but his government won't identify them - Bureaucrat-heavy coronavirus Command Table raises questions about where science is coming from"
This is not a questionable matter: from whatever day one is day one, this list should have been easily available public information. Further, more than a list, a complete bio on each and every individual involved in decision/policy making as well as those who are responsible for outcome(s). Again, no wiggle room, this is a prerequisite and if the sitting clown club du jour is unwilling to do so, they are gone, immediately, simple as that.
One possible reason for this reluctance: it would set a precedent that could (read: should already) extend to the politwits themselves. Unfortunately for them, this would also expose the fact that most of them aren't qualified for the position they occupy. Their jobs might be at risk and/or they might be embarrassed which for some is worse than job risk thereby becoming a powerful motivator. A great example of the first point, unqualified, is current education minister Stephen Lecce although a solid argument could be made that the majority of caucus is unqualified for their positions. Finally: note how the article author (not surprising I suppose as it's from the CBC) capitalizes 'Command Table' presumably to convey some credence and authority by assigning it title status…pfft, whatevs ]
Interesting and telling that govt is for the people, by the people but only at election time or if they need to manufacture an excuse for their behaviour. The rest of the time: do as I say, not as I do. It's like being in an abusive relationship just on a large scale.
A big picture analogy: anything govt group related, elections included, is akin to playing a board game where your opponent has not only made all the rules but they then change those rules to suit themselves as the game progresses…tough to win ain't it?
Why the fawk would we ever want to play it in the first place?