By Taylor Armerding
The Hendricks County Flyer
Fri Oct 19, 2012, 02:12 PM EDT
What is the point of presidential debates? Or even presidential campaigning in October?
Lots of people make that argument, based on what they say is historical evidence that debates and even a final blizzard of ads and campaign events don't sway the electorate - that by a month before the election, voters have already made up their minds.
But, these days, you could make another, more mathematical argument: There is decreasing significance in presidential candidate debates because millions of people, even if they did change their minds, couldn't do anything about it. They have already voted.
That's right - Election Day is becoming increasingly irrelevant because of early voting, which is now allowed in 32 states and the District of Columbia. According to most estimates, 35 to 40 percent of voters nationwide will have cast their ballots before "Election Day," and 85 percent are eligible to do it. Around 15 percent could have voted before the first presidential debate.
In 31 states, you don't even need an excuse - a hardship like being unable to get to the polls due to sickness, business, or military service - to vote early.
According to the Associated Press, as of last week, 29,400 voters had already cast ballots in North Carolina, and four years ago, 2.6 million people in the state had voted before Election Day. In Florida, nearly 4.6 million voters cast ballots before Election Day in 2008. In Colorado, more than 1.2 million absentee ballots have been requested.
What was that about an election being decided by a football stadium's worth of people?
Both campaigns ought to be decrying this. Instead, they are encouraging it, trying to pump up the early vote. A number of news reports said Democrats, in the wake of President Obama's poor performance in the first debate with Republican Mitt Romney, were frantically trying to "bank" early votes before people could change their minds.
The Romney campaign, while it reportedly does not have nearly the number of offices in swing states as Democrats, is working just as hard with phone banks and door-to-door contact to get people to vote now.
A plague on both their houses.
There are more than enough things that divide Americans. A single day on which the vast majority of citizens speak through the ballot to elect their leaders was one thing that brought us together.
It throws the claim that we all want informed voters out the window. As everybody - especially both campaigns - knows, tens of millions of voters don't really start to pay close attention until the month before the election. That is supposedly why the debates are scheduled just weeks before what used to be a legitimate election day. It is why campaigns go into overdrive during the last few weeks before that day. This is a blatant effort to get people to vote when they are less informed.
It undermines the effect of events leading up to the election. It is possible that the unemployment numbers that just came out, showing a drop from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent, would sway millions of voters. Perhaps they would think that lends some credibility to the president's regular claim that "the policies we've put in place are working."
But if they already voted for Romney, it won't matter.
Or, perhaps some voters would be swayed by the Obama administration's blatant disingenuousness over last month's attack - on the anniversary of 9/11 - on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya, in which four people were killed, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
The administration insisted for weeks that this was simply a spontaneous demonstration against a movie trailer that insulted the Muslim prophet, which got out of hand when it was suddenly hijacked by extremists.
Somehow, most everybody else knew that it was a terrorist attack, complete with non-spontaneous heavy weapons. And now, even the State Department has said there was no demonstration at all before the attack.
If that had happened under a Romney presidency, Democrats would be screaming, "Lies! Lies!"
But if those voters have already cast ballots for Obama, their change of mind doesn't matter.
This is not a call to eliminate early voting. Obviously, there are some people for whom getting to the polls is difficult to impossible. But they are likely a tiny fraction of the electorate - surely less than 5 percent.
And even that ought to be compressed to a couple of weeks, not a month or more. Those who care about voting can certainly mail their absentee ballots or do whatever needs to be done in that time frame.
Yes, a single election day is an arbitrary point in time. But, it is the ultimate in equal treatment. It requires everybody to "play by the same rules," which Obama ceaselessly claims is his guiding philosophy.
If the day is not important, then why limit the voting window to a month or two? Why not let people vote whenever they feel like it? Why make them wait until after the conventions, when the candidates have been chosen well before that?
Election Day ought to have major national significance. With four of 10 voters ignoring it, that is a dangerous dilution of significance.
- Taylor Armerding is an independent columnist. Contact him at email@example.com.
Word on the street and in the media is that it will be a really bad summer for mosquitoes. Or should I say, it will be a really bad summer for humans, because it will be a great year for thirsty mosquitoes.
June 14, 2013
As a Christian, I feel compelled to respond to a recent letter to the editor.
When Barack Obama announced his presidential campaign back in February 2007, he did it in front of the old Springfield, Ill., Statehouse in a speech full of references to Abraham Lincoln.
Ordinarily I don’t take requests, but a bunch of people have written to ask how I’m doing with my weight-loss surgery and I thought this might be the most efficient way to answer.
June 11, 2013
I am a grandmother who went to the Brownsburg graduation ceremony on June 7 and due to very poor planning on Brownsburg School’s part, I could not sit and watch my twin grandsons graduate in person. I was directed to an overflow room where I had to watch it on a TV screen and could not even take pictures.
What you are now hearing across the land is a collective whine. Blue-state Democrats are upset that Texas Gov. Rick Perry dares come and play in their sandboxes, and worse, threatens to “poach” jobs from their states.
The website Politico reports that Perry’s attempts to lure jobs to Texas are “infuriating to prominent Democrats around the country.”
I am the first to admit I am behind the times when it comes to technology. I remember way back in the olden days of the 1990s when I was actually ahead of the game. Now there are second-graders that are more tech savvy than me. I just decided to stop my forward technological progression a few years back.
June 7, 2013
College graduates facing a crushing debt – some more than $100,000 – is a very big and a very real problem.
But U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s recent proposal to deal with it won’t solve the problem. It is a cheap ploy to divert attention from the real problem.
It is appropriate that the worst scandal of the Obama administration — the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservatives — is a scandal of administrators and bureaucrats, of otherwise faceless people endowed with immense power over their fellow citizens and running free of serious oversight from elected officials.
Because I am a With-It type guy who is Down with all the latest Technostuff, I recently agreed to teach an online summer class for one of my local universities, which shall remain nameless but whose initials are IUPUI.
June 4, 2013
An NPR broadcast examines the question of how communities can better prepare for tornadoes like the one that struck Moore, Okla. on Monday. The broadcast features commentary from Michael Fitzgerald, who reported a five-part disaster series for the CNHI News Service.
May 22, 2013
Part I: Are We Prepared? | Part II: Disaster Dollars Part III: Lessons Learned | Part IV: Warning Signs Part V: The Big One
Trish Staine had just finished running 10 miles while training for a half-marathon when she started going into labor. The mother of three said she hadn't gained any weight or felt any fetal movement in the months before and had no idea she was pregnant. Is it possible for a woman not to know she's pregnant before she starts giving birth?
June 17, 2013
© 2013 Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc. ·
CNHI Classified Advertising Network ·
CNHI News Service
Associated Press content © 2013. All rights reserved. AP content may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Our site is powered by Zope. Some parts of our site may require
you to download the Flash Player Plugin.
Terms and Conditions
Hendricks County Flyer, Avon, IN
8109 Kingston St., Suite 500