Sorry, it's 2025 but you can't vote bc we didn't print & cut enough small pieces of paper 🤷♀️
-
Very detailed Lemmy post I wrote about this fuckery and more
Local news article containing the quote about the voter registrar
On Homer Plessey Way, board member Daniel Milojevic stood outside the Bywater polling place in the Press Street Gallery suggesting people try the two Jefferson Parish locations.
He said the local registrar of voters gave the district only 300 ballots per location and told them they could expect about 20 people.
“We had to confirm the number of ballots weeks ago,” he said, before it was clear how high the turnout would be. Milojevic conceded that planning had clearly missed the mark.
As one astute gentleman asked while defending Reddit, and accusing me of spreading misinformation:
If hardly anybody knew, how did turnout exceed expectations within 2 hours?
Because the "expectation" provided by the registrar was literally 20 voters per location (60 voters in total) for the entire fucking city.
Only in America.
No ballots, not the problem for the voter. If the voter wants to vote, get them a ballot, even if you have to order a transfer.
My country is on the fast lane for fascism as well but we still follow electoral law.
-
Very detailed Lemmy post I wrote about this fuckery and more
Local news article containing the quote about the voter registrar
On Homer Plessey Way, board member Daniel Milojevic stood outside the Bywater polling place in the Press Street Gallery suggesting people try the two Jefferson Parish locations.
He said the local registrar of voters gave the district only 300 ballots per location and told them they could expect about 20 people.
“We had to confirm the number of ballots weeks ago,” he said, before it was clear how high the turnout would be. Milojevic conceded that planning had clearly missed the mark.
As one astute gentleman asked while defending Reddit, and accusing me of spreading misinformation:
If hardly anybody knew, how did turnout exceed expectations within 2 hours?
Because the "expectation" provided by the registrar was literally 20 voters per location (60 voters in total) for the entire fucking city.
FREE & FAIR ELECTIONS OR GTFO
-
This was the first of its kind of election in the district, so I would really like to know where they got those estimated numbers, and if they went only by one parish voter registrar when determining the numbers for 5 different parishes
According to the news article "300 ballots would be available at each of the eight polling places" so that's a lot less unreasonable than I was thinking. The fact that this race got a news article is also noteworthy, in the past these races weren't considered important enough. I'm sure that helped bring more people in.
I also wonder what the regulations governing that district say. Maybe the law says something about having a certain number of ballots and closing the election after they are cast. If that were the case this would be a legislature problem, not an elections office problem.
Remember kids, sometimes the law requires or allows stupid things.
-
According to the news article "300 ballots would be available at each of the eight polling places" so that's a lot less unreasonable than I was thinking. The fact that this race got a news article is also noteworthy, in the past these races weren't considered important enough. I'm sure that helped bring more people in.
I also wonder what the regulations governing that district say. Maybe the law says something about having a certain number of ballots and closing the election after they are cast. If that were the case this would be a legislature problem, not an elections office problem.
Remember kids, sometimes the law requires or allows stupid things.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]This is the first time there has ever been a challenge to a seat and an election in this district, so where did they get the idea that estimated voters would only be ~20/location?
They said that they got it from the registrar of voters, but each parish has its own registrar and the district covers 5 parishes. So which parish/registrar came up with that number, what was it based on since it was the first election? Why was the same number applied equally when taking 5 different parishes into consideration?
-
This is the first time there has ever been a challenge to a seat and an election in this district, so where did they get the idea that estimated voters would only be ~20/location?
They said that they got it from the registrar of voters, but each parish has its own registrar and the district covers 5 parishes. So which parish/registrar came up with that number, what was it based on since it was the first election? Why was the same number applied equally when taking 5 different parishes into consideration?
Those are all good questions, but I do want to point out that if they were really expecting 20 voters at each location and had 300 ballots at each, it suggests that they were trying to be well prepared and got bad information/advice somewhere. This would argue against bad intent.
That doesn't mean they still didn't screw up, but it could be the difference between conspiracy and just unprepared
-
The thing is this was the first of its kind election for this district, so where did those estimates even come from? If you give a number it's got to be from somewhere right?
And they were just paper ballots. Nothing special about them. Here's a picture of one of the ballots
Literally nobody could find a printer and some scissors and tell voters they would have more ballots in an hour or so?
This is the kind of election where usually only people who specifically are invested in the thing bother
This is exactly why so many people showed up. The district encompasses 5 parishes. Both candidates represent different parts of the district with different interests at stake.
The incumbent candidate lives in New Orleans, runs urban gardens around the city, and used her position on the board to create a program that has allowed others to create more gardens and rent tools through the program.
The candidate that challenged her is a commercial fisherman from a smaller town. The department that has jurisdiction over the board is set to be given oversight of testing for seafood safety and regulations. The bill is literally just sitting on the Governor's desk waiting to be signed.
I am honestly kind of suspicious of the candidate that challenged her bc he never mentioned this while he was running.
Putting that aside, and assuming his intentions were good, I could also see why many voters in smaller communities within the district, who depend on the fishing industry for jobs, would want someone like him to have the position on the board.
The incumbent was announced the winner, and that's who I voted for. I still believe there should be a re-do. Voters were turned away from an election that their tax dollars paid for. Unacceptable.
The thing is this was the first of its kind election for this district, so where did those estimates even come from? If you give a number it’s got to be from somewhere right?
So, this board has never since it's creation had to have an actual election? It's always been someone running unopposed?
-
The thing is this was the first of its kind election for this district, so where did those estimates even come from? If you give a number it’s got to be from somewhere right?
So, this board has never since it's creation had to have an actual election? It's always been someone running unopposed?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Yes, in this district nobody has ever challenged a board seat, and it's only happened 7 times throughout the history of the state in other districts.
Usually people just have the seat until they decide to step down.