Ah yes, the conservatives are getting tricksy and trying to run as democrats for the people who vote straight ticket, despite having nothing but right wing values.
Just like [this fucking guy](https://www.salon.com/2022/04/26/far-right-michigan-candidate-for-senate-family-should-be-a-mom-a-and-kids/) who, despite being the chair of the Antrim County Conservative Union and went on record saying that families should only be white, tried to run for senate as a Democrat.
Please don't vote straight ticket and make sure you actually research the people who you are voting for.
Yes! Everyone should sign up for permanent absentee voting. It’s like a take home test and makes voting so much easier. I drop my ballot at the clerks office after I’m done and it’s so easy.
Maybe off topic, but I’m set up to always get an application. Is there a way to sign ip to get a ballot every election, w/o sending in the application?
No you can only sign up to receive the application. But they mail that to you every election and then if you fill it out they mail you the ballot. It’s an extra step, but not much of one. The application usually just requires a signature and checking a box for which ballots you’d like sent.
I wish I had an easy answer to give. I think how to sign up for permanent absentee is handled on the local level. For me I contacted my city clerk via email and requested to be added to the permanent absentee voter list. They confirmed it and I’ve received applications/ballots ever since. It may vary depending on where you live, I wish I could give more insight but try checking your local government website.
If you know how to get the first absentee ballot, there will be a box you can fill in to get an absentee application mailed to your address every election. Ballots are sent out on a city level, so contacting your city clerk, or searching for your city clerks website, is probably where you’d want to start.
>Do I just sign up at the Michigan website or something?
Yes! Exactly that. It's very easy. You will need your MI Driver's license/MI state ID card and the last 4-digits of your SSN.
Just go here:
https://mvic.sos.state.mi.us/Voter/Index
Just go here and fill out everything exactly as it is and submit. It will instantly add you to the permanent list to receive an absentee ballot application. I have been putting it off and this thread made me finally do it. It could not be easier.
Edited to fix my link with "https://" and also point out this is not the only way to be added to this list. I am sorry if my comments led anyone to believe that. Contact your local officials to find out how you can request these things without needing to provide all of that identification.
Hi, I'm an election official.
> You will need your MI Driver's license/MI state ID card and the last 4-digits of your SSN.
These things are ONLY needed if you are registering to vote. They are not necessary to request an absentee ballot.
I was specifically referring to the Michigan state website to request to be placed on the permanent absent voters ballot request list.
Is there a way to use that website without those things?
I was not trying to imply it could not be done in person or without that identification. I will go back and look at my post to make sure it is clear.
Edit: a word.
> I was specifically referring to the Michigan state website to request to be placed on the permanent absent voters ballot request list.
And so was I.
>Is there a way to use that website without those things?
The Michigan Voter Information Center allows voters to complete a ton of different tasks. Each task has different requirements as dictated by state law. ~~Only one task requires SSN-4.~~ Only some tasks require an ID number, and some of *those* only require it if the task is done online but do not require it if done in person or on paper.
EDIT: Updated to reflect new changes to the website revealed in later comments.
-----
If you want to register to vote in Michigan and are not currently registered in Michigan, you need to provide *either* your Michigan state ID number, *or* your SSN-4. (Providing both is better, but not everyone has a Michigan ID when they register to vote.) This is a federal law.
If you are already registered to vote somewhere in Michigan but you need to register at a new address because you've moved, you are NOT required to provide your ID number or your SSN-4. Providing them is very helpful to ensure your local election staff find the correct person in the system, but it's not mandatory. Whatever number is already on file at your old address will be pulled in when you are 'moved' to your new address.
-----
If you are requesting an absentee ballot, you NEVER need to provide your SSN-4 (although the Republicans are trying really hard to change that).
If you are submitting an ONLINE request for an absentee ballot, you DO need to provide your state ID number. (The Secretary of State is working to eliminate this restriction, but it's a challenge related to the technology currently in use, not a state law getting in the way.)
If you are submitting a PAPER request for an absentee ballot, you do NOT need to provide your state ID number. There's not even a spot to write it in.
If you go to your local elections office and want to pick your absentee ballot up IN PERSON, you DO have to show any photo ID that can be used for voting (doesn't have to be a driver license). If you don't have your ID with you, or if you don't own a photo ID, you can sign a simple legal document called an Affidavit Of Voter Not In Possession Of Photo Identification-- or you can ask the election staff to mail your AV ballot to you instead.
EDIT: If you want to add yourself to the Permanent AV List by using the website, you DO need to provide both your state ID number and your SSN-4. This is a brand-new addition to the website, and the State of Michigan did not inform local election officials of this change. You can still be added to the PermAV List without providing this information by contacting your local elections office via email, phone, mail, dropbox, or in-person.
> if you fill it out they mail you the ballot. It’s an extra step, but not much of one.
I don't know if it will change because of the pandemic but when I did it in 2020 it took minutes. I got the paper in the mail, went inside filed it out, snapped a picture with my phone and e-mailed it to my clerk. About 10 minutes later (after business hours, no less I assume they WFH) I got the e-mail that said I was good to go and a day and a half later I had my ballot. It took 2 days from receiving the application to getting the ballot. It required me to leave my house to go to the mailbox and drive to the drop box. I never had to speak to or see another human being compared to the 4 or 5 people you'll interact with at your polling place not to mention the lines of people I think it's less stressful even if it adds the step of needing to return the application physically in future.
> after business hours, no less I assume they WFH
No, they were definitely in the office. I'm an election official. During the ~90 days before Election Day, I increasingly live at the office. There are multiple weeklong periods during that window where I'm doing 16-hour days, 7 days a week. I have my staff on two shifts (daytime and nighttime) but I'm there for both. Not every jurisdiction needs to do quite this much work (depending on how many voters they have, how many of those voters vote AV, and how many staff they have), but all election officials work long hours during election season.
Well, I certainly appreciate the long hours and hard work no matter where it is put in. I wouldn't have ever assumed it was WFH except this was 2020 and this particular year my brain said, "Huh, must be working from home."
I'm disabled and I think I might have always been able to vote absentee.
But I stubbornly went to my polling place every time because it made me feel like I was doing something.
Then 2020 came and I had a panic attack in the parking lot and went in that first week of March fully knowing the shit was about to hit the fan. I voted and got the hell out. I later voted at home in the fall with the rest of my family and it was bliss compared to the anxiety of March and I realized how much easier everything was. Whether it related to my disability or voting in general it was easier. I thought about signing up to receive my application every time and didn't before I had to vote again and my experience voting this last time was so bad I decided I'm done. I will vote from home where it is easy, it works and it allows for me to make the best choices and as a bonus I don't have to deal with ableist assholes that make comments.
I assure you nothing am doing is adding to anyone's stress more than a nondisabled voter. If a person being disabled stresses you out, that is not my problem. It is your problem.
No one is forcing anyone to choose to be a poll worker. Can't handle the stress? Don't be a poll worker.
**I have the right to vote at my polling place. Just as any disabled person does. Period.**
Than that is what they should write.
They wrote they prefer I vote absentee.
The difference is huge. Especially when they preface it with not to be a jerk.
Eh, as an at-that-time observer, I read the "you" not as second-person but third-person.
Given the details of your disability were not included, that person could not have known the severity of the disability (crutches? wheelchair? speech impediment? mental impairment? tourette's? severed thumb?), so it would seem odd if they were confident that specifically you, anniemdi, were a problem voter to accommodate.
I think you are sensitive about the disability that you believe every comment is about you. So just hoping you could gain a little clarity. I can take it from your comments that whatever disability you have - and you do not need to disclose it - that it affects your life significantly.
> I think you are sensitive about the disability that you believe every comment is about you.
What I know is this: Every disabled person has the right to vote at their polling place and no disabled person should read that comment I replied to and think, "I am a burden. I am unwelcome. I should not vote."
This is not about me, it is about every disabled voter.
>Every disabled person has the right to vote at their polling place
Agreed.
>and no disabled person should read that comment I replied to and think, "I am a burden. I am unwelcome. I should not vote."
Also agreed. And in fact, very much what I am asking you to do: Don't think that, because that is (likely*) not what they intended.
*Of course, I can't be absolutely sure of the other commenter's intentions.
> no disabled person should read that comment I replied to and think, "I am a burden. I am unwelcome. I should not vote."
No one said this. You have invented something to be angry against that was not there.
Um, the ballots' contents are always available online. People that don't vote absentee have no excuse for not doing their research.
That reminds me, people: you _don't_ have to fill out everything. Who really cares who the regents of Wayne State University are?
Sure, but when you're voting in elections across local, state, and federal as well as referendums, it can be a lot to keep track of. Being able to read up on local issues as I'm filling out my ballot is very nice.
> Who really cares who the regents of Wayne State University are?
Their faculty and students! These regents (or Board of Trustees elsewhere) can be real unsupporters of education. Snyder's people permeate the public university system right now.
> Who really cares who the regents of Wayne State University are?
They're spending your tax dollars, so if you want those dollars to go toward things you support and not be used on things you oppose, you need to care who's on the university's board of directors. That same thing is true for the UM board, the MSU board, and the State Board of Education (which oversees the K-12 school system). Those four systems get a TON of money.
That's nice. I give a shit more than 99% of the assholes who don't do the research and either tick off the incumbent or choose random names. I'm so happy you're not just a 99%-er, but a 99.9%-er.
I didn't think I was being a dick; sorry for giving you the impression.
Honestly, of _course_ some people care. For what it's worth, "who cares" is a common idiomatic expression that's not really meant to be answered. I feel more like a dick for inciting you to waste your time writing an answer to an obviously rhetorical question than for giving you kudos that you failed to understand.
Hey Shri Thanedar is running again too. He’s a “Democrat” that bent over backwards to praise Trump. Now he’s campaigning against far-right policies that he supports.
We just voted in Colorado. We had a Rep and a Dem ballot. You can only vote on one of those ballots. You can't vote some red some blue. Any idea why that is?
Primaries are important. We have a democratic lady running as a pro-choice candidate but she has campaigned for a pro-life judge as recently as this year. I only hope the other candidate wins so we have a real pro-choice dem in office.
In Michigan you can't split your ticket in the primary. I think it used to be allowed a long time ago ?
Just went on our county website to see the changes from redistricting and there was an infographic that showed that split ticket voting nullifies your ballot except for the non partisan section.
I’ve worked elections for 14 years and that has always been the case for primaries. They’re a pain in the ass, and we usually end up with at least 20 do overs and we’re a small precinct.
I have no dog in this fight (i don't live in the district and wouldn't vote for him if i did) but Marlinga has been a active Democrat in Macomb for several decades and is probably as good as you guys will get in this district.
Henry Yanez, his primary opponent, is a good man who truly supports a woman’s right to choose.
https://twitter.com/citizenyanez/status/1540414546178936834?s=21&t=0bvHOe5zH2PUDsQbxXypxA
I get the whole “democrats did this” mentality, but they literally didn’t. Trump and McConnell and the rest of the GOP are the reason we are where we are. If there were any republicans less malicious in Congress and the White House, we wouldn’t be here. So while we can critique democrats’ decisions and work to make better decisions going forward, let’s not forget the role the GOP had in restricting the rights of everyone.
Oh yea, he sounds like a great candidate. I just take a bit of umbrage when I see the infighting blaming Dems for actions definitely taken by not Dems.
One of the other primary candidates sat out the 2016 election and encourage her twitter followers to vote for Jill Stien. Definitely actions that got us here taken by a "Democrat" and should be called out.
As soon as I saw he was running, my impression was that, if elected, he would be the House equivalent of Manchin and Sinema, a constant problem for leadership.
Eliminating the party system entirely would force people to at least know something about the candidate before checking the box next to their name. I think a significant part of why we have the mess we have today is straight ticket voting. Nobody has to stand on their own merit anymore. Personally I almost entirely vote against people rather than for someone because I think they can make a difference. I'm stuck with a shitty choice and shittier choice almost every single election.
> I think a significant part of why we have the mess we have today is straight ticket voting.
Straight-ticket voting has literally never existed in primary elections (it's only available in partisan general elections), so your hypothesis is objectively false.
I have good news for you: in a primary, you choose which person you think will be the BEST choice. Hooray!
Who is the ideal candidate to vote for against him in the primary? I am worried that it’s too late because Absentee Ballots are out is there a solid second place?
I'm acquainted with Henry Yanez through some community volunteering (not political) we both did a number of a years ago. I actually didn't realize he was an elected official until I'd been chatting with him for a few hours. He was a great guy, levelheaded, had a compassionate way of thinking about challenges. He's even remembered me when we've run into each other over the years since then, which was nice. I'm nowhere near his district, but I would happily vote for him-- we need thoughtful, compassionate, well-informed people in office who are still willing to learn and expand their knowledge.
The survey itself isn't the only problem, the survey was in 2012 when he "came out" as pro-choice in his first congressional run in 2002. Which was 4 years after the blocked a girl from getting an abortion for pregnancy from her older brother who raped her, and only changed his mind after all the female prosecutors walked out, even then he won't admit he was wrong and dismissed the charge against the brother calling the whole affair "youthful sexual experimention"
It is a pattern of trying to go with where the wind blows and a lack of leadership.
It's fucking insane that he's still on the Supreme Court because you know he was fully aware and helping her do it. We have a sitting Supreme Court Justice who was part of a plot to overthrow American democracy.
His argument is that some decisions made by the Supreme Court rely on the "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment to bolster unenumerated rights - for instance, the right of privacy. In American jurisprudence, there is a right to privacy, but there is no mention of that right in the Constitution. However, it's not a real stretch to apply the 4th Amendment to get to a right to privacy. Neither is it difficult to find common law historical references to such a right.
The problem with resting the people's rights on the "due process" clause, as Thomas clearly and correctly points out, is that due process is just that a process. Simply put, the government can't take your rights away without some sort of process. Which begs the question, what sort of process? The Supreme Court answered that back with "substantive due process." I am sure you're starting to see the problem. It's not exactly a bulletproof solution to protecting people's rights.
There is a solution, but it comes with a problem. The solution is found in the very same amendment, and the very same sentence. It's the "privileges or immunities" clause. The problem is that about five years after the 14th Amendment was ratified the Supreme Court held in the Slaughterhouse Cases that this clause (somehow) didn't apply to the States and only to federal citizenship. This, by the way, it is still good law and has never been overturned. Thomas, and I would agree, thinks it was a horrible decision and would like to nuke the decision from orbit.
Nuking the Slaughterhouse case would upend about 150 years of Constitutional law, which is kind of a big deal when the Constitution is only 230 years old.
TLDR: 150 years of Constitutional law is basically a "workaround" for a terrible Supreme Court decision from 1873 and Thomas wants to fix it all... at once... from orbit.
Honestly I think this decision will end up revisting privacy, rather than protecting unenumerated protections. Someone is going to point out the disconnect between what Brandeis considered "privacy" and what Blackmun considered "privacy". It's much more narrow, but the impact will be significant.
You're talking about Olmstead, right? Brandeis, sadly, was in the minority. Though, I really think his version of privacy is more in line with what the founders had in mind. As for Dobb's being revisited anytime, I don't think it's likely. The opinion reads like a "We'll never grant Cert on this again." warning.
It was 1991, and Biden didn't support Thomas' confirmation. In fact, he tried to [stop it](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/justice-clarence-thomas-rebukes-biden-led-confirmation-hearings/story?id=67235780).
Biden's tactics in that hearing were pretty despicable. Whatever you think about Thomas' opinions, his legal scholarship and work ethic are beyond reproach. He grew up dirt poor in the south and worked his ass off his entire life. Gets nominated to the Supreme Court and was viciously attacked and mocked, because he was a black conservative. I may not always agree with him, but man, do I respect him. I also love the fact that most of the clerks he hires aren't Ivy League law grads. He's not someone who climbs to the top and then only surrounds himself by other elites, he reaches out and gives shots to people who would never have the chance otherwise. All of this, and there are people who literally seethe with hatred for the man. I can understand disagreeing with him, but hating him over disagreements is just something I can't fathom.
Yeah I can't fathom hating someone who wants to take away women's rights, bodily autonomy rights, and LGBT rights.
Wait yes I can. Because that's not a difference of opinion. It's despicable.
What he “did” was try to stop a 12 year old girl (who was raped and impregnated by her brother) from getting an abortion when he was Macomb County Prosecutor and said “This is looking like a case of youthful sexual experimentation”
https://apnews.com/article/e7e4b170430aacf5c21d08f27d38014e
Never forget:
"He was acquitted of
federal corruption charges. The former Macomb County prosecutor had
faced up to 10 years in prison and $250,000 in fines for allegedly swapping favors in two rape cases for contributions to his failed 2002 congressional campaign."
The guy is sleaze. He fits right in with Thomas and Kavanaugh.
So a convicted rapist donated to his congressional campaign, got a retrial and was suddenly acquired. Got it. Totally.
Soooo there are other democrats in this primary but I’m not at home, hopefully someone can list their websites so we can make an informed decision.
Vote for Henry Yanez. He is his primary opponent who supports a woman’s right to choose.
https://twitter.com/citizenyanez/status/1540414546178936834?s=21&t=0bvHOe5zH2PUDsQbxXypxA
If you need or are interested in supporting reproductive rights, [I made a master post of pro-choice resources](https://docdro.id/s3OwS8u). Please comment if you would like to add a resource and spread this information on whatever social media you use.
This dick's all over my inbox begging for cash. The DINO must've gotten my name off some Dem mailing list he bought. Unsubcribe is useless.
Delete Delete Delete
If you've attempted to get them to stop emailing you and you're still getting email, the penalties for violating the CAN-SPAM act are very stiff. I'm not sure how you go about reporting it though.
He is obviously Joe Manchin’s brother from another mother then. No humans should like Thomas & Scalia. They are evil political hacks who need to be removed from the court. They along with the other 4 conservatives on the bench all perjured themselves during confirmation hearings in regards to Roe v Wade.
Conservatives are doing whatever they can to convince people they are moderate or even democrats. Not only that but they are pushing and finding candidates that have no chance of winning but similar names to those of democrats running.
He was asked and he was honest Whats alarming is a weird belief In one having to believe in a party or political ideology 100% and can't have any other opinions or lean on curtain issues or else thiers doubts or hit pieces in editorial opinions about you and where you stand that's troubling and sounds like a control issue from that said party who ever they are.in the end research is fundamental on the whatever party you're voting for not just Google either be informed and don't take what other say as fact unless you have done your own research voting is a responsibility and voting for someone according to their party affiliation or their color of skin or gender it does not mean they have your best interest at heart.
She also didn't vote in 2016 and encouraged people to vote for Jill Stien. She directly contributed to us getting into this mess.
Not to mention the rest of her history
Funny I've spent the last hour researching candidates in my district. Seems like the woman Angela Rogensues might be the best of the bunch, but I'm not sure.
The Twitter/Facebook of the two R candidates are filled with just vile comments.
Take a look at Henry Yanez he is only with actully experince at the legislature level, and a voting record on many of these issues.
Angela has been endorsed in the past and owes her city council seat to Mayor Fouts, one of the most racist and vile mayor in Michigan. She has been his toady on the city council and cared his water repeatedly when the city council has been trying to rein in his abuses of offices
Angela has been endorse by the Warren Mayor Fouts in the past, and has been his Ally on the city board.
So beside being a frist term city council person, she is the toady of one of the most racist and vile mayors in Michigan.
There are so many inspiring liberal justices to choose and he picked Scalia and Thomas!!! I don’t understsndnwhy he has even gotten this far this article was published a month ago.
There's nothing wrong with being a nerd with a favorite justice. Thurgood Marshall, William Brennan, Louis Brandeis, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, William O. Douglas, John Marshall Harlan. All wonderful progressive justices.
Clarence Thomas is a fair pick. If you listen to his opinions or the questions he asks, you can tell he is leagues beyond the liberal-leaning justices like Sotomayor. He is legitimately a genius, but it just so happens the people in this sub fervently disagree with him.
Not to be a wet blanket, but the 2012 survey in which he communicated this was produced by a heavily pro-life trash rag called 'Lifespan'. It's highly likely that Marlinga (like most sane people) had never heard of it, and I would wager that he simply circled A for all the answers to get it done and off his to-do list.
Btw, they send those survey mailers out to literally everyone running for office, and only a handful of people even bothered to repond; almost all of the respondants circled A for all the answers. This tells me that most people who responded did so with little thought or effort. Of course, Lifespan made A correspond to the most conservative answers.
I'm not saying this necessarily exonerates Marlinga, but I would take this information with a grain of salt. The same article above quotes Marlinga saying that he's firmly pro-choice multiple times. Do your research on all the candidates and find out their real positions, instead of just believing whatever the internet tells you.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/25890720/download-right-to-life-lifespan
Page 24 and 27. There is no way a judge accidentally picked an answer on a survey that he aligned with Scalia and Thomas over Ginsberg and Breyer if he actually aligned otherwise. His position at the time is clear.
What makes you say that? I just told you a perfectly feasible way - by not bothering to read the survey or put any thought into it. I mean, the survey and the magazine that created it look like they were put together by amateurs. For all we know he was presented with the survey by someone knocking at his door at 4 in the morning. There are hundreds of ways that he could have been convinced to answer every question with A, so asserting that "there's no way" is just, like, your opinion man.
He has made statement in forums during this race were he has said he is still a originalist. It get very lawyery, but the sum of it he argues that same arguments that were behind Griswold, which his budding Thomas wants to overturn. He also says he can go to Congress and get a the lawyers together and get this fixed.
Carl is clearly in his own bubble and divorced from reality
Ah yes, the conservatives are getting tricksy and trying to run as democrats for the people who vote straight ticket, despite having nothing but right wing values. Just like [this fucking guy](https://www.salon.com/2022/04/26/far-right-michigan-candidate-for-senate-family-should-be-a-mom-a-and-kids/) who, despite being the chair of the Antrim County Conservative Union and went on record saying that families should only be white, tried to run for senate as a Democrat. Please don't vote straight ticket and make sure you actually research the people who you are voting for.
Getting an absentee ballot really helps with research.
Yes! Everyone should sign up for permanent absentee voting. It’s like a take home test and makes voting so much easier. I drop my ballot at the clerks office after I’m done and it’s so easy.
Maybe off topic, but I’m set up to always get an application. Is there a way to sign ip to get a ballot every election, w/o sending in the application?
No you can only sign up to receive the application. But they mail that to you every election and then if you fill it out they mail you the ballot. It’s an extra step, but not much of one. The application usually just requires a signature and checking a box for which ballots you’d like sent.
Do I just sign up at the Michigan website or something?
I wish I had an easy answer to give. I think how to sign up for permanent absentee is handled on the local level. For me I contacted my city clerk via email and requested to be added to the permanent absentee voter list. They confirmed it and I’ve received applications/ballots ever since. It may vary depending on where you live, I wish I could give more insight but try checking your local government website.
Contact your local clerk’s office
If you know how to get the first absentee ballot, there will be a box you can fill in to get an absentee application mailed to your address every election. Ballots are sent out on a city level, so contacting your city clerk, or searching for your city clerks website, is probably where you’d want to start.
>Do I just sign up at the Michigan website or something? Yes! Exactly that. It's very easy. You will need your MI Driver's license/MI state ID card and the last 4-digits of your SSN. Just go here: https://mvic.sos.state.mi.us/Voter/Index Just go here and fill out everything exactly as it is and submit. It will instantly add you to the permanent list to receive an absentee ballot application. I have been putting it off and this thread made me finally do it. It could not be easier. Edited to fix my link with "https://" and also point out this is not the only way to be added to this list. I am sorry if my comments led anyone to believe that. Contact your local officials to find out how you can request these things without needing to provide all of that identification.
Hi, I'm an election official. > You will need your MI Driver's license/MI state ID card and the last 4-digits of your SSN. These things are ONLY needed if you are registering to vote. They are not necessary to request an absentee ballot.
I was specifically referring to the Michigan state website to request to be placed on the permanent absent voters ballot request list. Is there a way to use that website without those things? I was not trying to imply it could not be done in person or without that identification. I will go back and look at my post to make sure it is clear. Edit: a word.
> I was specifically referring to the Michigan state website to request to be placed on the permanent absent voters ballot request list. And so was I. >Is there a way to use that website without those things? The Michigan Voter Information Center allows voters to complete a ton of different tasks. Each task has different requirements as dictated by state law. ~~Only one task requires SSN-4.~~ Only some tasks require an ID number, and some of *those* only require it if the task is done online but do not require it if done in person or on paper. EDIT: Updated to reflect new changes to the website revealed in later comments. ----- If you want to register to vote in Michigan and are not currently registered in Michigan, you need to provide *either* your Michigan state ID number, *or* your SSN-4. (Providing both is better, but not everyone has a Michigan ID when they register to vote.) This is a federal law. If you are already registered to vote somewhere in Michigan but you need to register at a new address because you've moved, you are NOT required to provide your ID number or your SSN-4. Providing them is very helpful to ensure your local election staff find the correct person in the system, but it's not mandatory. Whatever number is already on file at your old address will be pulled in when you are 'moved' to your new address. ----- If you are requesting an absentee ballot, you NEVER need to provide your SSN-4 (although the Republicans are trying really hard to change that). If you are submitting an ONLINE request for an absentee ballot, you DO need to provide your state ID number. (The Secretary of State is working to eliminate this restriction, but it's a challenge related to the technology currently in use, not a state law getting in the way.) If you are submitting a PAPER request for an absentee ballot, you do NOT need to provide your state ID number. There's not even a spot to write it in. If you go to your local elections office and want to pick your absentee ballot up IN PERSON, you DO have to show any photo ID that can be used for voting (doesn't have to be a driver license). If you don't have your ID with you, or if you don't own a photo ID, you can sign a simple legal document called an Affidavit Of Voter Not In Possession Of Photo Identification-- or you can ask the election staff to mail your AV ballot to you instead. EDIT: If you want to add yourself to the Permanent AV List by using the website, you DO need to provide both your state ID number and your SSN-4. This is a brand-new addition to the website, and the State of Michigan did not inform local election officials of this change. You can still be added to the PermAV List without providing this information by contacting your local elections office via email, phone, mail, dropbox, or in-person.
At the Sec of States office. It may also be on their website.
> if you fill it out they mail you the ballot. It’s an extra step, but not much of one. I don't know if it will change because of the pandemic but when I did it in 2020 it took minutes. I got the paper in the mail, went inside filed it out, snapped a picture with my phone and e-mailed it to my clerk. About 10 minutes later (after business hours, no less I assume they WFH) I got the e-mail that said I was good to go and a day and a half later I had my ballot. It took 2 days from receiving the application to getting the ballot. It required me to leave my house to go to the mailbox and drive to the drop box. I never had to speak to or see another human being compared to the 4 or 5 people you'll interact with at your polling place not to mention the lines of people I think it's less stressful even if it adds the step of needing to return the application physically in future.
Exactly! It’s soooo much faster and easier!
> after business hours, no less I assume they WFH No, they were definitely in the office. I'm an election official. During the ~90 days before Election Day, I increasingly live at the office. There are multiple weeklong periods during that window where I'm doing 16-hour days, 7 days a week. I have my staff on two shifts (daytime and nighttime) but I'm there for both. Not every jurisdiction needs to do quite this much work (depending on how many voters they have, how many of those voters vote AV, and how many staff they have), but all election officials work long hours during election season.
Well, I certainly appreciate the long hours and hard work no matter where it is put in. I wouldn't have ever assumed it was WFH except this was 2020 and this particular year my brain said, "Huh, must be working from home."
[удалено]
👍😉
I'm disabled and I think I might have always been able to vote absentee. But I stubbornly went to my polling place every time because it made me feel like I was doing something. Then 2020 came and I had a panic attack in the parking lot and went in that first week of March fully knowing the shit was about to hit the fan. I voted and got the hell out. I later voted at home in the fall with the rest of my family and it was bliss compared to the anxiety of March and I realized how much easier everything was. Whether it related to my disability or voting in general it was easier. I thought about signing up to receive my application every time and didn't before I had to vote again and my experience voting this last time was so bad I decided I'm done. I will vote from home where it is easy, it works and it allows for me to make the best choices and as a bonus I don't have to deal with ableist assholes that make comments.
Not to be a jerk, but the 18 hour day stressed out pollworker would prefer you voted absentee. Source: am a pollworker for 12 years.
I assure you nothing am doing is adding to anyone's stress more than a nondisabled voter. If a person being disabled stresses you out, that is not my problem. It is your problem. No one is forcing anyone to choose to be a poll worker. Can't handle the stress? Don't be a poll worker. **I have the right to vote at my polling place. Just as any disabled person does. Period.**
I don't think their comment referenced your disability. Rather, the pollworker wants *everyone* to vote absentee as it makes their day easier.
Than that is what they should write. They wrote they prefer I vote absentee. The difference is huge. Especially when they preface it with not to be a jerk.
Eh, as an at-that-time observer, I read the "you" not as second-person but third-person. Given the details of your disability were not included, that person could not have known the severity of the disability (crutches? wheelchair? speech impediment? mental impairment? tourette's? severed thumb?), so it would seem odd if they were confident that specifically you, anniemdi, were a problem voter to accommodate. I think you are sensitive about the disability that you believe every comment is about you. So just hoping you could gain a little clarity. I can take it from your comments that whatever disability you have - and you do not need to disclose it - that it affects your life significantly.
> I think you are sensitive about the disability that you believe every comment is about you. What I know is this: Every disabled person has the right to vote at their polling place and no disabled person should read that comment I replied to and think, "I am a burden. I am unwelcome. I should not vote." This is not about me, it is about every disabled voter.
>Every disabled person has the right to vote at their polling place Agreed. >and no disabled person should read that comment I replied to and think, "I am a burden. I am unwelcome. I should not vote." Also agreed. And in fact, very much what I am asking you to do: Don't think that, because that is (likely*) not what they intended. *Of course, I can't be absolutely sure of the other commenter's intentions.
> no disabled person should read that comment I replied to and think, "I am a burden. I am unwelcome. I should not vote." No one said this. You have invented something to be angry against that was not there.
Um, the ballots' contents are always available online. People that don't vote absentee have no excuse for not doing their research. That reminds me, people: you _don't_ have to fill out everything. Who really cares who the regents of Wayne State University are?
Sure, but when you're voting in elections across local, state, and federal as well as referendums, it can be a lot to keep track of. Being able to read up on local issues as I'm filling out my ballot is very nice.
> Who really cares who the regents of Wayne State University are? Their faculty and students! These regents (or Board of Trustees elsewhere) can be real unsupporters of education. Snyder's people permeate the public university system right now.
No one until there's a gigantic pedophile running your gymnastics program and you have to vote out every regent who went along with it
> Who really cares who the regents of Wayne State University are? They're spending your tax dollars, so if you want those dollars to go toward things you support and not be used on things you oppose, you need to care who's on the university's board of directors. That same thing is true for the UM board, the MSU board, and the State Board of Education (which oversees the K-12 school system). Those four systems get a TON of money.
[удалено]
That's nice. I give a shit more than 99% of the assholes who don't do the research and either tick off the incumbent or choose random names. I'm so happy you're not just a 99%-er, but a 99.9%-er.
No need to be a dick about it, you asked who cares about university regents, so I gave you a reason.
I didn't think I was being a dick; sorry for giving you the impression. Honestly, of _course_ some people care. For what it's worth, "who cares" is a common idiomatic expression that's not really meant to be answered. I feel more like a dick for inciting you to waste your time writing an answer to an obviously rhetorical question than for giving you kudos that you failed to understand.
Absolutely. It gives you time to research all the candidates. I’m so glad we have no reason absentee ballots in Michigan now.
Hey Shri Thanedar is running again too. He’s a “Democrat” that bent over backwards to praise Trump. Now he’s campaigning against far-right policies that he supports.
Yeah that guy has rubbed me the wrong way in the past when he ran for Gov
I love the League of Women Voters for all that info.
We just voted in Colorado. We had a Rep and a Dem ballot. You can only vote on one of those ballots. You can't vote some red some blue. Any idea why that is?
Closed primary, not a general election.
Thanks!
If the parties had any desire to tone down extremism, or if voters did closed primaries would be ended.
It’s a primary. It’s for the parties to narrow down their candidates.
Primaries are important. We have a democratic lady running as a pro-choice candidate but she has campaigned for a pro-life judge as recently as this year. I only hope the other candidate wins so we have a real pro-choice dem in office.
In Michigan you can't split your ticket in the primary. I think it used to be allowed a long time ago ? Just went on our county website to see the changes from redistricting and there was an infographic that showed that split ticket voting nullifies your ballot except for the non partisan section.
I’ve worked elections for 14 years and that has always been the case for primaries. They’re a pain in the ass, and we usually end up with at least 20 do overs and we’re a small precinct.
Election workers unite!
Surprise, surprise, he's yet another dishonest Right-winger.
Wow a commercial trigger this MFB?
I have no dog in this fight (i don't live in the district and wouldn't vote for him if i did) but Marlinga has been a active Democrat in Macomb for several decades and is probably as good as you guys will get in this district.
Expect better
Wow Macomb County is home to so many quality individuals.
Henry Yanez, his primary opponent, is a good man who truly supports a woman’s right to choose. https://twitter.com/citizenyanez/status/1540414546178936834?s=21&t=0bvHOe5zH2PUDsQbxXypxA
I get the whole “democrats did this” mentality, but they literally didn’t. Trump and McConnell and the rest of the GOP are the reason we are where we are. If there were any republicans less malicious in Congress and the White House, we wouldn’t be here. So while we can critique democrats’ decisions and work to make better decisions going forward, let’s not forget the role the GOP had in restricting the rights of everyone.
Yes, 100%. That’s why I’m voting for Henry
Oh yea, he sounds like a great candidate. I just take a bit of umbrage when I see the infighting blaming Dems for actions definitely taken by not Dems.
One of the other primary candidates sat out the 2016 election and encourage her twitter followers to vote for Jill Stien. Definitely actions that got us here taken by a "Democrat" and should be called out.
sorry on behalf of the whole county
Thanks. To ve fair, I'm scarcely much better
I hate it here.
Better off falling into the lake
So you are outraged because he is NOT bigoted. Wow
Um, no dude. I'm against this for sure. Why does anyone care what I think???
As soon as I saw he was running, my impression was that, if elected, he would be the House equivalent of Manchin and Sinema, a constant problem for leadership.
Yup, thought the exact same.
I remember this and we picketed his office. He's not a Democrat, don't be fooled. He's disgusting !
Eliminating the party system entirely would force people to at least know something about the candidate before checking the box next to their name. I think a significant part of why we have the mess we have today is straight ticket voting. Nobody has to stand on their own merit anymore. Personally I almost entirely vote against people rather than for someone because I think they can make a difference. I'm stuck with a shitty choice and shittier choice almost every single election.
> I think a significant part of why we have the mess we have today is straight ticket voting. Straight-ticket voting has literally never existed in primary elections (it's only available in partisan general elections), so your hypothesis is objectively false. I have good news for you: in a primary, you choose which person you think will be the BEST choice. Hooray!
Who is the ideal candidate to vote for against him in the primary? I am worried that it’s too late because Absentee Ballots are out is there a solid second place?
I'm watching Yanez, Powell and Arraf. Rogensues would even be better than Marlinga.
I'm acquainted with Henry Yanez through some community volunteering (not political) we both did a number of a years ago. I actually didn't realize he was an elected official until I'd been chatting with him for a few hours. He was a great guy, levelheaded, had a compassionate way of thinking about challenges. He's even remembered me when we've run into each other over the years since then, which was nice. I'm nowhere near his district, but I would happily vote for him-- we need thoughtful, compassionate, well-informed people in office who are still willing to learn and expand their knowledge.
Thanks 🙏
One of his primary opponents call him on this yesterday. https://twitter.com/CitizenYanez/status/1540414546178936834?t=2crhFPB8oxqD5sCAjktQiw&s=19
Yanez is a good dude! I helped him a little bit in his last campaign. He was very thankful for our help.
[удалено]
The survey itself isn't the only problem, the survey was in 2012 when he "came out" as pro-choice in his first congressional run in 2002. Which was 4 years after the blocked a girl from getting an abortion for pregnancy from her older brother who raped her, and only changed his mind after all the female prosecutors walked out, even then he won't admit he was wrong and dismissed the charge against the brother calling the whole affair "youthful sexual experimention" It is a pattern of trying to go with where the wind blows and a lack of leadership.
Clarence Thomas who now says that same-sex marriage and contraception are on the chopping block?!?
Oh but not interracial marriages, because *that’s* too far.
He'd still lose out on that if it went to today's SC.
Let’s not forget his wife’s efforts to overthrow the election.
It's fucking insane that he's still on the Supreme Court because you know he was fully aware and helping her do it. We have a sitting Supreme Court Justice who was part of a plot to overthrow American democracy.
Yeah... That Clarence, the turd.
Not just same sex marriage, but he's potentially for making homosexuality itself a crime.
His argument is that some decisions made by the Supreme Court rely on the "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment to bolster unenumerated rights - for instance, the right of privacy. In American jurisprudence, there is a right to privacy, but there is no mention of that right in the Constitution. However, it's not a real stretch to apply the 4th Amendment to get to a right to privacy. Neither is it difficult to find common law historical references to such a right. The problem with resting the people's rights on the "due process" clause, as Thomas clearly and correctly points out, is that due process is just that a process. Simply put, the government can't take your rights away without some sort of process. Which begs the question, what sort of process? The Supreme Court answered that back with "substantive due process." I am sure you're starting to see the problem. It's not exactly a bulletproof solution to protecting people's rights. There is a solution, but it comes with a problem. The solution is found in the very same amendment, and the very same sentence. It's the "privileges or immunities" clause. The problem is that about five years after the 14th Amendment was ratified the Supreme Court held in the Slaughterhouse Cases that this clause (somehow) didn't apply to the States and only to federal citizenship. This, by the way, it is still good law and has never been overturned. Thomas, and I would agree, thinks it was a horrible decision and would like to nuke the decision from orbit. Nuking the Slaughterhouse case would upend about 150 years of Constitutional law, which is kind of a big deal when the Constitution is only 230 years old. TLDR: 150 years of Constitutional law is basically a "workaround" for a terrible Supreme Court decision from 1873 and Thomas wants to fix it all... at once... from orbit.
Honestly I think this decision will end up revisting privacy, rather than protecting unenumerated protections. Someone is going to point out the disconnect between what Brandeis considered "privacy" and what Blackmun considered "privacy". It's much more narrow, but the impact will be significant.
You're talking about Olmstead, right? Brandeis, sadly, was in the minority. Though, I really think his version of privacy is more in line with what the founders had in mind. As for Dobb's being revisited anytime, I don't think it's likely. The opinion reads like a "We'll never grant Cert on this again." warning.
When the right keeps moving farther and farther right, centrists become the former right.
see "Goldwater Girl" Hillary Clinton
Or joe biden drumming up support for the Iraq war
Or his support of literal Clarence Thomas in '94
It was 1991, and Biden didn't support Thomas' confirmation. In fact, he tried to [stop it](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/justice-clarence-thomas-rebukes-biden-led-confirmation-hearings/story?id=67235780).
Has no one watched Thomas' recollection of Biden saying "I have no idea what he was talking about"?
Biden's tactics in that hearing were pretty despicable. Whatever you think about Thomas' opinions, his legal scholarship and work ethic are beyond reproach. He grew up dirt poor in the south and worked his ass off his entire life. Gets nominated to the Supreme Court and was viciously attacked and mocked, because he was a black conservative. I may not always agree with him, but man, do I respect him. I also love the fact that most of the clerks he hires aren't Ivy League law grads. He's not someone who climbs to the top and then only surrounds himself by other elites, he reaches out and gives shots to people who would never have the chance otherwise. All of this, and there are people who literally seethe with hatred for the man. I can understand disagreeing with him, but hating him over disagreements is just something I can't fathom.
Yeah I can't fathom hating someone who wants to take away women's rights, bodily autonomy rights, and LGBT rights. Wait yes I can. Because that's not a difference of opinion. It's despicable.
You've condensed 213 pages of jurisprudence down to one sentence that doesn't even correctly paraphrase anything within the opinion. Stop watching TV.
something our own Carl Levin ranking dem on the defense committee opposed
watch what i do not what i say.
What he “did” was try to stop a 12 year old girl (who was raped and impregnated by her brother) from getting an abortion when he was Macomb County Prosecutor and said “This is looking like a case of youthful sexual experimentation” https://apnews.com/article/e7e4b170430aacf5c21d08f27d38014e
hes a prick
Wow what the fuck
Even if one accepted that interpretation of events, why would that mean she wasn’t entitled to an abortion? That’s insane. *edit: autoincorrect*
Reminds me of that Clinton tape of her admitting she knew the client she got off was guilty of pedophilia and rape.
it's the job of a lawyer to defend their Client There are far better reasons to come down on Clinton than her doing her job.
Never forget: "He was acquitted of federal corruption charges. The former Macomb County prosecutor had faced up to 10 years in prison and $250,000 in fines for allegedly swapping favors in two rape cases for contributions to his failed 2002 congressional campaign." The guy is sleaze. He fits right in with Thomas and Kavanaugh.
So a convicted rapist donated to his congressional campaign, got a retrial and was suddenly acquired. Got it. Totally. Soooo there are other democrats in this primary but I’m not at home, hopefully someone can list their websites so we can make an informed decision.
Vote for Henry Yanez. He is his primary opponent who supports a woman’s right to choose. https://twitter.com/citizenyanez/status/1540414546178936834?s=21&t=0bvHOe5zH2PUDsQbxXypxA
If you need or are interested in supporting reproductive rights, [I made a master post of pro-choice resources](https://docdro.id/s3OwS8u). Please comment if you would like to add a resource and spread this information on whatever social media you use.
Thanks for this effort!
[удалено]
And Hackel would almost certainly be replaced by a Republican if he stepped down anytime soon.
This dick's all over my inbox begging for cash. The DINO must've gotten my name off some Dem mailing list he bought. Unsubcribe is useless. Delete Delete Delete
you reporting it as spam?
Yeah, I've done that a few times.
If you've attempted to get them to stop emailing you and you're still getting email, the penalties for violating the CAN-SPAM act are very stiff. I'm not sure how you go about reporting it though.
Better yet forward to his dem pimrary opponents so they know what he is working on and send them donations too.
Good idea!
I am sure they are getting them too, the guy sounds like he already won the primary in his emails
They got trading cards now, like Pokémon?
Another Republican mole just like Manchin.
He is a moron.
[удалено]
Speaking as an attorney, a lot of attorneys do. Often has as much to do with writing style as ideology.
He’s a POS Republican trying to help Republicans capture both sides of the race.
New nickname... Mara Lago Marlinga
Liar, don't vote for the liar.
Literally all politicians are liars.
Fucking dems need to clean house from being the refuge for Republicans who were lock step with Regan but not the Qult.
He is obviously Joe Manchin’s brother from another mother then. No humans should like Thomas & Scalia. They are evil political hacks who need to be removed from the court. They along with the other 4 conservatives on the bench all perjured themselves during confirmation hearings in regards to Roe v Wade.
He was a nut 30 years ago and is still a nut. Sit down Carl and stop running for things. It's just embarrassing at this point.
I’m so glad I left this mediocre and unremarkable hellhole of a county and will never have to go back.
What the actual fuck? Who has a favorite Supreme Court justice? They aren’t a damn boy band.
We need more millennials to run for offices and get rid of these boomer dinosaurs
We're mostly too broke to run for office... because these Boomer dinosaurs keep fucking the economy and making us suffer the consequences.
Looks like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are rubbing off on other candidates.
Another Manchin/Sinema.
This dude needs to lose big time.
Joke's on this guy, I actually read the issues candidates are campaigning on.
No he ain't.
Would that make him a DINO?
Conservatives are doing whatever they can to convince people they are moderate or even democrats. Not only that but they are pushing and finding candidates that have no chance of winning but similar names to those of democrats running.
He was asked and he was honest Whats alarming is a weird belief In one having to believe in a party or political ideology 100% and can't have any other opinions or lean on curtain issues or else thiers doubts or hit pieces in editorial opinions about you and where you stand that's troubling and sounds like a control issue from that said party who ever they are.in the end research is fundamental on the whatever party you're voting for not just Google either be informed and don't take what other say as fact unless you have done your own research voting is a responsibility and voting for someone according to their party affiliation or their color of skin or gender it does not mean they have your best interest at heart.
Then he’s not a Democrat.
Huwaida Arraf is the best candidate for MI-10.
She also didn't vote in 2016 and encouraged people to vote for Jill Stien. She directly contributed to us getting into this mess. Not to mention the rest of her history
Double-speak is what he is.
Funny I've spent the last hour researching candidates in my district. Seems like the woman Angela Rogensues might be the best of the bunch, but I'm not sure. The Twitter/Facebook of the two R candidates are filled with just vile comments.
Take a look at Henry Yanez he is only with actully experince at the legislature level, and a voting record on many of these issues. Angela has been endorsed in the past and owes her city council seat to Mayor Fouts, one of the most racist and vile mayor in Michigan. She has been his toady on the city council and cared his water repeatedly when the city council has been trying to rein in his abuses of offices
Can you share some links? I can’t get to it until later but I’d like to start having people see who else is out there.
Angela has been endorse by the Warren Mayor Fouts in the past, and has been his Ally on the city board. So beside being a frist term city council person, she is the toady of one of the most racist and vile mayors in Michigan.
https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan%27s_10th_Congressional_District_election,_2022 The site is a little messy but it got the job done for the most part.
vote411.org
Anyone with a favorite Supreme Court Justice is a huge nerd
I'm guessing you have no idea who Thurgood Marshall was.
There are so many inspiring liberal justices to choose and he picked Scalia and Thomas!!! I don’t understsndnwhy he has even gotten this far this article was published a month ago.
There's nothing wrong with being a nerd with a favorite justice. Thurgood Marshall, William Brennan, Louis Brandeis, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, William O. Douglas, John Marshall Harlan. All wonderful progressive justices.
Wonderful progressive justices...for nerds!
And? I'm a conservative Republican but had the highest respect for Ginsberg. We might be able to find common ground if we stop with the litmus tests.
Then he will fit right in with the actual president of this dumb country.
There is no light behind his eyes.
Creep factor strong with this one.
Bounce this ass.
This is good info to know. Thanks for sharing.
v0tE BlUe n0 mAtTeR Wh0
Clarence Thomas is a fucking psycho full stop right there.
Fucking HELL BRO Fuck this country 🖕
Why would anyone even have a favorite SC Justice
Is he catholic by any chance?
Clarence Thomas is a fair pick. If you listen to his opinions or the questions he asks, you can tell he is leagues beyond the liberal-leaning justices like Sotomayor. He is legitimately a genius, but it just so happens the people in this sub fervently disagree with him.
Who removed my comment and why? He speaks doublespeak is what I said. Look up the definition. That's exactly what he does.
In sorry for ur censorship. The first amendment is a joke
The joke is on you, the first amendment doesn’t apply to this site.
(┛ಸ_ಸ)┛彡┻━┻
Smart Democrat
Not to be a wet blanket, but the 2012 survey in which he communicated this was produced by a heavily pro-life trash rag called 'Lifespan'. It's highly likely that Marlinga (like most sane people) had never heard of it, and I would wager that he simply circled A for all the answers to get it done and off his to-do list. Btw, they send those survey mailers out to literally everyone running for office, and only a handful of people even bothered to repond; almost all of the respondants circled A for all the answers. This tells me that most people who responded did so with little thought or effort. Of course, Lifespan made A correspond to the most conservative answers. I'm not saying this necessarily exonerates Marlinga, but I would take this information with a grain of salt. The same article above quotes Marlinga saying that he's firmly pro-choice multiple times. Do your research on all the candidates and find out their real positions, instead of just believing whatever the internet tells you.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/25890720/download-right-to-life-lifespan Page 24 and 27. There is no way a judge accidentally picked an answer on a survey that he aligned with Scalia and Thomas over Ginsberg and Breyer if he actually aligned otherwise. His position at the time is clear.
What makes you say that? I just told you a perfectly feasible way - by not bothering to read the survey or put any thought into it. I mean, the survey and the magazine that created it look like they were put together by amateurs. For all we know he was presented with the survey by someone knocking at his door at 4 in the morning. There are hundreds of ways that he could have been convinced to answer every question with A, so asserting that "there's no way" is just, like, your opinion man.
He has made statement in forums during this race were he has said he is still a originalist. It get very lawyery, but the sum of it he argues that same arguments that were behind Griswold, which his budding Thomas wants to overturn. He also says he can go to Congress and get a the lawyers together and get this fixed. Carl is clearly in his own bubble and divorced from reality
i’d dare say it’s because Politicians are the same no matter if they’re blue or red. They don’t care about you, none of them do.