NDSU students not allowed in . (voting, leader, supporters, chairman)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Legally speaking, a Student ID is NOT proof of "residence" and the right to vote. I went to the University of Michigan, but was never registered to vote in Ann Arbor or Washtenaw County. I kept my residence and voting registration in my hometown.
Yes, in 1971 the Supreme Court ruled that college students who live most of the year at college can, if they choose, vote in their college towns. (Until then, many college towns refused to allow them to register to vote there.)
It should be up to the individual, not to a government or party official.
Yes, in 1971 the Supreme Court ruled that college students who live most of the year at college can, if they choose, vote in their college towns. (Until then, many college towns refused to allow them to register to vote there.)
It should be up to the individual, not to a government or party official.
They STILL have to go through the LEGAL process of setting up residency and registering to vote at their college location. So that you can't be registered to vote in 2 locations. A student ID is not proof of residency, it is proof that you have the option to create a residency there.
These students were given two hours to come up with the proper residency information and were not able to meet that vital requirement. Isn't it odd that they didn't have State IDs/Drivers Licenses to that area nor were registered on the local voting rolls?
Last edited by michiganmoon; 03-04-2012 at 06:52 AM..
Yes, in 1971 the Supreme Court ruled that college students who live most of the year at college can, if they choose, vote in their college towns. (Until then, many college towns refused to allow them to register to vote there.)
It should be up to the individual, not to a government or party official.
no, it should not be up to the individual: it they are not registered, for whatever reason they can not and should not be part of any caucus...it is just that simple. Have you checked to see where these kids file income tax, that is the criteria if nothing else. They can't be a resident of one state or address for one reason and someplace for another. Sorry, these kids normally do not consider the town they live in for college their home. How many college kids do you even know, much less how many do you know that consider the college town their permanent home?.
They STILL have to go through the LEGAL process of setting up residency and registering to vote at their college location. So that you can't be registered to vote in 2 locations. A student ID is not proof of residency, it is proof that you have the option to create a residency there.
These students were given two hours to come up with the proper residency information and were not able to meet that vital requirement. Isn't it odd that they didn't have State IDs/Drivers Licenses to that area nor were registered on the local voting rolls?
I'm disappointed, but I believe you are correct. The campaign's been on for months. They could have/should have got this done long ago. If they only would have consulted the various RP sites for instructions. I think there has been some monkey business going on during the primary/caucus season, but this ain't it.
I would agree w/ proof of voter reg, but the email thing seems odd. Why were they expecting "outside" interference?
I can say that it seems many places aren't enforcing normal screening though and seem to count on innocent until proven guilty. In other words they count on evidence of fraud, after the fact. Would have been better if they were given more time I think. Not sure 2 hrs would be enough for students to make sure they had their ducks in a row.
I would agree w/ proof of voter reg, but the email thing seems odd. Why were they expecting "outside" interference?
I can say that it seems many places aren't enforcing normal screening though and seem to count on innocent until proven guilty. In other words they count on evidence of fraud, after the fact. Would have been better if they were given more time I think. Not sure 2 hrs would be enough for students to make sure they had their ducks in a row.
So delay a meeting, because 2 hours isn't enough for students to get their proof....when there is evidence that they are not residents? Evidence being that their driver's licenses are not local and they are not on the local voter registration rolls? Everything says that they are not residents nor were they registered to vote there.
You don't simply bend laws and rules because Ron Paul supporters want to disrupt the process and be loud.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
