Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election
PORT CHESTER, N.Y. – Arthur Furano voted early — five days before Election Day. And he voted often, flipping the lever six times for his favorite candidate.

Furano cast multiple votes on the instructions of a federal judge and the U.S. Department of Justice as part of a new election system crafted to help boost Hispanic representation.

Voters in Port Chester, 25 miles northeast of New York City, are electing village trustees for the first time since the federal government alleged in 2006 that the existing election system was unfair. The election ends Tuesday and results are expected late Tuesday night.

Although the village of about 30,000 residents is nearly half Hispanic, no Latino had ever been elected to any of the six trustee seats, which until now were chosen in a conventional at-large election. Most voters were white, and white candidates always won.

Federal Judge Stephen Robinson said that violated the Voting Rights Act, and he approved a remedy suggested by village officials: a system called cumulative voting, in which residents get six votes each to apportion as they wish among the candidates. He rejected a government proposal to break the village into six districts, including one that took in heavily Hispanic areas.

Furano and his wife, Gloria Furano, voted Thursday.

"That was very strange," Arthur Furano, 80, said after voting. "I'm not sure I liked it. All my life, I've heard, 'one man, one vote.'"

It's the first time any municipality in New York has used cumulative voting, said Amy Ngai, a director at FairVote, a nonprofit election research and reform group that has been hired to consult. The system is used to elect the school board in Amarillo, Texas, the county commission in Chilton County, Ala., and the City Council in Peoria, Ill.

The judge also ordered Port Chester to implement in-person early voting, allowing residents to show up on any of five days to cast ballots. That, too, is a first in New York, Ngai said.

Village clerk Joan Mancuso said Monday that 604 residents voted early.

Gloria Furano gave one vote each to six candidates. Aaron Conetta gave two votes each to three candidates.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

total bullshit
 
Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election
PORT CHESTER, N.Y. – Arthur Furano voted early — five days before Election Day. And he voted often, flipping the lever six times for his favorite candidate.

Furano cast multiple votes on the instructions of a federal judge and the U.S. Department of Justice as part of a new election system crafted to help boost Hispanic representation.

Voters in Port Chester, 25 miles northeast of New York City, are electing village trustees for the first time since the federal government alleged in 2006 that the existing election system was unfair. The election ends Tuesday and results are expected late Tuesday night.

Although the village of about 30,000 residents is nearly half Hispanic, no Latino had ever been elected to any of the six trustee seats, which until now were chosen in a conventional at-large election. Most voters were white, and white candidates always won.

Federal Judge Stephen Robinson said that violated the Voting Rights Act, and he approved a remedy suggested by village officials: a system called cumulative voting, in which residents get six votes each to apportion as they wish among the candidates. He rejected a government proposal to break the village into six districts, including one that took in heavily Hispanic areas.

Furano and his wife, Gloria Furano, voted Thursday.

"That was very strange," Arthur Furano, 80, said after voting. "I'm not sure I liked it. All my life, I've heard, 'one man, one vote.'"

It's the first time any municipality in New York has used cumulative voting, said Amy Ngai, a director at FairVote, a nonprofit election research and reform group that has been hired to consult. The system is used to elect the school board in Amarillo, Texas, the county commission in Chilton County, Ala., and the City Council in Peoria, Ill.

The judge also ordered Port Chester to implement in-person early voting, allowing residents to show up on any of five days to cast ballots. That, too, is a first in New York, Ngai said.

Village clerk Joan Mancuso said Monday that 604 residents voted early.

Gloria Furano gave one vote each to six candidates. Aaron Conetta gave two votes each to three candidates.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

total bullshit

I forsee a huge suit over this and a Federal Judge wiping egg from his face.

OH-WAIT.
That should be it's LIKELY there will be a huge suit over this and a Federal Judge wiping egg from his face.
 
I'm not sure that I understand the problem, let alone see how this is "total bullshit."
I'm just amazed. Flat amazed that you don't see a problem with one group getting to vote multiple times in an election. You must live in Chicago. That's the only reasonable explanation...
 
I'm just amazed. Flat amazed that you don't see a problem with one group getting to vote multiple times in an election. You must live in Chicago. That's the only reasonable explanation...


I think you misunderstood the story. Everyone gets to vote 6 times for the six trustee positions, not just Hispanics.
 
well, I think it rather stupid of the lady in the article who voted 6 times... once for each candidate.... hmmm.... me thinks she just negated herself.
 
well, I think it rather stupid of the lady in the article who voted 6 times... once for each candidate.... hmmm.... me thinks she just negated herself.
There's six positions, they get to vote "six times" as the results are cumulative, the top six vote getters gain the positions...
 
I took a special math class (because I suck at math, and needed to BS the credit requirement) where we discussed voting methods, and how different methods are advocated as being the most fair. For example, some people reject winning by plurality. This is one of the methods, and it is interesting...
 
It said nothing about one racial group getting more votes. Yurt, you posted the article. One would think you would have read it.
 
GAWD, Damo.

Now you're acting like RS. :pke:

Wrong. I read the article I commented on and quoted the section to which I was responding in my response. It just happened to be in error.

Damo's error here is on a higher level, but still no big fucking deal. I expect you will call him names and make a billion posts over how embarrassing it must be for him, now. No, that's not gonna happen, cause your ass is not sore over getting kicked around by Damo.
 
Wrong. I read the article I commented on and quoted the section to which I was responding in my response. It just happened to be in error.

Damo's error here is on a higher level, but still no big fucking deal. I expect you will call him names and make a billion posts over how embarrassing it must be for him, now. No, that's not gonna happen, cause your ass is not sore over getting kicked around by Damo.

No need.
Damo's already admitted his mistake and he's not the kind, after making a royal screwup, to try and play gotcha moments.

I'm beginning to feel a little concerned; because you seem to have an unhealthy interest in my ass. :palm:
 
No need.
Damo's already admitted his mistake and he's not the kind, after making a royal screwup, to try and play gotcha moments.

I'm beginning to feel a little concerned; because you seem to have an unhealthy interest in my ass. :palm:

You are an idiot and a liar. I acknowledged that the article was in error, though you attacked me, claiming that my comments were suggested by nothing, when they clearly were. You did not make it clear that the article was in error until later and offered nothing to support that. It was my own research that led me to conclude that the article was in error.

In both cases, the prudent response is to accept the recognition of the error and move on. But with me, with a lesser mistake, you continued to drone on and on about it and now you are dragging it into this unrelated thread.

Now, let's contrast these to your willful stupidity on the validity of web polls. You have not relinquished or acknowledged your error and simply continued to argue that you were right in the face of overwhelming evidence that you were not.

You don't have a leg to stand on in questioning my intellectual honesty as you have absolutely none.
 
You are an idiot and a liar. I acknowledged that the article was in error, though you attacked me, claiming that my comments were suggested by nothing, when they clearly were. You did not make it clear that the article was in error until later and offered nothing to support that. It was my own research that led me to conclude that the article was in error.

In both cases, the prudent response is to accept the recognition of the error and move on. But with me, with a lesser mistake, you continued to drone on and on about it and now you are dragging it into this unrelated thread.

Now, let's contrast these to your willful stupidity on the validity of web polls. You have not relinquished or acknowledged your error and simply continued to argue that you were right in the face of overwhelming evidence that you were not.

You don't have a leg to stand on in questioning my intellectual honesty as you have absolutely none.

Why would I question something that isn't there??

RS; I'm begging you to let this go, as it's making your appear to be deranged and obsessive.
Please stop and allow yourself to retain what shred of dignity you may have left.
Please stop. :palm:
 
Why would I question something that isn't there??

RS; I'm begging you to let this go, as it's making your appear to be deranged and obsessive.
Please stop and allow yourself to retain what shred of dignity you may have left.
Please stop. :palm:

Retard, who brought it up in this thread? You did.

I have all my dignity, while you show none and continue to get your ass handed to you over my error. You should have just let it go long ago and you would have had some small and trivial little trophy of my mistake to keep you going through the many ass-kickings that you receive. But, no.... you insist on pretending that it's a big-fucking-deal that I commented on an errant article.
 
Retard, who brought it up in this thread? You did.

I have all my dignity, while you show none and continue to get your ass handed to you over my error. You should have just let it go long ago and you would have had some small and trivial little trophy of my mistake to keep you going through the many ass-kickings that you receive. But, no.... you insist on pretending that it's a big-fucking-deal that I commented on an errant article.

This has gone past feeling sorry for you and now has reached the realm of you being pitied.

You brought it up, when you made your ludicrious statement and then had to apologixe for your lack of comprehension.

If you feel you have all your dignity, then you must not have had much to begin with. - LOL

Once again; you make the mistake of typing "kk", when it's obvious that you should have put in "ss".

Please, please follow your best idea and make this your last post on the subject.
At lesst that way, you might be able to bow out gracefully and retain a least a shred of honor.

Now, please stop RD; I'm begging you, for your sake.
 
Back
Top