The Voting Thread (Procedures, Turnout, Legal Challenges)(Update: Trump to file suit in PA, MI, WI, AZ, NV, GA) (3 Viewers)

[Lapaz]

There is a lot of push-back from Trump on voting by mail, but most states allow it, and 1/3 allow it without any excuse. His rationale is that it will lead to vast fraud, but of course that isn't his real reason. His real reason is that he thinks it will be worse for conservatives, but studies have shown that states that have instituted much broader voting by mail haven't had any statistical changes in party voting.

Stanford study: Mail voting doesn't benefit one party over another

Coronavirus-spurred limits have intensified a push to allow more mail balloting in November.

www.politico.com

Voting Outside the Polling Place: Absentee, All-Mail and other Voting at Home Options

Most states offer at least one method for any eligible voter to cast a ballot before Election Day. While some states provide early in-person voting, this webpage addresses absentee voting and all-mail voting.

www.ncsl.org

Although, normally voting by mail doesn't affect party votes, I bet it might this year if we have another resurgence of Covid, because I think the right is much more apt to discount the virus than the left. I know that is why Trump is against it.

Whether you're left or right wing, expanding mail in votes is the right thing to do to reduce the likelihood of spreading the virus, to expand voter participation, and to make it easier for those that do show up to stay distant. It will also allow any people with susceptibilities to remain safer. I think voting by mail could be made extremely secure by having people vote using traditional postal mail, coupled with requiring a confirmation either by phone, email or text. If done by phone, then voters can provide confirmation that can include confirming their form number. If done by email or text, it can include a picture of their form, and then confirmation that that was their form. Rather than staffers individually calling people, this can be automated by having voters call the number, text the number, or email the address provided to them on their form. A website can even be created with a database of those that have voted, and perhaps a link to allow people to confirm their vote was correctly registered. For people without computers, a site can include a means to access the database over the phone with some confirmation information. These types of systems are used extensively by banks and other sites that need security, so I think they are mature enough to use. We could even use such a site for people to confirm their vote on the day of the election.

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

Secretary of State Admits Voter Fraud Possible with Mail-only Election - The Minuteman Blog

One of the many Executive Orders signed by Governor Doug Burgum, in response to COVID-19, has left North Dakotans with a mail-only primary election. And there’s a lot of people unhappy about it. To be clear, at the end of [read more...]

www.theminutemanblog.com

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

Four Women Indicted in North Texas Voter Fraud Ring

Four women who are accused of targeting elderly voters were indicted on 30 felony counts of voter fraud and arrested following an investigation by the office of the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

www.nbcdfw.com

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

https://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2020/04/11/heed-jimmy-carter-on-the-danger-of-mail-in-voting-absentee-ballots-remain-the-largest-source-of-potential-voter-fraud-by-john-r-lott-jr/

 

[N.O.Bronco]

So you aren’t going to answer the question.

You Get a Ballot, You Get a Ballot: Nevada's Mail-in Primary Shows Potential for Voter Fraud

The Nevada primary is proving Republicans right about the dangers of voting-by-mail. Thousands of ballots mailed to inactive voters, people who moved or perhaps even died, are reportedly stacking up

townhall.com

I’ve answered your questions multiple times, in mail-in states fraud is statistically insignificant or lower than average, transparency and participation greater, with less capacity for foreign interference, while in contrast you have habitually refused to answer my challenges or others. You’ve asserted that expanding this in other states will significantly raise the propensity for fraud, walk me through your evidence? That’s all I have asked to further this debate.


And refusing to engage for days and then spamming the board with random links without commentary is not contributing to any sort of constructive dialogue. It’s basically textbook Gish Galloping. It’s not even demonstrating any sort of competency in the matter you made such unsubstantiated assertions about. I’ve asked you for proof of your assertions, so far you have deflected and then spammed the board without any commentary to accompany it. If you can’t demonstrate effort and goodwill, what is the point?

Edit: cutting stuff out that I feel comes off like ref-working that I should leave private if I have an issue.

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

Glad you thought it was funny. If the mods were serious about getting things cleaned up around here and I believe they want to, you should be banned.

 

[Sledge Hammer]

Gang mentality? You're arguing with one other poster.

 

[N.O.Bronco]

Glad you thought it was funny. If the mods were serious about getting things cleaned up around here and I believe they want to, you should be banned.

For what? Asking you to qualify your statements?

 

[N.O.Bronco]

I guess I also just struggle to understand this posture Tony.

For instance, Superchuck and I disagreed, I asked him why he thought that way followed by explaining my position so he wouldn’t be flying blind, and he responded, Both of use were(I think, I hope) able to make some valid points and by explaining to me his reasoning I gained a different perspective. I didn’t have to beg, in my response after questioning his position I wanted to be as forthright and concise as possible as a sign of respect to him. He clarified where he was coming from and I think he made a totally valid point that is worth ensuring and kept in mind if pursuing these policies.

Lapaz interpreted my post one way and challenged my conclusions. I tried as best I could in my disagreement to be respectful and then answer the challenges he evoked. Hopefully, persuading him a bit more to the point I was making but obviously not fully successful up to that point... I’ll keep working lol

In contrast I’ve asked you to do what they have either been pretty willing to do or did so without even asking, just as a formality to one another out of respect. Lapaz spent three paragraphs making an articulate case for his/her position and so I wanted to pay back that respect. I ask you until the point of frustration to explain your evidence and in contrast things steadily devolve until you loud clap me for not answering your third question after not answering any of mine.

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

I guess I also just struggle to understand this posture Tony.

For instance, Superchuck and I disagreed, I asked him why he thought that way followed by explaining my position so he wouldn’t be flying blind, and he responded, Both of use were(I think, I hope) able to make some valid points and by explaining to me his reasoning I gained a different perspective. I didn’t have to beg, in my response after questioning his position I wanted to be as forthright and concise as possible as a sign of respect to him. He clarified where he was coming from and I think he made a totally valid point that is worth ensuring and kept in mind if pursuing these policies.

Lapaz interpreted my post one way and challenged my conclusions. I tried as best I could in my disagreement to be respectful and then answer the challenges he evoked. Hopefully, persuading him a bit more to the point I was making but obviously not fully successful up to that point... I’ll keep working lol

In contrast I’ve asked you to do what they have either been pretty willing to do or did so without even asking, just as a formality to one another out of respect. Lapaz spent three paragraphs making an articulate case for his/her position and so I wanted to pay back that respect. I ask you until the point of frustration to explain your evidence and in contrast things steadily devolve until you loud clap me for not answering your third question after not answering any of mine.

Just one more for your reading pleasure.

Error and Fraud at Issue as Absentee Voting Rises (Published 2012)

Nationwide, mailed ballots now account for nearly 20 percent of votes, yet such ballots are more likely to be compromised, and contested, than those cast in person, statistics show.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Tony1Sainstfan]

Also just to add. Bronco my answers to your questions have been included in all the links I provided with articles that back up what I have said. In my opinion democrats want mail in voting in this election because they know they can’t beat Trump on a level playing field. The same goes for getting rid of the electoral college.

 

[Sledge Hammer]

@N.O.Bronco and @Tony1Sainstfan since the argument is between you two, I'll just say this. This feels like a classic example of two people talking past each other. I'm not saying you're both equally guilty or not. Don't take it as such.

I think NO Bronco has made a fair point that many states do vote by mail with little to no issues. And Tony1Sainstfan has shown multiple examples of voter fraud or concerns. I'm not here to judge either take. But let's make sure we're not spending too much time commenting on what Andrus posted on Saturday and let's not spend too much time wondering what the mods should or shouldn't do. Often, people regret that question.

I feel like we're not fully in the spirit of our vision of intelligent, thoughtful, and polite political discourse. Even though, I will say, I do see some more effort than prior to Saturday.

If anyone needs to take a break from the conversation, just do so, and let cooler heads prevail.

 

[JRad]

In my opinion democrats want mail in voting in this election because they know they can’t beat Trump on a level playing field. The same goes for getting rid of the electoral college.

There is no evidence vote by mail favors either party.

And it’s a whole other thread, but winning an election when you had 3 million fewer votes than your opponent isn’t what I’d call “a level playing field”. And I’ve despised the electoral college long before 2016.

 

[Lapaz]

Utah also does it.

And It is not reliant simply on voters. I apologize if I indicated that was the only check in the process. Voters simply have the sort of transparency and oppurtunity to track their ballots that is basically not possible in pretty much every old-school in-person system. Which is important to point out when most in-person systems do not.

You sign your ballot, government receipt of your ballot can be verified online or by phone, your signatrue and info is matched to your voter registration and license info/signature both digitally and in-person by a multi-level bi-partisan panel, if there is a discrepancy you are contacted and asked to provide additional information to validate your ballot.

Additionaly, because things are collected and catalogued in this manner, and it is standard across all mail-in states, Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Hawaii are also able to compare ballots and make sure people are not mailing in ballots into two states. Something only really possible with a standardized process and this level of efficiency gained through a system like this.

The signature check of the ballots may catch fraudulent submissions, but I've seen people accept many variations of my signature, and my partner has copied my signature. It provides some protection, but not enough under normal circumstances. I think the pandemic justifies accepting the extra risk. One thing that checking signatures doesn't do is to prevent ballots from being stolen. That's why I would couple the paper ballot with a backup electronic system. I would require confirmation that a ballot was sent.

I’m also not sure how you are more vulnerable with paper mail-in ballots than digital systems that we know by leaked intelligence documents have been hacked successfully and there is basically ZERO accountability once you press send.

If by digital systems you mean online, then Rad raised some good reasons to be concerned, such as Phishing and other cyber concerns, and if you're referring to the digital readers used for in-person voting, then I agree that they too are vulnerable, but I think it is a harder target. Aren't mail-in ballots read by the same digital systems, which would make them have the same risk, plus the added risks of mail related votes? Both are mitigated by assuring that all digital systems have backup paper ballots.

 

[JRad]

Aren't mail-in ballots read by the same digital systems, which would make them have the same risk, plus the added risks of mail related votes?

You’d be able to leave something like that offline, which would greatly reduce the risk. At least, in theory.

I didn’t grab it in the quote, but I agree with the paper/digital redundancy.

 

[dtc]

Absentee voting is usually done by request from the voter and in some states it is illegal to just randomly send everyone a absentee ballot. I could see cases where fraud might be a big player in that. Here’s the bigger question for me. If it’s ok to go to Walmart or Home Depot then why can’t we figure out a way to vote in person and stick to the rules as is.

The "rules as is" allow us to vote by mail. I've been doing it for a very long time.

I don't go to Walmart. I do not wait in line. I don't have time to sit on queue and waste my day to vote so I do it by absentee. It's not illegal. There is none. Not one bit of evidence that voting by mail results in fraud.

So, here's the bigger question.

Why do you want to make it harder and more dangerous to vote?

 

[dtc]

We should go further and open up online voting. Then we can see where America really stands on issues. I see no reason why online voting shouldn't be available. Am I missing something? We can bank online, have doctor's visits and receive health information, file our taxes, conduct the census, and handle our DMV work all online. Time to enter the 21st Century.

They may be cynical, but Republicans are not dumb. They know that the more people vote the less likely they are to hold power.

It's as simple as that.

 

[dtc]

I’m still waiting for Bronco to shine a light on how much he trusts USPS. They are notorious for screwing up mail delivery but I’m supposed to believe they are spot on when it comes to ballot delivery. I also want him to explain how it’s ok in almost every state to go into a gas station and buy something from a clerk who is behind plexiglass or go to Walmart or Home Depot with hundreds of other shoppers but it’s dangerous to get in line and vote.

The USPS is one of the most efficient organizations on the face of the planet. They deliver billions of pieces of mail every single day without fail even during a pandemic for 50c.

Rarely is anything lost and NEVER is anything sent certified lost.

And, more importantly, if it's good enough to ship ballots for our soldiers and service people overseas it's good enough for the rest of us.

 

[N.O.Bronco]

@N.O.Bronco and @Tony1Sainstfan since the argument is between you two, I'll just say this. This feels like a classic example of two people talking past each other. I'm not saying you're both equally guilty or not. Don't take it as such.

I think NO Bronco has made a fair point that many states do vote by mail with little to no issues. And Tony1Sainstfan has shown multiple examples of voter fraud or concerns. I'm not here to judge either take. But let's make sure we're not spending too much time commenting on what Andrus posted on Saturday and let's not spend too much time wondering what the mods should or shouldn't do. Often, people regret that question.

I feel like we're not fully in the spirit of our vision of intelligent, thoughtful, and polite political discourse. Even though, I will say, I do see some more effort than prior to Saturday.

If anyone needs to take a break from the conversation, just do so, and let cooler heads prevail.

Maybe I misunderstood the spirit of Andrus’s post, but gish galloping to me is not really engagaing in good faith with honesty.

And a simple cursory glance at some of those so called “sources” are little more than unsourced musings from fringe partisan blogs opining the dangers of this sort of voting without the evidence to back it, much like what I challenged Tony on previously.

Only about one or two even attempt to provide some non-tinged evidence for problems, and none that I see involve the states that have moved to these mail-in systems that specifically focus on layers of verification from the rolls used to register and provide ballots to the back end of counting the ballots and matching signatures.

Also just to add. Bronco my answers to your questions have been included in all the links I provided with articles that back up what I have said. In my opinion democrats want mail in voting in this election because they know they can’t beat Trump on a level playing field. The same goes for getting rid of the electoral college.

Care to walk me through what the most compelling arguments your no doubt hours of reading and vetting all those sources helped produce in forming your opinion? As surely you engaged the material enough to reference some of the more compelling pieces of evidence and are able to summarize your findings so we can finally move this conversation past what was simply requested of you now two days ago.