Sorry, I left out the word "widespread." I stand corrected and edited my post for clarity. Thank you so much! Edit, and yes, he has been charged for his crime.
There's a difference between ID requirements and inconvenience and what usually happens, which is closing facilities that serve communities of color/poor, or reducing hours or adding additional requirements to get said IDs.
You clearly didn't read the article! Bartman’s arraignment follows a Republican man in Forty Fort, Pennsylvania, who was charged in October for similarly filling out an absentee ballot application on behalf of his deceased mother. A registered Republican in Chester County, Pennsylvania, was also charged for casting a ballot in person in the November election, and then returning to his polling place with sunglasses on in an attempt to disguise himself and vote on behalf of his son. Sounds pretty widespread to me!
Charge the losing part if they fail!! This morning, hours after Newsom's victory in the recall, the election chairs of both the California Senate and the Assembly have already announced plans to reform the state's recall system.— Duty To Warn 🔉 (@duty2warn) September 15, 2021 The California recall cost a staggering $276 million for an election that was called 46 minutes after polls closed. pic.twitter.com/EDPNkjGrgF— The Recount (@therecount) September 15, 2021
Yes, I agree that the current attempts at voter suppression, in the name of "election security" are racist, classist and ageist. They should be stopped. However, ID requirements and inconvenience should be curtailed, as well.
I despise Trump and most Republican politicians, but the fact is that mail voting is unsafe. When the voting ballot arrives to the recipient's mailbox, there's no guarantee that the recipient will actually use it and sent it back to the post office. Ir could be a family member, a neighbor, a stranger that checks other people's neighbors. Online voting is even worse.
I'm going to argue that voting by mail is more fair than voting in person. It's practically impossible to commit fraud of mail-in voting to the point of changing the outcome of an election. If there's widespread mail theft to the point where thousands of ballots are stolen out of the mail and fraudulently returned, that would almost certainly be caught. There may be individual cases where a family member casts a fraudulent ballot against the wishes of the actual recipient. That happened with absentee voting before there was statewide mail-in voting (in several states now - Washington, Oregon, Colorado and now California), but Republicans - the ones who are fighting against statewide mail-in voting - were in favor of absentee ballots, because they got more votes from elderly shut-ins who would only vote absentee, than whatever small number of fraudulent absentee ballots. It was a win for them because more of their people voted. Now, with statewide mail-in voting, it's easier to vote. People will vote who couldn't be bothered to go to the polling place - or, were unable to go to the polling place because of strict ID requirements that they couldn't meet, or threats of cops being at polling places to investigate outstanding warrants, or whatever. The number of additional voters greatly overwhelms the number of potential fraudulent votes. If there's 100 new votes for every one fraudulent vote, there's no way the fraud can affect the outcome of the election. And it's still possible to stop most of those fraudulent votes - if my ballot got stolen out of my mailbox, I would contact the county and get a new ballot issued, or go vote in person, and my stolen mail-in ballot will be invalidated. If someone starts turning in a bunch of invalidated ballots, they can get arrested and charged with fraud. Republicans don't want people to vote, so they're against widespread mail-in voting, and they raise the spectre of voter fraud to try to get it stopped, but the same risk of voter fraud has always existed and they were in favor of it because it helped them. Voter fraud is practically nonexistent and it shouldn't be used as an excuse to make it harder to vote. This is not saying voter fraud isn't bad. It is. But it's trivial compared to voter suppression - stopping the "wrong" people from voting, which is what all those voter ID laws in red states are designed to do. The best way to eliminate voter fraud is to eliminate voting (copyright @chaski in a post yesterday on the previous page of this thread), which is what Republicans want to do, so let's not help them. We can make vote by mail safe and it will increase participation in our democracy.
Meanwhile, Democrats criticise requiring a photo ID, which is ridiculous. However, it's even more ridiculous that millions of Americans don't have one. Here in Uruguay, even the homeless have one and go to vote. Moreover, if you can't find it, you can go to vote anyway, because each polling station has a photo book as well.
Your second sentence explained why your first sentence is wrong. We don’t have a free and readily available national ID card that is used for a variety of functions in the US. Each state has their own rules regarding drivers licenses and state IDs. In some cases, each county has slightly different administrative policies around the state ID cards. If you’re a citizen of X and lose a national ID card, pricing who you say you are is almost always much easier. Because you’ve had a card since birth. Try losing a license in a move to another state. It can be a logistical nightmare to get a replacement. And in the State of Missouri, the ids do not comply with federal Real ID standards anyway due to the Republican legislature and Governor. Bottom line: if the govt does not make IDs readily accessible, you can’t require them to vote. If we want to go full national ID with quality biometric tech, etc then I’m all for voter ID. Even if you lose it and show up to the polls without it, they’d be able to confirm you are who you claim to be. But today # of voters deterred >>>>> fraud occurrences. Fraud isn’t a problem.
The bigger problem is that million of American don't have a valid ID card to vote. Just make it happen. And no biometric please, a side photo is enough.
How is this a "fact"? Of course, there is no "guarantee that the recipient will actually use it and send it back..." as there is no requirement that anyone vote. Requesting a mail-in ballot does not mean that someone will definitely vote. It means that they intend to vote and vote by mail. Can you provide verifiable proof that this is a widespread issue? There is no "guarantee," but the facts are that the things you raise are 1) federal crimes (interfering with the mail and voter impersonation are both crimes) 2) proven in the states that have widespread mail in voting, not really widespread issues. I am not sure why "online voting is even worse." Potentially, it could be worse, but that is not a definitive fact.
I don't claim it's widespread (I guess it's not). I claim that mail voting has a big risk, and on-site voting hasn't.
Again, what you claim is a 'risk' really is not much of a risk. Frankly, the biggest 'risk' of mail in voting is that the vote could be lost or delayed in delivery. Again, that happens, but is not a major risk. Hundreds of millions of pieces of mail are delivered each day and an infinitesimal percentage is lost.
The existence of the voter rolls make scaling election fraud essentially impossible. Rick Wilson explained how the GOP exploited the real mechanics of vote by mail in Florida. It's all about getting your voters to request their ballot and send it in - and you can build machinery around that. Mango suppressed his own mail in voting because he's an idiot.
To those on here talking about potential fraud.... If you use debit or credit cards, you're propping up a system that encourages fraud. I'm not saying you are causing fraud, just helping others do so by using these cards. Indeed, the only safe way is with cash. But you better have gotten that cash from a bank, otherwise you're helping a system engage in fraud. I'm not saying you personally are causing fraud, just helping a system where fraud could happen.... If....
But the source of that problem is that the barriers to securing an ID are inconsistent and unreasonably onerous for many people. And yes to biometric-compliant IDs. That ship already sailed for state IDs, so there is no further loss of privacy.
But cash props up the fraud of the NWO and the fed and Soros and fiat currency. I use goats and cannabis as my currencies to protect mah freedoms.
Cannabis Goats- another good band name. It would probably be a crappy jam-folk band, but would be a good band name.
In my head.... They would play late 80s/early 90s gangster rap classics using an upright base, ukelele, milk jugs, maybe a harp or glockenspiel. Debut album would be Straight out of Burlington with a girl named Ashlynn knitting an Infiniti scarf out of yarn spun from free trade yak hair. Vinyl only. Pressed on records made from recycled water bottles from festivals. And their merch booth would probably make more money from artisanal maple syrup and candle sales than their music.
There would probably be a semi-ironic hippy chick who plays either oboe or french horn when she's not singing.
My daughter bought some CBD something that she gives to our dog. Also, there's already a folk-rock band called The Mountain Goats based in Durham. TCG could be a Mountain Goats tribute band.
There was a "natural vet" on the radio last month, swearing up and down about the benefits of CBD for dogs. I take it regularly to sleep, but switched to Delta 8. I have not given either to my dog. However, she gets so scared at thunder or fireworks, I might try giving her CBD (dog formula). There was a decent Irish rock/folk band with the imaginative name of Goats Don't Shave. They used to play the local Irish fests each summer back in the 1990's.
Maybe because you don't know how it actually works, it seems like it can be gamed. I vote by mail and it's not a problem at all. 1) I have to complete the ballot, put in the envelope, seal and then sign the envelope over the seal. My signature on that envelope is checked at the election center to make sure it matches what they have on record. It is otherwise discarded. 2) If my neighbor decides to steal my ballot and I notice I have not received my ballot (we get our ballots weeks before the election), I can call up my election center and request a new one (They make sure it's me). They will invalidate the other. 3) If my neighbor gets caught tampering with my ballot, he will be in trouble you don't want to be in. Hardly worth the $ penalty and jail time just to try to sway an election of thousands and thousands by stealing a few votes The minor risk I've seen is children or relatives of the elderly trying to get them to vote a certain way, but then again it's a question of a few cases.