Mailboxes

[ExpressLane]

Once again, if you think I am a dementia patient, fine with me.

You are the guy having this give and take with me.

How ya doin'?

I.m trying to orient you to reality. It's considered good medical care.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I.m trying to orient you to reality. It's considered good medical care.

Ah, so you think you are a medical professional rather than an asshole.

I see.

I seriously doubt any medical professional would consider medical advice from you to be "good medical care."

But thanks anyway.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The question was has there ever been a case of proven significant fraud. So far your answer is no.

Assuming your story is true and not an Internet invention it shows the strength of the system, not a weakness. Resorting to an arrangement that convoluted can never enable a significant level of fraud yet that was the arrangement deemed workable.

No, but all mail-in balloting with weeks of time to vote = more potential for fraud. Just because we haven't discovered a case of large-scale fraud doesn't mean we should change how we do our elections where we increase the potential for fraud.

 

[domer76]

the security of a basic mailbox is not equal to election security.

Your horse is dead.
Your elephant is in the room.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

That's just hilarious.

My kids and I all live in five different states. Let's say we are all register to vote where we live. They get their mail-in ballots and send them to me so that I can submit them to our township's election authority, and hopefully influence this swing state's vote with them.

1. The ballots won't be alike; ballots are individualized for each locale's races.
2. The ballots will be rejected because the owners' are not registered to vote here.
3. The only thing your screed above got right is that even the attempt to submit false ballots is fraud.

Let's pretend that I am a desperate MAGAT. I learn when the ballots are mailed out because my friend is the postmaster at our tiny little post office (which is true btw). I go around and grab the ballots out of neighbors' mailboxes before they can get them. I fill them out for Trump and the rest of the MAGAT clown show candidates. I mail them all in. Now tell me how I can forge my neighbors' signatures on both envelopes, good enough to match their signatures in the registered voter books the township election authority has? You can't because I can't.

Another #StopTheLibsFromVoting fail.

You are an idiot. You'd all have to register to vote where you live and where the others in the conspiracy live. Thus, you'd receive for your local election 6 ballots, one for you and 5 for your kids at your address. You fed ex or whatever the kid's ballots to them. They fill them out, and mail them back to you. You submit 6 ballots locally for your election. The ballots are the correct ones and appear valid.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I guess if enough Democrats went through all that to cast extra votes...instead of losing to Joe Biden by over 7,000,000...it would have been closer to 6,999,997.

C'mon, TA. Mail in voting is fine. I used it for the first time during the epidemic and loved it. I will vote by mail from now on.

No, it's not. The potential for increased fraud is there. Also, elections should be held on a given day, maybe two, not over a period of weeks or even a month or more. The potential for lost, late, etc., ballots increases exponentially with mail-in balloting.

 

[evince]

One way people in a mail-in ballot election with weeks of voting can cast multiple ballots is simply register to vote in multiple states.

They then work with others doing the same thing such that the address--remember, the ballot goes to an address, not a person--they use is their co-conspirators. What the people in this conspiracy do is collect the ballots sent to those in other states locally and then re-mail them to the person they were intended to receive wherever they might be.

The person on the ballot, in some other state, fills it out and mails it back to their co-conspirator in the state of origin. That person then mails it in.

In the 2016 election there was a case of this being done between people in Ohio and Arizona where 24 people (between the two states) got ballots mailed to them and then voted in both states.

Yes, that's a small number but it is voter fraud, and it shows the weakness of mail-in ballot elections. There is ZERO control on the ballots. With weeks to operate in, this is possible. This sort of fraud is IMPOSSIBLE in a vote in person, ID required, election.

All fucking bullshit lies straight from Americas enemies

 

[evince]

No, it's not. The potential for increased fraud is there. Also, elections should be held on a given day, maybe two, not over a period of weeks or even a month or more. The potential for lost, late, etc., ballots increases exponentially with mail-in balloting.

There is no proof of any of that shit existing asshole

 

[T. A. Gardner]

All fucking bullshit lies straight from Americas enemies

They come straight from YOU? Okay, I can believe that.

 

[martin]

No, but all mail-in balloting with weeks of time to vote = more potential for fraud. Just because we haven't discovered a case of large-scale fraud doesn't mean we should change how we do our elections where we increase the potential for fraud.

Until you can factually show how that large scale fraud could occur the potential for it can’t be said to exist.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Until you can factually show how that large scale fraud could occur the potential for it can’t be said to exist.

Spoken like a true atheist. You want to wait until the cows have left the barn to shut the door. I on the other hand, want to shut and lock it before the cows can escape.

The potential is there. It exists. To what extent it has been exploited, we are uncertain. For example, the movie 2000 Mules, even if completely wrong, shows an exploit that could be occurring that can't occur in an all-vote-in-person with ID election. Ballot harvesting and drop boxes are ONLY a thing if you have all-mail-in balloting and weeks to over a month to vote.

 

[Ross Dolan]

No, it's not. The potential for increased fraud is there. Also, elections should be held on a given day, maybe two, not over a period of weeks or even a month or more. The potential for lost, late, etc., ballots increases exponentially with mail-in balloting.

Yeah, fewer people should be able to vote so the Republicans can win more elections.

I get it.

Most people here get it.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Yeah, fewer people should be able to vote so the Republicans can win more elections.

I get it.

Most people here get it.

Strawman argument. You fail.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Strawman argument. You fail.

I doubt that. Except for the MAGA morons here, everyone realizes that what you want to do is to make voting as hard as possible. Any moves to make it easier...you, and the Republican Party, will oppose.

So...if there is a fail (there doesn't have to be) it is on you, not moi.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I doubt that. Except for the MAGA morons here, everyone realizes that what you want to do is to make voting as hard as possible. Any moves to make it easier...you, and the Republican Party, will oppose.

So...if there is a fail (there doesn't have to be) it is on you, not moi.

What's so hard about showing up at a polling location once a year, maybe, and showing some ID in order to vote? Voting is an important civic duty isn't it? Isn't it something you should be willing to take a little time out of your schedule to do once or so a year for an hour or two? How hard is that? Are you really that inconvenienced by it, as if it were some grinding task and burden you need to have it made as simplistic and easy as possible rather than put in a minimum of effort?

 

[Ross Dolan]

What's so hard about showing up at a polling location once a year, maybe, and showing some ID in order to vote? Voting is an important civic duty isn't it? Isn't it something you should be willing to take a little time out of your schedule to do once or so a year for an hour or two? How hard is that? Are you really that inconvenienced by it, as if it were some grinding task and burden you need to have it made as simplistic and easy as possible rather than put in a minimum of effort?

For some people it is difficult...or an inconvenience. What is wrong with trying to give more options so that more people can vote...except that if more people vote, there is less chance of Republican scum being elected?

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

It's not the drop boxes themselves that is the concern.

It's the fact that the people using them are not voting for (R)s, right?

 

[martin]

Spoken like a true atheist. You want to wait until the cows have left the barn to shut the door. I on the other hand, want to shut and lock it before the cows can escape.

The potential is there. It exists. To what extent it has been exploited, we are uncertain. For example, the movie 2000 Mules, even if completely wrong, shows an exploit that could be occurring that can't occur in an all-vote-in-person with ID election. Ballot harvesting and drop boxes are ONLY a thing if you have all-mail-in balloting and weeks to over a month to vote.

Gibberish.

 

[Ross Dolan]

So the Democrats say there was "No voter fraud" and now you admit it was possible. Perhaps we should plug the areas that aren't secure. Voter ID and no mass mail in voting and monitored drop boxes only in limited locations.

I have no idea of what the Democrats do...and I certainly would not be an instrument of them doing whatever.

I AM NOT A DEMOCRAT...I am a registered Independent.

Get your shit together.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I doubt any Democrats or Republicans said there was NO voter fraud. There almost certainly is some voter fraud in every election...but it is negligible...and has no significant impact on the outcome. And most of it seems to have been perpetrated by Republicans, these days. (The ones who have been caught...have been Republicans.)

As for it being possible...well anything that has not been established as impossible....IS POSSIBLE. Of course it is possible. I would say, even likely. The Republicans are such a bunch of crooks and cheaters, I would be astonished if they did not cheat (fraudulently vote) in damn near every election.

I do not make a big thing of it, because I know it is too difficult to get election fraud (these days) days to have a significant impact. IT AIN'T GONNA CHANGE WHO WINS.



What you are actually saying is, "Let's make voting as difficult as possible so that the Republicans have even more of an advantage than they have because of the Constitution."

I vote NO to any ideas that limit mail-in voting...or drop boxes.

When ExcessivelyLame says "Perhaps we should plug the areas that aren't secure," she means no drop boxes or mail-in voting in areas that are not predominantly populated by whites. Which conveniently makes it more difficult for voters there to vote. Which party do you think those voters tend to favor?