Well it seems like some fairly simple fixes like not going all-in on mail-in vote or voter IDs would eliminate a lot of potential for fraud. But for some reason we have to be adamantly against this until we see extensive evidence of fraud. In other words, we have to wait until things are seriously screwed up and then fix them, rather than enact fairly simple preventive measures in the near future. Seems like that kind of approach has been criticized pretty thoroughly by yourself on a number of occasions.
If they look, they’ll see that you’re full of shit that it’s “one incident per page”. And even if it was (again, it isn’t) that’d still be 380+ incidents. Do you argue the accuracy of the report? If so, which one? I’m happy to start on Page 1 as they’re all sourced. Mail-in voting is riddled with fraud as it is - the report doesn’t even mention the 100k illegals registered to vote in PA, untold thousands in California, etc. - and fraught with potential abuses. Exactly as Trump correctly said. Again.
I’m against ALL voter fraud, everywhere, all of the time. I’ve listed examples of fraud that was perpetuated to help BOTH parties. If you want to secure our elections, you only need National Voter ID and in-person ballot casting. Can you think of another method that’s more secure?
I already have to show an ID when I go to vote. I already have my signature compared to the one on file. And that's been in three states.
Until some yahoo at the booth throws away or hides a bunch of ballots. I personally see no issues with Voter ID, as a picture ID is almost necessary in today's world. Yes, you have the few people that just won't get one and do everything in cash, etc. But do they vote? What demographics don't have any ID of any sort? We require an ID to get a gun from a gun shop, even though we have the 2nd Amendment guaranteeing our right to own a gun. I don't think that means the 15th Amendment should be immune from such discussions. EDIT: I said 18th Amendment, but duh, I mean the 15th Amendment.
I didn't say any were in error. I said they're from over 20+ years. In a nation of over 300 million, they do not indicate a huge problem. Hell, 3 of the first 4 are from the same incident.
I have no way of knowing that. But I do know that if this were the case, it would not be making a case against mail in. There are entire states that do mail in voting, and have for years.
Fall into a logical fallacy? Aha! Are not most touchdowns from passes only because we don't run the ball?!
Those states that do mail in voting does everyone do it that way or do they also have the option of going to a voting station? If so what is the break down of how many people mail in vs go to the voting both's?
Utah is just an example I know of, top of mind. I know they have mail-in only primaries this year. I think you have the option of voting in person or mail-in for most places. I don't know what people do more of. The reason I invoke Utah is because it is obviously not a very left leaning state and them having mail in voting has not changed either tendencies or relative turnout.
Care to guess? I get why you invoked Utah because you think I think this is a Dem vs Rep problem. For me I think either party can take advantage of this and it will cause all kinds of problems. That is just my opinion.
I'm not being coy, I really don't know. In VA we have the option for the primaries. I'm going in person and my wife is mailing it in. I suspect some are like me and would rather go in person if at all possible. What would change my mind was if I lived somewhere with not enough machines and huge lines. I have had to wait for hours in some places I lived. Others, I walk in and out. It closely corresponds to the relative wealth of the community, which is wrong.
