There Is No Evidence That Voting By Mail Gives One Party An Advantage

Don't know where you found that, it's a little dated, a lot of things have happened since then. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/docs/pacei-voterfraudcases.pdf

 

True.

North Carolina GOP Operative Faces New Felony Charges That Allege Ballot Fraud

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/30/7468...s-new-felony-charges-that-allege-ballot-fraud

 

The republicans should use vote by mail to its advantage in every way the dems do. Then see how much the dems still want it.

 

You said the Election Assistance Commission stated millions of voter fraud

Your citation is a report by the Heritage foundation (noting that on it's cover it stated that there were a mere 1071 'proven' cases of fraud. which hardly equals millions.)

Please give me the EAC citation, please, or rephrase your allegation.


.

 

Republicans want it, too. it's a popular idea across parties.

 

THE absentee ballot. Think about how this works if she sends hers in, with her signature on outside of not one, but two envelopes, compared to two others the county/ state has on record, and your fraudulent ballots without her signature on those two envelopes. Oregon has already worked on this for over about twenty years.

 

There Is No Evidence That Voting By Mail Gives One Party An Advantage

I agree. But there is no doubt that it is easier to corrupt the vote if done by mail that if done in person in the traditional way. We do have some corruption in voting. It doesn't appear to cause any swings in the election results but there is no point in increasing it any further.

 

It's still a very bad idea.

 

Why, I've been voting by mail for years.

 

There is also no evidence that voting by mail is necessary.

 

Sigh, one again, how significant does it have to be to change the outcome of an election and that outcome have a serious repercussion? And I posted evidence to you which you ignored and did your simple dismissal of the facts. But I note you have now shifted to "we don't need election integrity because both sides cheat and it balances out" folly.

 

Why when half are clueless as to the issues and the candidates, why would you want them to go and vote when they are ignorant of those critical points?

 

I can't find your link, could you do me a favor and provide it again?

Thanks

 

Well, with that logic, let's just go down the list of all the conveniences we enjoy, and one by one, eliminate those conveniences because they are not absolutely necessary.

I've been voting by mail for several years. True, I could have drove to the poll, and waited in a line, and voted there.

But, at Home, I was able to sit down with the ballot, and research the candidates and ballot initiatives right there as I voted.

Sure, you can argue that one could have done that before, but I would have had to written down my preferences on the ballot on a piece of paper, and have taken that with me, and taken time off of work do it.

It is so much easier, and so much more fun, to do it as I am casting my vote, I have the ballot right in front of me, and the internet to help me make my selections, and I don't have to write everything down and carry it with me to the ballot box.

If it makes voting easier, more people will do it, and isn't more democracy better than less?

 

Now what would be really LOL is if a landslide of Republican votes arrive by mail that re elects Trump and gains majority in House and Senate.

There will be the biggest whine from Left since 2016 Election night media meltdown.

 

so, because YOU think people are 'ignorant' you are going to make it harder to vote?

Say, what if I said, as mayor, I think bluesguy is not smart enough to make good selections on a ballot, I'm going to place the ballot box outside the city limits, so he will have to drive a lot further to vote, and I'm hoping he will choose not to vote because it's more difficult.

You think that's funny? In Dodge City, Kansas, a small town with a majority Hispanic population, the city officials, republican controlled town, decided to move the town's only voting place outside the city limits, and at first, there were no buses that could take you there. Only after outcries from national attention, and the help of Rachel Maddow, did they finally make buses take people there. But why is it out there in the first place?

See, if they make it less convenient, less people will vote, that is to say, less minorities will vote, and that's good for republicans.

We know what the game you guys are playing is.

https://apnews.com/78f02d14245043aab005046ef4063c10

 

Yes, if more people vote and they vote for Trump, no one can question his win.

But, with gerrymandering, interstate cross check purging minorities from voter registration rolls, voter caging, limiting voting booths in poor neighborhoods, all tactics that the right are doing currently, his 'win' will not be seen as legitimate. Don't you want the vote to be fair and just?

If Trump wins the right way, instead of the wrong way, then no one can complain. I'm all for it.

 

The only fraudulent voting found in 2016 seams to be primarily Democrat votes in California, where the Dems gave drivers license to illegal aliens

 

When did absentee voting come into play? Civil War. Who instituted it? Republicans. Who was vehemently against it? Democrats.

Proof that neither party has an ideology other than, "what serves my team the best right now?"

I'd prefer to be represented by people who care about the entire country.

 

Illegals did not vote an any significant quantity to affect election outcomes.

But what does affect voting outcomes is making it hard for people to vote, which Republicans do, in spades, noting that before the advent of the rush to make 'voter Id' laws, there was NO evidence of fraud in any significance to affect outcomes. WE voted for decades without issue, but now, all of the sudden, it's an issue. I'll tell you why it's a issue, making voting harder demonstrates fewer votes in minorities. If there are fewer votes in minorities, then republicans chances of winning are greater,

https://www.lwv.org/newsroom/press-releases/2016-presidential-election-was-rigged

 

Yes, but during the civil war, the liberals were republicans. You really can't compare parties of over century ago with the parties of today.

But the question is, do we want to make voting easier, or more difficult?

Do we want more or less, democracy? Repubs seem to say no, dems say yes.

 

All these words, a still no demonstration of the necessity of voting by mail.

 

It's not hard for anyone to vote - even the disabled.

 

I've no objection whatsoever to absentee balloting.

The switch thing, though, is a myth.

https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/fea...1-the-myth-of-the-republican-democrat-switch/

 

First, don't think, know. Just good look at surveys of people quizzed on topical political subjects. Like do they even know the name of their Representative and two Senators. And didn't say anything about making it harder, this is about encouraging and desiring every person vote when we have lots of people not qualified to make an informed choice in their vote. That's folly if you think that makes for a better election and a better government.