[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

No, it doesn't. And thank you for your service!

However, when Willie Sutton was asked "Why do you rob banks?", his reply was "because that's where the money is."
Over the years, mail in voting was such a small percentage of the total vote that it wasn't worth the risk of committing voter fraud. With that percentage increasing greatly, I'm afraid it may become an easy target. I feel the same way about "early voting". Two or three days, yeah, OK, but 30 days? A lot can be revealed in 30 days prior to an election---perhaps a candidate might be charged with murder or rape. Sounds a little far fetched? Remember not to long ago a candidate could have (and IMHO should have) been charged with felony violation of the National Security Act. Once those early votes are cast, they can't be taken back. And 30 days gives plenty of time to run fraudulent votes through the system. I'm not saying it WILL happen, but is it worth the risk? We all know who benefits from the dead and repeat votes already.

No, we all don't know......who does benefit?

[Bucco]

What keeps circulating in my mind, remembering all the baseless charges over the past years, as relates to this phoney accusation....

If you don’t have anything nice or truthful to say, say it repeatedly.

[big guy]

Originally Posted by jacksonbrown

A nationwide effort is underway in at least 16 states to overturn restrictions on mail-in voting and third-party ballot harvesting. States where suits have been filed include the swing states of Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Florida.

click here for the article


If this is adjudicated in their favor then your ballot, which you lawfully and dutifully cast, can easily be compromised.

This article is too long and dreadfully verbose and confusing. Why should it be so hard to vote? It's a constitutional right! They know that there has been tampering with voting machines, there is less chance to tamper with voting by mail. It's been done since the civil war. Ballots are sent to every military personel in the US and abroad. No standing in line, no babysitter needed, no chance of being exposed to coronavirus. Those ballots are as safe as our Social Security checks, tax checks, personal checks, look at all the years we have paid bills by checks through the mail. We receive pay checks through the mail, transactions are carried on through the mail. Not safe? Baloney! A Democratic method of getting more votes? Double baloney!

There is evidence that demonstrates there is not a partisan advantage of voting by mail. While the availability of vote-by-mail ballots increases voter turnout by 1.9 to 2.4 percentage points, the voting method does not increase the share of turnout for either Democrats or Republicans, according to researchers.

A study by Stanford University’s Democracy and Polarization Lab compared counties with vote-by-mail programs to those without in the same state. The authors concluded that vote-by-mail programs have "no discernible effect on party vote shares or the partisan share of the electorate.”

Five states have all-mail elections: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. According to Ballotpedia, 29 states and DC allow voters to cast an absentee ballot for any reason, while 16 states require a valid excuse for requesting to mail in a ballot.

During the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic, concerns about the safety of in-person polling places have been raised for the 2020 federal election in November, as well as for summer primary elections. At least 40 people who voted at the Milwaukee polls in Wisconsin's Apr. 7, 2020 primary election have tested positive for coronavirus, raising concerns that voters were forced to put their health at risk to participate in the election.

On Apr. 24, 2020, the governors of New York and Kentucky signed executive orders requiring that every resident be sent an application for vote-by-mail ballots for the states’ summer elections.

[bfoglbird]

The constitution doesn't require proof of citizenship or to present an ID to vote! Just saying....
Maybe it should????

[Marvic 1]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

No, we all don't know......who does benefit?

The one's that are asking for mail in voting that who, somethings up their sleeves....

[TexaninVA]

Originally Posted by JimJohnson

Being retired Military, I voted absentee over my career. Was my vote suspicious and should it have been considered fraud?

There's a big difference between absentee ballots (i.e. you have to request one) vs mass mailouts of ballots. Apples v oranges ...

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

There's a big difference between absentee ballots (i.e. you have to request one) vs mass mailouts of ballots. Apples v oranges ...

1. With respect, please allow an explanation of the difference ??

2. Since since there was mail voting, no fraud has happened, although accusation have been leveled with never any substance, so what is the basis for rejecting a method to allow more Americans to vote ?

3. Back before Twitter, Facebook, etc., there was no system for mail in voting. Now we are told Facebook and Twitter are vital.....why label mail in voting as a bad thing ?

4. Why is more participation in our system a bad thing?

5. Why, since the established commission to investigate improper voting was disbanded after 5 months, and the claim of millions of immigrants has been proven to. Be totally false, are we still looking in the haystack ?

[Lindsyburnsy]

I agree that we should all be able to vote by mail. I for one have no desire to wait in long lines for who knows how long, when I can easily drop my ballot in the mail, and now with COVID 19, why on earth would you want to. I do however, believe the vote should be counted as long as it is postmarked before voting begins. My son lived overseas and he didn't get his ballot in time, even though he requested it way in advance. Michigan has already sent out a request form if you desire an absentee ballot. This seems to make much sense. Glad postage will also be included.
Voting by mail has been going on for years in some states and there hasn't been any reports of abuse, fraud, etc. There was a "voter fraud" commission set up a couple years ago and was dismantled because there was no evidence of fraud or abuse.

Originally Posted by mtdjed

I am not against mail in ballots. However, I think that there should be a requirement that they should be requested. That way a need is expressed, a current address is provided, and an opportunity to insure that the requester is properly registered can be verified.

Simply mailing to everybody creates an needless opportunity for confusion and abuse.

From the beginning of this country, voting has been a right that must be personally performed. Choosing not to vote is your decision. A vote should be private. Nobody should know my vote. All votes should be collected by the vote deadline. Votes delivered after the vote deadline should be nullified. Otherwise my vote is essentially known.

[Lindsyburnsy]

Your signature is your proof as long as it matches up with whatever form that was used to register to vote.

Originally Posted by bfoglbird

The constitution doesn't require proof of citizenship or to present an ID to vote! Just saying....
Maybe it should????

[Bucco]

Just for the record....

Seventeen states require voters to provide an excuse for voting by absentee ballot.

Twenty-eight states and the District of Columbia offer no-excuse absentee voting.

Five states have elections that are held by mail-in ballot.

These states have jurisdiction over voting, thus what is suggested be done and when to overhaul something that has been successful always ?

This is a proven, secure system, and the outcry is extremely....let’s say..suspicious and seems to be a “reason in advance”

[mtdjed]

1. With respect, please allow an explanation of the difference ??

A request for a absentee ballot shows a need, mass mailout goes to every registered voter but could end up in the wrong address.

2. Since since there was mail voting, no fraud has happened, although accusation have been leveled with never any substance, so what is the basis for rejecting a method to allow more Americans to vote ?

Your statement that no fraud has happened is simply wrong.

3. Back before Twitter, Facebook, etc., there was no system for mail in voting. Now we are told Facebook and Twitter are vital.....why label mail in voting as a bad thing ?

What does mail in voting have to do with Twitter or Facebook

4. Why is more participation in our system a bad thing?

More participation is not a bad thing if it is done correctly.

5. Why, since the established commission to investigate improper voting was disbanded after 5 months, and the claim of millions of immigrants has been proven to. Be totally false, are we still looking in the haystack ?

Properly done, mail in can be OK , but simply changing rules and mailing out ballots without a well planned system will lead to problems. Think of the possibilities. A ballot is mailed to a dead person. What happens to it? A ballot is mailed to the wrong address. What happens to it? The possibilities are endless.

In summary , more is not better if it is controlled.

[Marvic 1]

Originally Posted by Bucco

2. Since since there was mail voting, no fraud has happened, although accusation have been leveled with never any substance, so what is the basis for rejecting a method to allow more Americans to vote ?

My post keeps getting deleted by the Admin regarding my input into FRAUD with paper voting so I have to keep it satisfactory to their liking level....
So all I can say is no truth to YOUR OPINION on mail fraud, there are plenty of video explaining fraud by both sides of the aisle...
What right do we have at this time to test and conduct a National Election for President of the United States with a procedure that have not been proven to be reliable. Maybe later next year test this action of voting on a local level election before moving onto bigger national things..

[mtdjed]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

The entire brouhaha started when dozens of polling places in minority areas were shut down by state governments, and then minorities trying to get rides to areas away from their homes were not allowed into the other polling places. Some disabled people were instructed to NOT get on the bus that would take them to a distant polling area.

In some states, there were only 2-3 polling areas in an entire county to serve hundreds of thousands of people, because the GOVERNMENT shut down the other polling places ON Election Day.

Meanwhile, in states where absentee voting was allowed, voting took place anyway. And NO confirmed mail fraud AT ALL in those areas.

The red herring is the notion that mail fraud is even a thing with absentee voting. It isn't.

Can you provide the sites where only 2 or 3 polling areas are available to serve hundreds of thousand of people? I tried to google it and could not find such areas. I can imagine some areas such as Alaska, Montana etc where distance are so great and population low that would be best served by absentee voting.

You mistake absentee voting (which is a request for a ballot) with the mass mailing that was the topic. Absentee voting is absolutely OK.

My experience in Florida Voting is that I am asked to ID myself, which I do with my drivers license. It is swiped and matched to the voter registration list. If I am matched to the list i am given a ballot. I vote . Not a hard system. I just do not want some stray ballot arriving at some residence thru mass mailing to be used to negate my ballot.

[Clarinet]

For the many seasonal residents of the Villages a mail-in absentee ballot is essential. Otherwise we would be deprived of our right to vote.

[jacksonbrown]

"Your signature is your proof as long as it matches up with whatever form that was used to register to vote."

So, who (or what) determines if the signature "matches up"?

In my former state of residence, at the state level the (state) constitution mandates that the state elections office will be filled by appointment, which results in appointments from the current party of the current governor.

And, at the precinct level, the precinct judge (head of that precinct) AND a majority of the precinct judges had to be the same as the current party of the governor.

So, who (what) determines if the mail-in ballot is verifiable?

The current party in power.

As a county chairperson, on election day, I went from precinct to precinct, looking for irregularities. I personally witnessed the current Clerk Of Court delivering "voters" to exercise their constitutional right to vote. Of course, they were of the same party as the Clerk Of Court.

This is the same county where the brother of a county commissioner was sent to prison for "buying" votes.