Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
This is the sewer pipe that runs through the entire Trump-Hannity conversation. Fraud is not the threat that the pair asserts (to a large viewing audience), and the reason they claim that it is such a threat is solely to advocate for changes that would make it harder for Democrats to vote.
And, I'll give you my personal two-cents....maybe not everyone should vote. What is the quality of the analysis and judgement of someone who couldn't figure out a way to vote live or by absentee ballot, and had no motivation to do either? I think one party benefits from collecting such votes, and it's pretty clear which one.
Not an uncommon opinion in our history. That's why we have a long history of suppressing voters. Someone decides that they possess some unique qualification by which to dispossess other citizens of their Constitutional rights. William Rehnquist for example.
I won't mistake you for a libertarian.
I'm not sure what you're implying (I could guess, though). My friend, there is a vast difference between voter suppression (bad) and allowing political operatives to shape an election through voter harvesting and similar practices. As it stands now, anyone with even a modicum of interest can vote, including by mail through absentee ballots. Universal mail-in voting introduces issues (even if small) not otherwise present. Is it a huge issue? Probably not, but I don't think that you need to be a racist or bigot to think it's not a great idea in the next presidential election.
I'm not in favor of ballot harvesting. I agree that is the weakest link in the chain. And it is a very weak link indeed. IIRC it was the crux of the issue with the 2018 election in North Carolina's 9th Congressional district.
I do know that both parties make every effort to find unmotivated voters and get them to vote. I see no problem there. I do not make value judgements about the worthiness of unmotivated voters that are subsequently motivated by mailers, doorknockers, text messages, robocalls, or church buses driving them to the polls.
Both parties have a history of voter suppression efforts. Rehnquist came to mind because I now live in Arizona. The history of your state and city may incline you to look at the Democrats. It wouldn't take much effort to find such examples.
I do strongly disagree with the idea that "not everyone should vote." Who am I to make that decision? If you're looking for implications, look there.
Do you really want your party to stop outreach efforts to unmotivated voters that might vote your way? You don't have to worry about me picketing your house. You are free to express your opinion.
Factually speaking, voting by mail is a nearly universal option by now. We're only talking about a very few states implementing it for the first time this year. It's all over but the shouting.
Not to get too far in the weeds but I believe only 10 states automatically mail out ballots. This is what I'm thinking about when I think of the controversy over mail-in voting. I don't think anyone (not even Trumpers) object to absentee voting, the key being the voter needs to request a ballot. That specific request goes a long way to ensuring the integrity of the process, or at least making any attempt at fraud more obvious. I simply respectfully disagree that requiring a voter to have to make the slightest effort to vote is an imposition....and eliminating that slight effort creates the fine line whether the vote expressed by such an individual is really his/her own, a/k/a voter harvesting.
There are 50 US states and in 42 of them, for this year, anyone who wants to vote by mail can do so.
Here are the details, according to CNN's political unit:
Eight states, in addition to Washington, DC, will be conducting a primarily vote-by-mail election in November (CA*, CO, DC*, HI, NV*, OR, UT, VT*, WA)
34 states allow voters to request a mail ballots with no excuse (AL*, AK, AR*, AZ, CT*, DE*, FL, GA, ID, IL*, IA*, KS, ME, MA*, MD, MI*, MN, MO*, MT, NE, NH*, NJ, NM, NC, ND, OH*, OK, PA, RI, SD, VA, WV*, WI, WY)
Eight states require an excuse to cast a ballot by mail (IN, KY, LA, MS, NY, SC, TN*, TX) Asterisks denote a change was made due to coronavirus.
This is a good place to insert the fact that each state governs its own election rules. So no one is actually talking about universal mail-in voting for the entire country, although you could imagine Democrats being supportive of the idea. Multiple states have changed election rules during the pandemic and made it easier to vote absentee, by mail...
There are 50 US states and in 42 of them, for this year, anyone who wants to vote by mail can do so.
Here are the details, according to CNN's political unit:
Eight states, in addition to Washington, DC, will be conducting a primarily vote-by-mail election in November (CA*, CO, DC*, HI, NV*, OR, UT, VT*, WA)
34 states allow voters to request a mail ballots with no excuse (AL*, AK, AR*, AZ, CT*, DE*, FL, GA, ID, IL*, IA*, KS, ME, MA*, MD, MI*, MN, MO*, MT, NE, NH*, NJ, NM, NC, ND, OH*, OK, PA, RI, SD, VA, WV*, WI, WY)
Eight states require an excuse to cast a ballot by mail (IN, KY, LA, MS, NY, SC, TN*, TX) Asterisks denote a change was made due to coronavirus.
This is a good place to insert the fact that each state governs its own election rules. So no one is actually talking about universal mail-in voting for the entire country, although you could imagine Democrats being supportive of the idea. Multiple states have changed election rules during the pandemic and made it easier to vote absentee, by mail...
Ballotopedia (because of course there is such a thing) adds another category of states that are automatically sending out applications to vote by mail. It includes a number of states that have been traditionally red for a while now. Such as Idaho, the Dakotas, and Nebraska.
If the no-excuse states are anything like Arizona then you can request permanent mail voting online, or anytime you renew your driver's license or car registration.
And, I'll give you my personal two-cents....maybe not everyone should vote. What is the quality of the analysis and judgement of someone who couldn't figure out a way to vote live or by absentee ballot, and had no motivation to do either? I think one party benefits from collecting such votes, and it's pretty clear which one.
Not an uncommon opinion in our history. That's why we have a long history of suppressing voters. Someone decides that they possess some unique qualification by which to dispossess other citizens of their Constitutional rights. William Rehnquist for example.
I won't mistake you for a libertarian.
I'm not sure what you're implying (I could guess, though). My friend, there is a vast difference between voter suppression (bad) and allowing political operatives to shape an election through voter harvesting and similar practices. As it stands now, anyone with even a modicum of interest can vote, including by mail through absentee ballots. Universal mail-in voting introduces issues (even if small) not otherwise present. Is it a huge issue? Probably not, but I don't think that you need to be a racist or bigot to think it's not a great idea in the next presidential election.
I'm not in favor of ballot harvesting. I agree that is the weakest link in the chain. And it is a very weak link indeed. IIRC it was the crux of the issue with the 2018 election in North Carolina's 9th Congressional district.
I do know that both parties make every effort to find unmotivated voters and get them to vote. I see no problem there. I do not make value judgements about the worthiness of unmotivated voters that are subsequently motivated by mailers, doorknockers, text messages, robocalls, or church buses driving them to the polls.
Both parties have a history of voter suppression efforts. Rehnquist came to mind because I now live in Arizona. The history of your state and city may incline you to look at the Democrats. It wouldn't take much effort to find such examples.
I do strongly disagree with the idea that "not everyone should vote." Who am I to make that decision? If you're looking for implications, look there.
Do you really want your party to stop outreach efforts to unmotivated voters that might vote your way? You don't have to worry about me picketing your house. You are free to express your opinion.
Factually speaking, voting by mail is a nearly universal option by now. We're only talking about a very few states implementing it for the first time this year. It's all over but the shouting.
I simply respectfully disagree that requiring a voter to have to make the slightest effort to vote is an imposition....and eliminating that slight effort creates the fine line whether the vote expressed by such an individual is really his/her own, a/k/a voter harvesting.
OK. I think I see the distinction you're making. I think we've worn this out pretty well.
Factually speaking, voting by mail is a nearly universal option by now. We're only talking about a very few states implementing it for the first time this year. ...
Not to get too far in the weeds but I believe only 10 states automatically mail out ballots. This is what I'm thinking about when I think of the controversy over mail-in voting. I don't think anyone (not even Trumpers) object to absentee voting, the key being the voter needs to request a ballot.
Huh. I would have thought it was casino union members finally outnumbering the ranchers and miners. Come to think of it though, one of our friends from San Francisco daze retired to Henderson.
It will be interesting to see where Arizona lands. There has been a lot of Californios moving here. Like me. But there were already demographic factors in play from all the immigrant laws waking up the Latino votes. Much like Pete Wilson did with prop 187.
Voting by mail is fine as long as you request the (absentee) ballot and each ballot is authenticated. It does not take that much effort to request an absentee ballot, but I hear from certain politicians that that is too much to ask. Mass mailing of ballots to addresses will open up the election to fraud by either side and cause the losing candidate to question the election results. Kind of what we have experienced over the past 3 1/2 years by the losing side in 2016! Both sides are already positioning themselves to dispute the results if they do not win and IMO the election will be very close and that the post election results will not be known for weeks or months based on how things are transpiring. There are requirements that must be met in order to vote based on citizenship, residency and at least 18 on the date of the election. One way or another the states need to validate this information & if they are unable to do so then the vote(s) should not be counted.
I moved to Washington ten years ago and was pleasantly surprised the first time a ballot magically appeared in my mail box. We had registered to vote when we got our WA drivers licenses. Since then we have routinely received our ballots, voted and return them by mail. Our signatures go on the outside where they can be easily screened when they get to their return destination. If the signature looks a little off or is omitted, we will be notified so that we can resolve it as instructed. To be honest I have never heard of a big scandal with respect to the "who" voted. I think I once heard that a poll worker sat on some returned ballots but that could have happened at an in person voting location.
Since this state has been voting by mail for so long, I doubt that it is equip to vote any other way. To block voting by mail, IMO, might take the vote away from Washington State for all practical purposes. So far, though, our Board of Elections website is not issuing alarms. The AG is part of the multi-state lawsuit. But our postal sorters have been taken and presumably destroyed especially near Seattle. I say presumably because it doesn't make sense to go so fast to make them unusable.
Donald Trump’s campaign failed to produce any evidence of vote-by-mail fraud in Pennsylvania after a federal judge ordered it do so, according to a 524-page court filing obtained by the Guardian.
The order came from US district judge Nicholas Ranjan, a Trump appointee, earlier this month amid a lawsuit in Pennsylvania over several voting policies. The Trump campaign is suing to block the widespread use of official ballot dropboxes in the state in locations other than an election office, and to allow poll watchers to work in counties other than the ones they live in.
The campaign also wants to block election officials from counting mail-in ballots if a voter forgets to put their mail-in ballot in a secrecy sleeve within the ballot return-envelope. The campaign argued in court that the current practices will lead to voter fraud without these changes.
Ranjan last week ordered the campaign to turn over its evidence of the prevalence of fraud in Pennsylvania, including fraud related to dropboxes and vote by mail. While the Trump campaign cited a handful of mail-in ballot fraud cases in its original complaint, the campaign turned over little evidence of pervasive fraud in its partially redacted response. Certain documents in the filing were designated confidential and withheld from the Guardian.
The campaign also offered no evidence of fraud specifically linked to dropboxes or mail-in ballots. The filing was first reported by Type Investigations. Several studies and investigations have shown that voter fraud is extremely rare.
John Powers, an attorney with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which is opposing the Trump campaign in the suit on behalf of civil rights groups, said the evidence the campaign produced was “paltry”.
“The campaign has not provided any meaningful evidence that voter fraud is a widespread problem in Pennsylvania or that there was any intentional misconduct in the state’s June primary election,” he said. “There’s certainly several explosive, salacious claims in the complaint that just aren’t borne out by the facts or what’s been produced. Based on what we’ve seen so far, it seems like a lot of hot air.”
The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the filing.
… Certain documents in the filing were designated confidential and withheld from the Guardian....
I just noticed this. How in the world is something that may take away people's rights or give them a virus that can kill them ever be designated confidential???? We deserve to see the entire portfolio of evidence for justifying the obstruction of safe voting. (Recall that some areas are removing voting locations in minority areas so it's not just postal sorting machines. It's also voting machines.)
The Russians and Chinese maybe getting busy w mails now especially in swing states and districts
Us can't win If trump wins may have new impeachment regarding USPS IF biden win trump may not forfeit and could be dragged out after US SUPREME COURTS interventions
Bernie has openly submitted that voting day should be a day off for everyone: a national holiday. That way, presumably, no one has to miss work to go and do their civic duty. Or else make voting day on a week-end... But that presumes the old, NORMAL situation, without covid, and people are MOSTLY voting in-person. ... In HI, we can use USPS (no stamp required) or drop the ballot (automatically mailed to me) off at a local non-postal drop-box. I just may do THAT, with uncle tRumpster playing these games. I registered to vote when I got my DL. In order to vote in the primary, I had to declare a party. CLOSED PRIMARY HERE. That fact sucks bugger-all.... My own preferred party is not listed--- though I know it is in many other States. (But among the "parties" listed is a silly "American Shoppers Party" and a local party representing "native Hawaiian values.") So, the State of Hawaii is telling me that my vote doesn't count, already---- unless "my" candidate belongs to the pre-approved parties. So, I'm a Democrat only to the extent that Bernie is. And Hawaii is so deep-Blue that I could vote for my mother or for a Martian I met on the street and it would make no difference. I've not been here yet for a General Election. I'm guessing that anyone of any party can vote for whomever on the ballot? Anyhow, mail-in is presumed and expected, unless you want to drop your ballot into the Drop Box. I think early voting in-person is allowed, if you want to make the extra effort. Voting should never be suppressed or made to be difficult. It ought to be as "easy as pie." Signatures are compared. Discrepancies ARE noted and there is a process to reconcile them. Voters are alerted and instructed about what to do. Needless to say, there are deadlines. Perhaps the States may respond to the tRumpster's games by compensating in some way that I cannot imagine, from where I sit?
From what I read, Hawaii is an OPEN PRIMARY state. "In Hawaii, any voter can participate in a political party's primary election regardless of the voter's partisan affiliation." https://ballotpedia.org/Primary_elections_in_Hawaii
The confusion is that, unlike most states, the Hawaiian government does not run the processes for selecting delegates to parties' conventions, where the party chooses its presidential candidate. "Hawaii does not conduct a presidential primary." https://elections.hawaii.gov/voters/voting-in-hawaii-guide/
Rather, the parties themselves run whatever process they choose. For the Democratic party, that's an election that the party opens only to registered Democrats. For the Republican party, that's a caucus (similarly closed), which they cancelled (in Dec. 2019). https://866ourvote.org/state-information/hawaii/
I guess their delegates were selected by party elders in a smoke filled room. I really don't know.
If your preferred party is not on the ballot, it must not have tried to get on, or failed to get 757 voters to sign its petition. It's not the state telling you that your vote doesn't count, it's your party telling you that it wasn't worth its effort to get the fewer than 1K signatures it needed to qualify. Covid was not a factor. "The deadline to qualify a political party for the 2020 Elections was Thursday, February 20, 2020, 4:30 pm. " (emphasis in original) https://elections.hawaii.gov/political-parties/qualified-political-parties/ https://elections.hawaii.gov/political-parties/qualification/
Why do you think the Democrats are pushing Cheat by Mail and Ballot Harvesting so hard?
Ignoring the obviously biased (misinformed) characterization of something that's been repeatedly addressed, there's a simple one word answer to the neutral question:
Why do you think the Democrats are pushing vote by mail? Health.
The Republican position seems to be a variant of the Jack Benny joke about being robbed: your vote or your life.
I say “Thank God” for the fact that we still have the electoral college and each state conducts polling independently of the federal government. Just imagine a “National Bureau of Elections” with an “Election General” appointed by Trump. Yes, folks will assert with some validity that the EC is unfair because rural / Ag states have more sway (as they do in the Senate). I imagine that was a compromise worked out in order to get all the previously independent states to sacrifice some sovereignty to a stronger federal government. If I lived in one of those states I’d argue that with more land to govern and being the bread-basket of the nation they deserve that extra sway. Cuts both ways. Depends where you happen to reside.
All this talk about letting the states go bankrupt. Hell, remember what we are: The United States of America. The states are the foundation, not some co-dependent of big daddy in DC. Help them rather than slamming them at every turn.
Yes, folks will assert with some validity that the EC is unfair because rural / Ag states have more sway (as they do in the Senate).
"More sway" in the Senate is a huge understatement. According to the latest data, California had a population of 39.9 million people while Wyoming had a population of 567,025 for the same two Senate seats per state: https://worldpopulationreview.com/states That means Wyoming's population is just 1.4% of California's but it has the same political power as California in the Senate. To translate that on a per capita basis, the average citizen of Wyoming has 71 times the political power or sway in the U.S. Senate than the average citizen of California. "More sway" or "more land" doesn't quite cover it. Worse still and lesser known, after 1929 the government put a cap on the number of representatives at 435 in the House of Representatives based on the 1910 census: https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/The-Permanent-Apportionment-Act-of-1929/ Since then there has been a massive shift from rural states to states like California but there is a limit on how many representatives the House can have. In practical terms, that means California is at risk of losing representatives even while its population is growing:https://qz.com/1506891/california-is-in-danger-of-losing-a-house-seat/ If the representation were adjusted for today's population, California would gain 13 members of the House: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_Rule In the U.S. land and land ownership in states have trumped people or population for far too long. And the notion that the Breadbasket should have more sway simply because of the land those states own is misguided when so much of our GDP is based on technology and services today that are produced outside the Breadbasket states.
Comments
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/03/heres-how-rare-in-person-voter-fraud-is/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/21/trumps-claim-hell-send-sheriffs-polling-places-is-revealing-lot-unintended-ways/
This is the sewer pipe that runs through the entire Trump-Hannity conversation. Fraud is not the threat that the pair asserts (to a large viewing audience), and the reason they claim that it is such a threat is solely to advocate for changes that would make it harder for Democrats to vote.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/19/politics/mail-in-vs-absentee-voting-2020-election/index.html
There are 50 US states and in 42 of them, for this year, anyone who wants to vote by mail can do so.
Here are the details, according to CNN's political unit:
Eight states, in addition to Washington, DC, will be conducting a primarily vote-by-mail election in November (CA*, CO, DC*, HI, NV*, OR, UT, VT*, WA)
34 states allow voters to request a mail ballots with no excuse (AL*, AK, AR*, AZ, CT*, DE*, FL, GA, ID, IL*, IA*, KS, ME, MA*, MD, MI*, MN, MO*, MT, NE, NH*, NJ, NM, NC, ND, OH*, OK, PA, RI, SD, VA, WV*, WI, WY)
Eight states require an excuse to cast a ballot by mail (IN, KY, LA, MS, NY, SC, TN*, TX)
Asterisks denote a change was made due to coronavirus.
This is a good place to insert the fact that each state governs its own election rules. So no one is actually talking about universal mail-in voting for the entire country, although you could imagine Democrats being supportive of the idea. Multiple states have changed election rules during the pandemic and made it easier to vote absentee, by mail...
If the no-excuse states are anything like Arizona then you can request permanent mail voting online, or anytime you renew your driver's license or car registration.
Totally agree. Just asking for trouble, from any side.
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37673797
"Five states—Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah—routinely conduct their elections almost entirely by mail."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-vote-by-mail-in-every-state-11597840923
As @WABAC wrote, as far as what's changed is concerned, it's not 10 states, but only four states (Calif., N.J., Nev., Vt.) plus the District of Columbia.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/11/us/politics/vote-by-mail-us-states.html
No matter what the level of fraud the Republicans introduce, I don't see Trump swinging California. Likewise, NJ and Vermont.
Admittedly, thanks to the California emmigration that some posters have been applauding, Nevada has become a swing state.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/08/15/donald-trump-slams-universal-mail-voting-few-states-planning/3333957001/
That's really all we're talking about, unless it's bragging rights for the national vote.
It will be interesting to see where Arizona lands. There has been a lot of Californios moving here. Like me. But there were already demographic factors in play from all the immigrant laws waking up the Latino votes. Much like Pete Wilson did with prop 187.
Both sides are already positioning themselves to dispute the results if they do not win and IMO the election will be very close and that the post election results will not be known for weeks or months based on how things are transpiring.
There are requirements that must be met in order to vote based on citizenship, residency and at least 18 on the date of the election. One way or another the states need to validate this information & if they are unable to do so then the vote(s) should not be counted.
Since this state has been voting by mail for so long, I doubt that it is equip to vote any other way. To block voting by mail, IMO, might take the vote away from Washington State for all practical purposes. So far, though, our Board of Elections website is not issuing alarms. The AG is part of the multi-state lawsuit. But our postal sorters have been taken and presumably destroyed especially near Seattle. I say presumably because it doesn't make sense to go so fast to make them unusable.
This article from a Washington radio news program described the removals. Their data point to Seattle area being a major target. (I live in Bellingham 90 mi away. I enquired yesterday and was told that Seattle is also where Bellingham mail is sorted.)
https://www.kuow.org/stories/nearly-half-of-mail-sorting-machines-in-seattle-area-already-dismantled
Below are excerpts from a current article in The Guardian:
In other words ords try to mail ballots asap and hope does not get lost. Look like majority of states are getting more prepared/ready
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/513098-how-six-key-swing-states-handle-voting-by-mail
The Russians and Chinese maybe getting busy w mails now especially in swing states and districts
Us can't win
If trump wins may have new impeachment regarding USPS
IF biden win trump may not forfeit and could be dragged out after US SUPREME COURTS interventions
https://ballotpedia.org/Primary_elections_in_Hawaii
See also Ninth Circuit Shields Hawaii Open Primaries
https://www.courthousenews.com/ninth-circuit-shields-hawaii-open-primaries/
The confusion is that, unlike most states, the Hawaiian government does not run the processes for selecting delegates to parties' conventions, where the party chooses its presidential candidate. "Hawaii does not conduct a presidential primary."
https://elections.hawaii.gov/voters/voting-in-hawaii-guide/
Rather, the parties themselves run whatever process they choose. For the Democratic party, that's an election that the party opens only to registered Democrats. For the Republican party, that's a caucus (similarly closed), which they cancelled (in Dec. 2019).
https://866ourvote.org/state-information/hawaii/
I guess their delegates were selected by party elders in a smoke filled room. I really don't know.
If your preferred party is not on the ballot, it must not have tried to get on, or failed to get 757 voters to sign its petition. It's not the state telling you that your vote doesn't count, it's your party telling you that it wasn't worth its effort to get the fewer than 1K signatures it needed to qualify. Covid was not a factor. "The deadline to qualify a political party for the 2020 Elections was Thursday, February 20, 2020, 4:30 pm. " (emphasis in original)
https://elections.hawaii.gov/political-parties/qualified-political-parties/
https://elections.hawaii.gov/political-parties/qualification/
Ignoring the obviously biased (misinformed) characterization of something that's been repeatedly addressed, there's a simple one word answer to the neutral question:
Why do you think the Democrats are pushing vote by mail?
Health.
The Republican position seems to be a variant of the Jack Benny joke about being robbed: your vote or your life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adam_(MP)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-vote-by-mail-explainer/explainer-fraud-is-rare-in-us-mail-in-voting-here-are-the-methods-that-prevent-it-idUSKBN2482SA
All this talk about letting the states go bankrupt. Hell, remember what we are: The United States of America. The states are the foundation, not some co-dependent of big daddy in DC. Help them rather than slamming them at every turn.
That means Wyoming's population is just 1.4% of California's but it has the same political power as California in the Senate. To translate that on a per capita basis, the average citizen of Wyoming has 71 times the political power or sway in the U.S. Senate than the average citizen of California. "More sway" or "more land" doesn't quite cover it.
Worse still and lesser known, after 1929 the government put a cap on the number of representatives at 435 in the House of Representatives based on the 1910 census: https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/The-Permanent-Apportionment-Act-of-1929/
Since then there has been a massive shift from rural states to states like California but there is a limit on how many representatives the House can have. In practical terms, that means California is at risk of losing representatives even while its population is growing:https://qz.com/1506891/california-is-in-danger-of-losing-a-house-seat/
If the representation were adjusted for today's population, California would gain 13 members of the House: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_Rule
In the U.S. land and land ownership in states have trumped people or population for far too long. And the notion that the Breadbasket should have more sway simply because of the land those states own is misguided when so much of our GDP is based on technology and services today that are produced outside the Breadbasket states.