Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

discogeek t1_iqvs06x wrote

Voting shouldn't be a "gotcha" game, not sure why Republicans are arguing we should look for reasons to reject ballots (other than the obvious "reject ballots from areas that have people that don't look like me").

68

itasteminty t1_iqvxoby wrote

Just remember, this is the same group that has now sued themselves half a dozen times over the election laws that they themselves had passed due to it not having their expected outcome.

They are suing because changing the law requires more than just a straight majority vote, and they don't have a supermajority in PA, so basically they don't have enough votes to just "change the law" again. So, their argument has been that they passed an unconstitutional law, and have been trying to use the courts to overturn the law they passed. So far, they have lost every legal challenge, Unfortunately we, the tax payers, are paying the bill for this idiocracy.

27

reverendsteveii t1_iqvxjjl wrote

I think you understand exactly why Republicans are looking for reasons to reject individual ballots. It's part of a larger effort by them to find a way to reject the concept of voting overall.

9

Disgruntled_Viking t1_iqw8hxs wrote

A scary percentage of them are just fine with someone who openly said he can just decertify election machines whenever he wants if he is governor.

7

SnooRevelations9889 t1_iqy0oe9 wrote

They (successfully) discourage their voters from voting by mail, then they try to reject as many vote-by-mail ballots as possible. The disenfranchise some of their own voters, but come out ahead.

That said: Please go ahead and vote by mail if that' s convenient for your.

Statistically, the number of ballots the R's can get thrown out are smaller than the number of people who wouldn't make it to the polls on election day, if they'd decided to vote in person.

2

randompittuser t1_iqy4fn2 wrote

Oh I’m sure why Republicans are doing it. Because their party is falling apart, and left to a majority vote, PA would be blue.

1

NewAlexandria t1_iqvvy1m wrote

PA's mail ballot system is horrible broken. A piece of mail goes to an address, and you sign it and then send it back as your proof of identity.

That's tragically easy to fake en-masse.

I shudder thinking that this was our mail-in ballot security for the past election, and that anyone defended this.

You should be worried about shitty people faking your ballot! GOP! Russia! Whoever you're worried about, in PA, they can bulk-fake votes.

Demand a secure process. Ballots are no longer a place for the honor system.

−25

djarvis77 t1_iqw0je6 wrote

It is not that easy to sign up.

It is not broken.

They can not "bulk-fake votes".

If you could prove any of these things you would have sources. And others attacking mail-in would have sources. You don't, they don't...because there are no sources that verify or prove any of your claims.

20

NewAlexandria t1_iqw0nmz wrote

ITT: seething over reality.

−13

turbodsm t1_iqw4wtr wrote

I think you think Mail in voting is new. Yet, other states have been doing this for decades at a much larger scale. Still waiting on the evidence that it's fraudulent.

14

NewAlexandria t1_iqw1k3f wrote

People don't like to hear about risks because the reality and consequences of those risks means something they cannot cope with.

−18

turbodsm t1_iqw4xz8 wrote

Driving is pretty risky too.

11

NewAlexandria t1_iqw5rmv wrote

sounds like stinky threat-talk

if a real 'argument', it's a red herring regardless, as individual casualty does not risk the electoral process

−4

AnxiousCat9782 t1_iqxsicy wrote

Republicans don't like to hear about mail in voting because trump said baaad! They can't cope if someone disagrees with the cult master. I introduced trump because the repub legislature thought is was just fine until he cried cheating! Cope.

7

NewAlexandria t1_ir0j83w wrote

I've been complaining about this for a couple decades, including and before the hanging chads. I'm anti-corruption, which sadly doesn't often give me the chance to plainly support any one party consistently. I'd need a military job if people want me to turn a blind eye to political corruption

0

discogeek t1_iqw0uyp wrote

>PA's mail ballot system is horrible broken. A piece of mail goes to an address, and you sign it and then send it back as your proof of identity.

This is incorrect. The voter's identity was already checked when they submitted their registration to vote. Pennsylvania does not require ID checks except the first time voting at a new location. The DoS and PennDOT and county boards of elections also have a system in place to check the ID already issued, as we aren't incompetent enough to suggest that only the physical card in your wallet is the only way the state can confirm your identity.

This argument is false and a red herring. There is nothing wrong with our mail ballot system except that it throws irrelevant barriers between people and their vote.

15

NewAlexandria t1_iqw23ur wrote

None of that relates to the problem described. Stop and accept that reality is different.

It exemplifies how so many people have been confused on this issue.

I know someone that just moved into the state. They were sent a mail-in ballot registration. All they have to do is write their signature and send it back.

DL / SSN-last-4 are not trivial to get, but they're available to 'hackers.'

This is not security

−4

discogeek t1_iqx97uu wrote

Just because you can make up scenarios in your mind doesn't mean it's reality.

What in the fucking world makes you think Harrisburg doesn't have access to your ID without you showing the physical card? They issued it, they have all the information on your application, they have your photo on file.

You're just making up bullshit to make a problem where there isn't one. All the information on the mail in ballot is simply to make things easier, Pennsylvania isn't a third world banana republic (although you may want to make it one) where any fake person can vote.

Get a grip on reality, you're not living in it.

9

NewAlexandria t1_ir0itic wrote

You clearly are not a security professional, nor have ever been near the space.

−2

chaqalaqalaqa t1_iqwpty6 wrote

To get one you have to sign up through a state website that verifies you based off of your social and drivers license or ID number.

How is that not as secure as some old person checking your signature when you vote ?

10

NewAlexandria t1_iqx1ggs wrote

You probably registered at some other time? That is not when my friend had to do upon moving.

also, the paper form, only asks for last-4 of the social, + DL number. That data is out there is some wants to buy it from the dark web. So that's how it's not secure enough, as compared to an in-person visit, or a live/video proof or credentials.

1

chaqalaqalaqa t1_iqx2z3r wrote

I just moved and has to re-register. Stop making stuff up.

And there’s no more secure system in the US. Socials are the closest we have to an identifier. What would your solution be?

9

Dr_Worm88 t1_iqxof4s wrote

I would like you to in great detail explain to me exactly how this will actually happen, please educate us all.

8

NewAlexandria t1_ir0jcte wrote

It's not a good faith request. You don't deserve new time.

You'll have to go reading through my comment history to find where I've answered similar in the past.

−2

Dr_Worm88 t1_ir0rjse wrote

I couldn’t find it. I found vague postings but nothing explaining exactly how you would mass fraudulently vote.

But you presented an argument without evidence and it can be dismissed without evidence.

Glad we cleared this up.

5

NewAlexandria t1_ir3dhfr wrote

shallow search. predictable. someone who took the wormpill and wormed?

1

Dr_Worm88 t1_ir3ioqn wrote

Coming from someone refusing to substantiate a claim.

Typical smooth brain.

1

sweedishchef8286 t1_iqxh3op wrote

You can sign in, but you also have to hope they don't compare signatures, the person you are trying to vote for already voted by mail or a number of other possibilities that would simply catch them.

7

NewAlexandria t1_ir0irbt wrote

I'm sure you already see that there would be a great many people that wouldn't have, or whose signatures could be so shakey that you could not be sure. Easier to fake if those were older people that have a known predisposition to lose motor skills due to geriatric diseases.

This security hole just writes itself. It's not hard. I've been complaining about these security issues for a long time, way before this election, and way before Bush's hanging-chads

−1

VenomB t1_iqvyb04 wrote

I'll never understand how people can't figure out how security holes work. It doesn't matter if it is abused or not, the fact remains that the procedure is insecure and there are far too many hands touching everything.

Mail-in is insecure, its fact. Compared to putting your vote down and submitting your ballot at the voting site yourself, its just a huge open hole security-wise. Calling it the honor system is perfect because it relies on assuming nobody would break the law or try to cheat. That's now how it should work. Nobody should even be able to. Otherwise, its just not secure.

−14

djarvis77 t1_iqw06yg wrote

> Mail-in is insecure, its fact.

Prove it.

12

NewAlexandria t1_iqw0xf5 wrote

proof by gestalt: if there was not actually an issue, there would be no basis for so many people to raise outcry. Lying/deluded people would have had other people tell them 'shut up idiot' before the numbers got this big.

Note: this isn't an actual proof. You're just have problems and you want the internet to therapy/educate you

0

alaska1415 t1_iqy5zkb wrote

You have to be a troll. That lots of dipshits are in a lather over something they don’t understand does not make it an issue.

That so many people are primed to believe that the ONLY way they could lose was by fraud is the reason so many beloved this.

4

NewAlexandria t1_ir0k523 wrote

> I've been complaining about this for a couple decades, including and before the hanging chads. I'm anti-corruption, which sadly doesn't often give me the chance to plainly support any one party consistently.

0

alaska1415 t1_ir1ho33 wrote

You’ve been complaining about nonsense for decades? Cool.

3

VenomB t1_iqw369g wrote

When you submit your ballot at the machine, its at the point of counting and should have no time or chance for other people to even touch it until its counted.

When you submit your ballot via mail, that ballot enters the mail system and follows a procedure that involves other people with access to manipulation or removal. Its really not that damn hard to figure out.

What path does the ballot take? If it isn't directly to a point where nobody but the submitter touches it, then its already insecure. That's how security works.

−7

alaska1415 t1_iqy5tot wrote

Ok then, count them when they’re received. Nothing about mail in voting requires they be stored for some amount of time.

1