Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

hachijuhachi t1_istmwyn wrote

Voting is a constitutional right and now we're playing games with people ballots because they weren't dated? Any reasonable person could tell you this is nothing more than disenfranchisement.

173

the_real_xuth t1_istpyl6 wrote

The biggest problem with this is that we don't have an affirmative right to vote. What we do have is a bunch of negative rights, mostly the right to not be discriminated against for x, y, and z for the purpose of voting. We do this because it is still relatively popular to discriminate based on other reasons (eg not allowing a person to vote while in prison for a felony). So people can use the fact that we don't have this affirmative right to vote to chip away at it to get much of the same effect as other forms of voter discrimination.

58

thenewtbaron t1_istspyo wrote

oh, it isn't dated ballots... it is a dated envelope. Hell, the date doesn't have to be anything official or even right to be accepted, that is how important the date is to the process.

No one is checking to to see it is an actual date, no one is checking your handwriting numbers against the little circles you fill in.

it doesn't add to election security.

45

hachijuhachi t1_istub3i wrote

Thank you. Details are important. Especially when they're ridiculous.

13

thenewtbaron t1_isufhbq wrote

The really fun part is that this got to court because of a "number of elderly democratic and republican voters" forgot to put the date on the envelope.

I hope those republican voters realize that these republicans has argued that we shouldn't count their votes.

9

No-Professional-1884 t1_isu4j1f wrote

I would more argue that it’s actively trying to keep legitimate votes from being counted.

8

hachijuhachi t1_isu84ge wrote

Helo me understand the difference between what I'm saying and what you're saying.

4

introspeck t1_isvxjui wrote

To implement the constitutional right, the state legislature must codify the rules. It's how it works in all 50 states. Pennsylvania's election laws were sane, deterring fraud while maintaining full access. But they were overridden egregiously "because covid". The election laws weren't changed by the legislature, they were just ignored where inconvenient to those running the elections... mostly in the major cities, which lean strongly toward one party.

−2

pocketbookashtray t1_isuxqcz wrote

Any reasonable person knows that in order to prevent fraud, rules must be set and established.

Now if we can only get a strong voter ID law, as most every other country has, maybe people will start having faith in the election process again.

−13

Aezon22 t1_isuzapc wrote

Voter ID is republican bullshit. PA dems offered a free voter ID a while ago, repubs shot it down. They wanted people to have to pay for it. Gee I wonder why? Meanwhile it’s illegal to make someone pay for one as it constitutes a poll tax. But of course the jackasses will keep screeching about it, making up shit about voter fraud, etc. it’s all just bullshit and you guys are dumb enough to fall for it.

13

pocketbookashtray t1_it9b31h wrote

Democrats are all about cheating at elections. From Tammany Hall to Daley’s Chicago to current Philadelphia, the Democrats have cheated in every election for 100 years. Sorry that you don’t know history.

0

hachijuhachi t1_isv45z7 wrote

Audits that were funded by the losing candidate concluded there was not fraud to a degree that would have had any effect on the outcome. Find a new line or find a new person to try it on.

11

pocketbookashtray t1_it9auif wrote

So fraud only matters to you if it flips the election. Kind of like drunk driving doesn’t matter until you run over a child.

1

hachijuhachi t1_it9gcg9 wrote

Nope. Your analogy only works if drunk driving literally didn’t have a meaningful outcome. You’re comparing drunk driving - something that injures and kills innocent people (10,000 deaths/year per NHTSA). Voter fraud has never been shown to impact the outcome of any recent U.S. election. It used to be rampant. It’s just not anymore. Technology and practices have improved to remedy what was once a real problem. It’s a poor analogy. One is a real problem. The other is a windmill that quixotic republicans are trying to convince us all is a giant.

1

pocketbookashtray t1_itcc248 wrote

That you think voter fraud isn’t rampant says all anyone needs to know about your intelligence.

1

hachijuhachi t1_itchw95 wrote

That’s all you got? Here I was hoping I was up against someone with some real evidence, something beyond a baseless claim. But then you switched gears to “you’re dumb” and now I’m honestly a little disappointed.

What I haven’t seen is any voter fraud with my own two eyes. So I gotta depend on reports of others. And see, the only others who claim that there is “rampant” voter fraud, even voter fraud that amounts to anything more than a handful of republicans who tried voting multiple times (shame they didn’t realize this really isn’t an effective way to impact the outcome of an election). Those who do claim that there was voter fraud have been the last president, who lost the election and has a reputation that, let’s just say, calls his credibility into some question, and those who support him.

Wouldn’t it be better for you guys to say “ok. You know what? We lost that one. It sucks. But let’s find someone else who can continue the things we liked about the last president (who lost) and leave some of the things we didn’t like behind?” Find a new standard bearer that more people will take seriously. All these voter fraud claims make the claimants look like sore losers.

Can’t you find me one reputable, unbiased report of rampant voter fraud? One?

1

insofarincogneato t1_isx0xud wrote

You know how required licensing only burdens working class and POC with owning firearms and doesn't actually stop violent crime? Why is voter ID supposed to stop voter fraud instead of disenfranchise voters when there's not any significant statistic of fraud?

1

pocketbookashtray t1_it556oj wrote

So you are in the POC are too stupid to be able to get an ID camp. Nice racist position.

−1

insofarincogneato t1_it5afxk wrote

The ID thing is about government agencies purposely making it difficult for working class people and folks who are marginalized by society due to hours of operation, location and price. separating working class from POC in what I said is a bad faith attempt to redirect and speaks volumes about what points you have to actually make. You didn't even address the main point about ID and licenses preventing crime or fraud.

With no real argument, what's left? You just don't care if it makes voting harder cause you buy into media bullshit and talking about race relations is nice and divisive. You can miss me with that shit, and you probably shouldn't assume someone's race on the Internet.

1

pocketbookashtray t1_it5dwdl wrote

We can agree that government agencies make life difficult for everyone. Less government is always a good thing. But you overstate the difficulty of getting an ID. There is not one piece of evidence that voter ID, anywhere in the world, has inhibited legal voting.

0

insofarincogneato t1_it5h8p5 wrote

If there's no problem getting an ID and there's no good evidence that voter fraud is a wide spread problem then I have to wonder why you're not questioning why it's such a huge party platform.

Why make it harder?

You know you can't prove a negative right? If people are inhibited from voting how would you be able to keep statistics on it? Site the source of a study done on it.

When government makes things harder, it's disproportionately harder on marginalized people. I just don't get why voter ID is the one "inconvenience" you're arguing for.

1

insofarincogneato t1_it5in2r wrote

How do you rationalize the requirements of ID? Should homeless people not get to vote because they don't have a legal address? Should we charge people for legal documents that are needed in order to exercise their rights?

All this kind of talk does is further politician's agenda to discredit and to influence folks to lose faith in our system. What do we do when Democrats take majority and we have to fight for even more strict requirements? Are we gonna take their word that it's in good faith? Cause I'm not really here for that.

1

pocketbookashtray t1_it9agib wrote

So every other civilized country is doing it wrong.

0

insofarincogneato t1_ita4znq wrote

What an argument... Is every other country doing gun licenses right? How is it that America is compared to other countries only when it's convenient?

1

CheckPlease54 t1_isxj4k6 wrote

Because you’ve never heard of fake IDs? It solves zero

1

pocketbookashtray t1_iszd9lz wrote

So you believe we should get rid of drivers licenses. Because, after all they can be faked.

1

CheckPlease54 t1_iszp9gk wrote

I’m just saying it’s not a full proof way to prevent things, just ask any college student.

1

MandoFett123456 OP t1_istgwe3 wrote

> The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with an unsuccessful Republican candidate for a judgeship in Pennsylvania and threw out a lower court's ruling that had allowed the counting of mail-in ballots in the race that he had sought to exclude because voters neglected to write the date on them.

The conservatives in the state and on the Supreme Court want to throw out your vote if you make one mistake

Edit: You can still register to vote, don’t let the GOP take away your rights and freedoms. Make a plan to vote. Make a plan for your friends and family to vote. Do it today and don’t delay https://vote.gov/register/pa/

Edit2: Early voting is also an option! https://www.vote.pa.gov/Voting-in-PA/pages/early-voting.aspx

106

IsTh1sNameTaken t1_istitb3 wrote

That is concerning. Hopefully this inspired thousands to vote in-person instead of by mail.

16

Disgruntled_Viking t1_isu2d3s wrote

I made that decision right after the last election. I knew it was going to be one of their moves and if Mastiano cheats his way in we will never have representation from PA again. He has said this much already.

15

the_real_xuth t1_istp0zk wrote

The only issue with that is that in many places, especially cities, there can be long lines to vote which will deter many potential voters. At the polling place I worked at on the morning of the 2020 presidential election there was an hour long wait to vote and it was that short because roughly 1/2 of the votes cast at that district were cast by mail.

12

BluCurry8 t1_istrvvb wrote

Not everyone can take off work and stand in lines for hours. Mail in ballots allow people access to the vote. Pennsylvania should go completely mail in like Washington state.

9

phillybookwoman t1_iswiimv wrote

I want to vote IN PERSON. The whole mail-in ballot issue were so bad the last time, I just want to do it in person.

1

BluCurry8 t1_isxi8rr wrote

I am not sure what you are talking about. I had zero issues with the mail in ballot. I received emails throughout the whole process tracking my ballot. Easy, no waiting, no trash being pushed at the polls.

1

[deleted] t1_isu43gj wrote

[deleted]

14

Wissahickonchicken t1_isudc6f wrote

The Court didn’t perform any analysis on PA’s election code in vacating the Third Circuit decision. It was strictly procedural, and not a ruling on the merits of the argument to count undated or wrongly dated ballots.

9

P3as_And_Carrots t1_isu5bjb wrote

And there it is. I was looking for the context. This is the kind of stuff the supreme court is supposed to do. Wonder why the lower courts didn’t go that route in the first place.

1

Atrocious_1 t1_isu5y93 wrote

Because the lower court understood how dumb a statute it is

13

P3as_And_Carrots t1_isu69xb wrote

I’ll be honest I don’t know much (or understand much) about law stuff, so I was genuinely curious. I guess it’s just something I’ll have to call my reps about (unfortunately, one of them is a 2020 election denier 😩).

4

Naive_Metal_3468 t1_ists7nr wrote

And this is why I always vote in person. I don’t trust the republicans.

12

Suggett123 t1_isvwwe7 wrote

Isn't there a postmark on the envelope, with a date?

2

pocketbookashtray t1_isuxxo2 wrote

Why is it always the Democrats that assume their followers are the ones too stupid to follow simple rules.

Perhaps they are right?

−7

HectorsMascara t1_istlae4 wrote

> Ritter argued that mail-in ballot rules improve election administration and deter fraud.

> Vacating the ruling does not change Ritter's loss in his race.

56

MandoFett123456 OP t1_istm6th wrote

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/exhaustive-fact-check-finds-little-evidence-of-voter-fraud-but-2020s-big-lie-lives-on

There is no voter fraud. It’s all made up by Trump and repeated by his lackey Dr. Oz. For some reason reality TV stars just love making it hard for working class folks in PA to vote

110

Desperate-Role9199 t1_iswnrio wrote

You just believe the first thing you read don't you. If you haven't noticed the media is biased as fuck and you're absolutely blind to what's actually going on if you don't think that there was cheating. I watched them stop counting ballots for no fucking reason, and there's video of those chicks running the same batches of ballots numerous times. Ntm all the videos of people stuffing the shit out of drop boxes. And another thing...since 2016 all I've heard is Dems like Hillary, and Stacy Abrams fucking swearing up and down that "trump" stole the election. Or "Kemp stole Georgia" so you my friend have proven to be a HYPOCRITE

−14

insofarincogneato t1_iswzh2p wrote

And who was behind releasing these videos? Remember, you said the media is biased as fuck.

Literally none of those things proves fraud. What, someone stopped counting on video? What of the numerous State's recounts with special poll workers?recounted ballots... How do you know what it was for, if they were counted twice or just double checked for accuracy? Putting ballots in a box... Do you even hear yourself? Why don't you volunteer as a poll worker since you have so little faith in the system?

We leftists said the electoral college should be abolished, not that the results of the election.. the actual number of votes weren't legitimate. If you're gonna talk shit about something, get it right 👍

6

CheckPlease54 t1_isxjejp wrote

Everything you’ve said has been easily debunked. You lost, grow up

2

JacoDaDon t1_isuw1kt wrote

To think something like voter fraud doesn’t exist when candidates run campaigns receiving donations of close to $2,000,000,000 is one of the most naive statements I’ve ever heard.

You got individuals and groups donating millions upon millions of dollars — Very powerful individuals, I might add.

If you don’t think that campaigns aren’t willing to pull out all the stops and explore every possible avenue both legal & illegal in order to secure a victory and reap the spoils that victory brings you need to come join us in the real world.

Despite the agreed upon talking points all your favorite partisan hack journalists obnoxiously repeat what you’ve been lead to believe is far from the truth.

−37

captrespect t1_isv5rje wrote

Until you have actual evidence of this you are just spouting paranoid conspiracy theories.

21

Advanced-Guard-4468 t1_isva7qn wrote

There was someone in Philly that was arrested and doing time for voter fraud? Is it enough to overturn an election? Who knows but to think it doesn't exist is pretty ignorant of what takes place.

−6

framistan12 t1_isw680x wrote

To expect that there would be absolutely zero fraud in an election where thousands or millions of votes are cast would be naive. To demand that we add entire layer of rules and procedures that everyone must follow to a tee in order to thwart that one guy in Philadelphia is asinine.

10

Advanced-Guard-4468 t1_iswza0d wrote

Yes, why put rules in place to prevent fraud, because none exists /s

That one person was responsible for hundreds of fraudulent ballots being cast. It wasn't just one or two.

−7

framistan12 t1_isxg4w5 wrote

You are referring to this? https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/former-us-congressman-and-philadelphia-political-operative-pleads-guilty-election-fraud

That was fraud all right, but that was an inside job by someone on the election board to stuff ballot boxes. That was not Gramma forgetting to write a date on her mail-in ballot.

3

Advanced-Guard-4468 t1_isxgnon wrote

If you look at my 1st post. Someone said voter fraud doesn't happen. It does and we should try to discourage it from happening. We never know about it until after the election.

−1

Tidusx145 t1_isv604a wrote

The jump from scuzzy campaign donations to voter fraud is a huge jump. Mostly because it crosses the line from legal yet unethical to illegal and unethical. Not impossible but extremely unlikely without some actual evidence.

21

BluCurry8 t1_istriy6 wrote

Deter fraud? The date in question is on the outside envelope, there is a date on the inside ballot already. It is a duplication. Stand corrected. It is only on the postal envelope and the signature is to confirm the voter declaration. I still do not see how this deters fraud. It is no different than signing in at the polling place (which does not make any declaration)

27

Ukieboar t1_isttc4o wrote

There's a date on the inside ballot? Are you sure?

The date on the outer envelope - the only date on the return portion of the ballot may be immaterial, because the Voter Registration office date & time stamps returned ballots. If the ballot is received by the Voter Reg office by the predetermined deadline, it should count - if the date is the only "issue"/not taking into account other factors.

16

BluCurry8 t1_isu14xf wrote

I am looking at my ballot right now and you are correct. Also, what you are signing and dating is the voters declaration not the ballot itself. So it is really not pertinent to the ballot at all. It is just to make sure what you can and cannot do after submitting the mail in ballot.

11

Canopenerdude t1_isu7nr0 wrote

> Vacating the ruling does not change Ritter's loss in his race.

I love this part. Dude's just a sore loser but he's going to create precedent to disenfranchise people over his own ego.

17

crazypants9 t1_istpbp1 wrote

Look up voter fraud and 99% of it is Republicans

24

introspeck t1_isvxxrq wrote

Nonsense. Boss Tweed would like a word with you.

1

rubikscanopener t1_isu57ut wrote

Sadly not true. Both parties have engaged in a wide variety of voter fraud over the years. Don't trust either party. They only care about themselves.

−22

BluCurry8 t1_isuap60 wrote

Anyone can commit fraud, republicans use it as a tool to disenfranchise voters as well as committing the fraud themselves.

2

crazypants9 t1_isubnul wrote

They are fucking Americans every day right in front of you. They are so pro life they want to cut Medicare and Medicaid and social security. And if your wife or daughter will die without an abortion, we’ll that’s the price of freedom. Like all the dead children’s bodies they walk over. If you ever wondered how Germans got taken by the Nazis, it started like this. Even the antisemitism is being screamed. Fuck the GOP before they fuck us all.

−4

JacoDaDon t1_isuwk1d wrote

Biden’s added $4,000,000,000,000 to the national debt. Thanks to Democrats their ain’t gonna be any Medicaid, Medicare or SS anyway.

−11

crazypants9 t1_isuztre wrote

Republicans gave billions to the most wealthy among us in tax breaks. What’re does that money come from? Get your head out of your ass.

5

CheckPlease54 t1_isxiu98 wrote

Trump spent more than any person in history in four years.

1

JacoDaDon t1_isymr2e wrote

Umm remember Covid 😂

1

CheckPlease54 t1_iszp4e6 wrote

Umm, he spiked the deficit before that.

2

JacoDaDon t1_it30arp wrote

2016, 2017, 2018 & 2019, all 4 years he was in office, the deficit under Trump was lower than it was under Obama in 2009, 2010, 2011 & 2012. Since taking office in 2020, Biden has tripled the deficit in comparison to Trump. Not to mention, just look around you. What are YOU experiencing? I’m experiencing the highest fuel prices & highest inflation I’ve paid in my life as a 43 year old born in America. That’s a fact. When Trump was in office, I could not say the same thing.

Basically it goes like this . . . if you’re in your 20s and not a democrat—You don’t have a heart, but if you’re in your 30s and not a Republican—You don’t have a brain!

1

CheckPlease54 t1_it3jor0 wrote

Obama lowered the deficit from a GW high of 1.8 trillion to 600 billion. Over a trillion drop. Trump immediately spiked the deficit, and you’re just leaving off Trumps last two years…lol

Biden didn’t triple any deficit. You’re lying

Trumps tariffs and massive debt spending caused inflation when demand came back under Biden. Demand on lack of supply is a world wide problem. You’re take is naive.

2

JacoDaDon t1_it4kau4 wrote

Trump was not POTUS in 20 or 21. I linked the deficit numbers. You just won’t look. You’re a classic, “if it’s good my guy did it. If it’s bad the last guy did it” guy.

1

CheckPlease54 t1_it4vej9 wrote

Actually, his budget runs through 9 months of 2021, and he was President until January 2021

Nothing you said is correct

I actually look, and don’t ignore Trump’s massive debt spending and deficits.

1

CheckPlease54 t1_it537wy wrote

Trump didn’t take office until January 2017. You can’t do years

2

witqueen t1_isuwtm9 wrote

Just an FYI. if you were sent a mail in ballot, and want to vote in person, you MUST present your mail in ballot so they can determine you aren't voting twice.

24

framistan12 t1_isw70ag wrote

You can vote provisionally in person without your mail-in ballot. This is useful, for example, when the tracking fails to show your mailed ballot being counted. Explain your situation at the polling place, and they'll set you up with a ballot. That way you won't be flagged for attempting to vote twice fraudulently. The election board will sort it out.

https://www.vote.pa.gov/Voting-in-PA/Pages/Voting-by-Provisional-Ballot.aspx

7

Ellis4Life t1_isto5ci wrote

Why did Kegan side with the conservative justices on this one? On SCOTUSblog I read only Jackson and Sotomayor dissented on this.

12

Canopenerdude t1_isu7hfa wrote

Probably because it is a law on-the-books, making it a bit more complicated than initially it might seem.

It's an incredibly stupid law and those ballots should be counted, but I can understand not wanting to wipe the law out, especially given how polarizing this one is.

9

Finrodsrod t1_istyuvp wrote

If the ballot is postmarked before the election, then why does a date need to be written on it? What difference does it make if I write October 18th, and send it the day before election day having it post-marked?

12

syndicatecomplex t1_istuvae wrote

The only way they can win is to cheat. VOTE THEM OUT. They stand for billionaires and oligarchs, NOT Pennsylvanians.

6

cowboyjosh2010 t1_istx0qt wrote

FWIW the SCOTUS ruling does not forbid the counting of mailed-in ballots that are missing a date on the outer envelope. It instead states that election offices will now not be required to count such ballots. I believe it will now be at the discretion of each county whether undated mailed-in ballots will be counted or not.

I am so used to the onerous rules for applying for an antlerless deer license as a hunter that the notion that I have to write the date on my mailed-in ballot envelope seems like a nothing burger, but I do realize though that this requirement does absolutely NOTHING to increase security for elections, so all the same: I realize it's a loss for improving access to voting.

5

Cold-Resolve1923 t1_isvgbro wrote

I miss the olld days of getting a doe license. Now you need a lawyer to figure it out

1

cowboyjosh2010 t1_isvjahx wrote

I really don't think it's all that bad today. It's no more complicated than it ever was before (back when I started hunting 20 or so years ago), you just have more licenses you can buy now. What would be ideal is if the PA legislature would vote to allow the PGC to sell and issue antlerless licenses the same way that almost every other hunting/fishing license is sold: through an online portal. That'd really simplify things. But I digress and go back to still standing by it that this rule for ballots is both not that hard to follow and also completely useless if the goal is extra security around voting.

3

Cold-Resolve1923 t1_isvjlx4 wrote

On line portal,,AMEN..Oh, I started in 1967. Single shot 12ga while dad used the 3030 he bought after the war

2

xImmortal3333 t1_isu9rnh wrote

Just wait till republicans come for gay marriage and birth control after November, this is nothing

5

axeville t1_isu9k5r wrote

I'm so fired up to vote I'll probably vote multiple times /s

2

topredder t1_isv4l17 wrote

It’s a good thing a put the date on my mail in ballot

2

Lawmonger t1_isx8wzy wrote

Ballots with any date are counted, whether they're future or past dates, but not undated ballots. How immaterial is that?

2

Marqueso-burrito t1_isu6xjq wrote

I think what people are forgetting is that countries restructure themselves every 200 years or so, and the last time we had a major scale restructuring was back in the 1800s. In the next 40 years (as long as we’re still here) I could see a revolution going down. But hey I’m just a kid ya know

1

introspeck t1_isvy54h wrote

There also appear to be 80-year cycles - four generations. Check out the book The Fourth Turning.

2

Fstmiddy t1_isua12h wrote

This is grossly misleading.

1

fdrlbj t1_isufsht wrote

Of course they do….

1

Alternative-Flan2869 t1_isuqjbx wrote

Of course - scotus is political, biased and against voting rights protection.

1

EveArgent t1_isuxb71 wrote

Shocker. Republican supreme court majority sides with a republican. I'm glad he still lost though, makes me laugh to know he must still be so butt hurt.

1

hashtagbob60 t1_isxlqkd wrote

Would you have thought otherwise? Now where are those 11,780 votes trump needed?

1

Wolfpak0ne t1_isui1ce wrote

It is comical to drop in here and read all the comments of Liberals losing there shit over every single political article. Cracks me up. You can carry on now.

0

CheckPlease54 t1_isxin1n wrote

This is the right’s entire personality, and it’s pathetic

0

Jimusmc t1_it4qq1h wrote

Good. less dem cheating the better

0

trebordet t1_istuw56 wrote

The Supreme Court has a 6-3 insurrectionist, fascist majority.

−3

Jimusmc t1_it4qoiq wrote

and you have clear mental issues that need addressed.

1

trebordet t1_it4qup2 wrote

>and you have clear loyalty issues that need addressed.

1

Jimusmc t1_it4r7ub wrote

good job showing those issues.. please do seek help.

1

thunderGunXprezz t1_istmcqe wrote

Can we just switch to online voting already?

−8

psychcaptain t1_istnpjb wrote

That.... Is not advisable. At least according to almost all the experts that have gone on the record about it.

32

heili t1_isugvio wrote

People think Russian bots are already influencing our elections and then someone literally suggests internet voting.

2

BluCurry8 t1_isty1xw wrote

It could be if they set up a private network. I pay taxes online.

−6

psychcaptain t1_istyn1s wrote

Money is trackable and can be accounted for. How you voted cannot, because it's ultimately a secret ballot.

Having mail in ballot, or an in person ballot leaves a paper trail.

4

BluCurry8 t1_istz5hj wrote

Ah. BS. Everything online is trackable. Just because you do not understand security does not mean it does not exist. 99% of all business is done on line. As far as a secret ballot, we’ll that is questionable. All paper ballots have your information assign and in person you are logged into the rolls at a specific time. I am not so sure why we need a supposed secret ballot. It makes integrity at the polls even trickier.

−6

PA_Irredentist t1_isu2gw8 wrote

We need a secret ballot because anything else opens the gates to corruption: your employer or landlord would coerce you to vote a certain way, or people would sell their votes. Those are the reasons we moved to a secret ballot in the first place.

3

psychcaptain t1_isu7t9l wrote

Indeed. The paper ballot is a way for the person the verify how they voted when it's scanned into a machine (which should be air gapped) and allows for a recount. An online system would either have no way for you to verify your vote (so you can't verify that the vote went through correctly) or it would, be an open to tracking by others.

1

BluCurry8 t1_isubddg wrote

Of course you could verify your vote. I can verified the amount of taxes I have paid on my quarterly estimates I have submitted. I can also download a receipt and get email notification.

−2

psychcaptain t1_isuf7ad wrote

Really? Who would you call to tell you who you voted for last election?

There are no records of who you voted for. None. There are only records that you voted.

And when you voted, you for a paper ballot, which you would verify is correct, and then it gets counted. That's it. It's a secret ballot. No one gets to know how you voted, except you. Which is, again the problem with online services. No air gap which means altering your vote would be possible in a way a paper ballot makes it impossible. You have no way of knowing what the machine at the other side received, or whether someone highjacked your vote.

4

BluCurry8 t1_isu9pmh wrote

In this day and age, it is already determined if you are party affiliated. So, now tell me how a secret ballot stops someone from coercion? Even knowing a party affiliation how does that stop coercion? It doesn’t. Companies ask their employees to give to their PACs They do not require it, but they certainly try to influence their employees. Like I said, not seeing the benefits you seem to think we get with a secret ballot. It can still be private, just like your bank statements. You would then be able to confirm your ballot was counted and included in the final count with read only access after you submitted your ballot.

1

PA_Irredentist t1_isuo2mv wrote

I think the discrepancy here are that there are very specific types of trust we want to discourage in voting: specifically, trust between bad actors or between bad actors and potential victims.

The secret ballot, by definition, just requires that no one except the voter can possibly know who they voted. It doesn't prevent coercion for party registration or PAC funding - those are separate issues which have their own ins and outs.

You argue in favor of a private - not secret - ballot. I hear you and understand the value you find in that. It would be great for cases when there are no bad actors AND when people don't trust their votes are being counted accurately.

However, a private ballot like you endorse is completely open to coercion and corruption, even with read-only access. Imagine that a random person honestly offered to refund me for a debit card purchase of $20 at Wal-Mart. In the private world you're describing, Wal-Mart, my bank, and I know that I did. However, I can still validate it by showing the random person my private bank account statement.

In the current, secret ballot system we have, no one would rationally offer money for my vote because there is no legal way of validating the transaction. Even if I do as they wish, they have no way of knowing that I'm not lying through my teeth. In your private ballot system, I can use my read-only access to show the candidate, a party leader, my boss, or landlord that I completed my end of the bargain. Now, they can establish trust: they can use my ability to access that data to confirm that I voted the way they wished. As a result, they can coerce or bribe you or I to vote the way they wish.

1

reverendsteveii t1_isu3sc0 wrote

>Everything online is trackable

Explain how, and why online fraud is still in the hundreds of billions of dollars a year if the solution is simply "track it, everything online is trackable"

2

psychcaptain t1_isu7z9v wrote

I mean, in theory, I think we could, but the cost would probably be far greater than returns.

That being said, happy to see us go after the larger fish when it's feasible.

2

BluCurry8 t1_isubu28 wrote

How much do we spend on elections every years? Billions. We should put a tax on every political donation and PAC to pay for secure elections. We have the means, but of course why would we invest money on decent infrastructure!

0

BluCurry8 t1_isu8pki wrote

Everything is trackable, that does not mean that companies investigate fraud all the way to putting a person in jail. Most of it is written off. That does not mean that they can’t track it, it means the chose not to pay for resources to do the investigations. They are making a decision to write off bad debt rather than pay the costs to track it down and have it prosecuted. Happens all the time, especially in insurance. They just pass the costs off to other customers. Most of these crimes require accountants and IT professionals. How many police departments hire accountants and IT professionals along with the computer equipment they need?

−1

reverendsteveii t1_isubtaq wrote

Ah, so you've no expertise at all and you're guessing based on how you think the world works. Okay, have a great day!

2

BluCurry8 t1_isudpp7 wrote

????? I’ve worked in IT for the last 23 years and managed a infrastructure and Network Security program, but sure you do not like my easily verifiable answer and therefore try to tell me I do not know what I am talking about!!! Use Google and do some research.

−1

trs21219 t1_isufq04 wrote

You may be in IT, but I'm gonna guess you've never defended a mission critical distributed application / network against every major nation state attacker all at once.

If you implement a vote online system, that's exactly what you would have; China, Russia, Hell even some of our supposed allies all trying to hack their way in at the same time to skew the elections in their favor. And you may know after the fact that there was a hack, but good luck finding what they changed once they have root level access to your network.

Lastly the government is generally terrible at everything they implement technology wise. They couldn't even launch a healthcare website without months of issues and overrun budgets. I don't trust them to develop and secure un-auditable digital systems that determine who is in power.

Voting online is just an all around terrible idea.

2

psychcaptain t1_isu84nn wrote

https://youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs&feature=share&utm_source=EKLEiJECCKjOmKnC5IiRIQ

Tom did a video on this a few years ago.

2

BluCurry8 t1_isucmqc wrote

Are your passwords anonymous? Yes. They are converted to ******* when you input them, so Tom does not understand the basics of security. Like I said it can be done. And it probably will be someday. We still have a culture of people who do not understand technology they use everyday.

−1

reverendsteveii t1_isu3lky wrote

Software engineer checking in here: no. God no. Take that idea a hundred miles out into the desert, bury it ten feet deep in the ground, then launch an orbital nuclear bombardment at it.

Edit: if you're about to tell me that I'm wrong and this is easy, I recommend you consult the opinion of every other actual developer in this thread. You'd be hard pressed to find an engineer who would trust their elections to modern software capabilities and practices, and the reason is because it will be vulnerable. Not maybe, not eventually, but to a determined and well-funded actor it will be critically vulnerable from day one and it will remain critically vulnerable for the entire lifetime of the system.

11

trs21219 t1_isu808x wrote

Another Software Engineer here. Completely agree. Paper ballots with digital scanning is the best way. Anything else can and will be hacked.

Also love the XKCD reference there.

8

BluCurry8 t1_isucvjc wrote

Anything can be hacked. Even paper ballots that are scanned. At the end of the day you are still using software to tabulate the outcome. Ughhhhh

1

trs21219 t1_isud933 wrote

On a small scale sure. But if the tabulators are only able to push data, not allow incoming connections, and you have an auditable paper trail with a certain percentage of machines being randomly audited you can be pretty damn secure while still having fast results.

Way less attack vectors than online voting though.

2

heili t1_isuh23m wrote

> and you have an auditable paper trail

The voting machine should print me a receipt of my votes as it recorded them.

1

BluCurry8 t1_isud11f wrote

Ok so basically you are saying, your experience with software development is so bad that you cannot build a secure system.

−2

heili t1_isuhf0w wrote

I am also a software engineer, and I agree with every other software engineer in here. Internet/Online voting is a terrible idea.

There is no such thing as invulnerable code. There are no networks anywhere connected to the internet that cannot be hacked. Shit hackers have even managed to cross air gaps to exploit systems.

I am absolutely saying that no way in hell would I be able to code an unhackable, uncheatable, unbreakable software solution to allow online voting, and any software engineer who tells you they can is either lying or not a software engineer.

5

reverendsteveii t1_isum27f wrote

When every other software engineer you ever meet shares this opinion with me, you're gonna wanna revisit this comment

4

Sefkeetlee t1_istnke8 wrote

Not questioning the content of the post, but OP you post an awful lot in multiple states’ subs solely about political issues. I’m sure you’ll be a regular poster in r/Pennsylvania after the election cycle ends…

−12

IsTh1sNameTaken t1_istgs7b wrote

👍👍

−55

MandoFett123456 OP t1_isth2x6 wrote

No it’s not good. Republicans (especially lackeys like Dr. Oz) want to make it harder for average folks to vote

23

SamShephardsMustache t1_istjh0j wrote

They're active in r/conservative...tells ya all you need to know.

21

Sefkeetlee t1_istqb73 wrote

So is OP

“Fully agree. No more voting for RINOs like Kemp. Vote for Hazel!”

0

ho_merjpimpson t1_isu8jxe wrote

as far as i can tell, what you linked to has nothing to do with OP or anyone i can see in this thread.

4

Sefkeetlee t1_isu94bx wrote

OP deleted the comment, the quote was a comment they posted on r/conservative

−2

[deleted] t1_istjvs5 wrote

[removed]

18

IsTh1sNameTaken t1_istk6qg wrote

I don't want to take away your vote, my hope is that as many people will vote in-person as possible instead of mailing.

−33

PaApprazer t1_istmm0p wrote

How about those without your mobility? Can they use mail in or are you taking away their right to vote?

16

ROTLA t1_istljfe wrote

What’s the difference? And you can start pulling out a few instances of scattered issues with mail in ballots and my counter will be the mountains of evidence of election interference by Republicans, including Jan 6.

13

thenurgler t1_istql6s wrote

The difference is that voting in person makes voter suppression a lot easier.

9

No-Setting9690 t1_istqj7m wrote

There has NEVER been a case of mail fraud that affected any outcome. Vote by mail is as old as voting in itself in the US.

4

Charirner t1_isttsa9 wrote

Why? Mail in voting has existed for a very long time and is the primary way service members vote when overseas. Do you want to take away veterans votes?

4

Finrodsrod t1_istz2og wrote

Why do you hate old people, people in the Military, expats living abroad, college students, and people with disabilities?

4

IsTh1sNameTaken t1_isuhhbe wrote

I want absentee voting and its previously used process to remain in use.

I do not want massive mail-in voting by anyone for no reason when it can give rise to these types of confusion-inducing scenarios or lead to uncertainty to which criteria need to be met and which don't, creating gray areas.

To be perfectly honest, if we want to deflate this issue voting in-person will go a long way in helping that (if the person is capable, which is what we've been doing all along until 2020.)

Our government should make voting day a national paid holiday to cut out the obstacle of work/ school.

−1

nesquiksand2 t1_istmgbt wrote

Just curious, what are you guys going to blame this time when your candidates lose?

15

reverendsteveii t1_isu44vv wrote

I've been lurking in the Mastriano Memes Facebook group for weeks now just so I can be there when the narrative goes from "we're definitely gonna win" to "there was definitely widespread but unprovable voter fraud", and also to take screenshots for the FBI when that widespread but unprovable voter fraud leads to Republican terrorism.

5

psychcaptain t1_isug37z wrote

Lol, I live in small town PA, and where I would usually see a ton of GOP election Signs, I see only a few. And although it's not many, I have seen more Shapiro or Fetterman signs than this area should ever have, if the GOP would win.

My town will still go Red, but on the state wide race, I think it's going to be a victor for the Dems (but I am sure it will be close, because it always is).

0