I REALLY don't get republican obsession with ending mail in and early voting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't see an issue with universal mail in voting.

You are not concerned about breaking the ballot chain of custody? You trust the postal service to deliver 100% of ballots on time and to the correct address? You trust that all ballots will be completed in secret? You trust that ballots can be verified without giving up the privacy of one's vote? You are an awfully trusting person.

Those two positions are totally at odds.

Disagree. Not everyone needs to vote early or by mail. Most do just fine by voting on election day. The absentee ballot option exists for those who cannot.

If you make voting inconvenient, then people won't vote. That is what the Rs are trying to do.

Rs closed the drop boxes in liberal areas. So, now they have to rely on other people or USPS. Again, if you are worried about chain of custody, then you should push Rs to put those drop boxes back.

I am not going to support making voting harder for people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a Republican, so I can't speak for them, but I don't really like early voting, either. I think that there is something to be said for having everyone vote based upon the same information. What happens if a candidate dies or becomes incapacitated or drops out of the electoral race between when a voter votes and the actual election day?

As for mail-in voting: I'm certainly in favor of it when it is actually needed (voter unable to vote in person or out of town), but not on a universal basis. It breaks the chain-of-custody for ballots and potentially breaks the idea of a secret ballot. In an ideal world, the number of mailed-in ballots would be low enough that it would not make a difference in election outcomes.

I realize that vote fraud is low in the US, and I am not calling mail-in ballots fraudulent, but I do think that it is important for elections to appear to be legitimate, in addition to actually being legitimate. This is why I also support required voter identification at polling places (and, along with that, free identification available to any eligible voter). Again, I don't personally see any of this as solving an actual problem, but it would reduce the chances for a losing candidate for office to be able to convince people that election results are illegitimate, and that would be a good thing for democracy in general.

Are you in favor of moving voting day to a weekend or being a national holiday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't see an issue with universal mail in voting.

You are not concerned about breaking the ballot chain of custody? You trust the postal service to deliver 100% of ballots on time and to the correct address? You trust that all ballots will be completed in secret? You trust that ballots can be verified without giving up the privacy of one's vote? You are an awfully trusting person.

Those two positions are totally at odds.

Disagree. Not everyone needs to vote early or by mail. Most do just fine by voting on election day. The absentee ballot option exists for those who cannot.

Curious:are you the same poster that’s has been on all the abortion threads advocating for a mandatory 15 week national abortion ban as a compromise post Roe v. wade?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If mail in voting is fine for the military, then it's fine for me.

Are you in the military? Are you unable to vote in person? If so, then I agree.

Otherwise, sorry, but not everyone can take the time off to vote in person on that specific day.

Then that would seem to be a legitimate reason for an absentee ballot.

To be clear: I want every eligible voter who wants to vote to be able to do so with a minimum of time and frustration spent. But I do not favor universal mail-in voting or early voting. As I noted above. And I am not a Republican (or Democrat).

So you are ok with adding the hurdle of a voter having to request an absentee ballot and hope the USPS delivers it, instead of, you know, making in universal.

How about this instead...everyone can vote when they want, and if YOU want to do it in person on election day, then go for it?

[Anonymous]

Curious:are you the same poster that’s has been on all the abortion threads advocating for a mandatory 15 week national abortion ban as a compromise post Roe v. wade?

Nope. Abortion is not an issue that I particularly care about, actually.

Are you in favor of moving voting day to a weekend or being a national holiday?

I would be open to the idea, yes, but that requires discussion and debate. That said, don't most employers provide time off for voting? I would definitely support making that mandatory. I would also support 24-hour voting on election day (to include part of the previous day).

[Anonymous]

So you are ok with adding the hurdle of a voter having to request an absentee ballot and hope the USPS delivers it, instead of, you know, making in universal.

Yes, because, as I noted above, the ideal situation is to have a small enough number of absentee ballots that they could not mathematically affect the outcome.

How about this instead...everyone can vote when they want, and if YOU want to do it in person on election day, then go for it?

No, because "making it easy to vote" is not the same thing as "bending over backwards to make voting so easy as to require nearly zero effort."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Curious:are you the same poster that’s has been on all the abortion threads advocating for a mandatory 15 week national abortion ban as a compromise post Roe v. wade?

Nope. Abortion is not an issue that I particularly care about, actually.

Are you in favor of moving voting day to a weekend or being a national holiday?

I would be open to the idea, yes, but that requires discussion and debate. That said, don't most employers provide time off for voting? I would definitely support making that mandatory. I would also support 24-hour voting on election day (to include part of the previous day).

No no they dont- wtf?

[Anonymous]

Yes, because, as I noted above, the ideal situation is to have a small enough number of absentee ballots that they could not mathematically affect the outcome.

Why do you consider this ideal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Curious:are you the same poster that’s has been on all the abortion threads advocating for a mandatory 15 week national abortion ban as a compromise post Roe v. wade?

Nope. Abortion is not an issue that I particularly care about, actually.

Are you in favor of moving voting day to a weekend or being a national holiday?

I would be open to the idea, yes, but that requires discussion and debate. That said, don't most employers provide time off for voting? I would definitely support making that mandatory. I would also support 24-hour voting on election day (to include part of the previous day).

But what if something happens ten minutes before polls close that would have changed one voter's mind. You should only allow voting for 12 seconds, and have a rule that there can't be ANY news during those 12 seconds, to foreclose that potential disaster.

Your idea is stupid, OP. You like to vote in person on election day so you can't see why everyone else can't, too. Well guess what - voting by mail works just great, and I prefer doing it this way. I can actually research candidates and ballot measures as I am voting - I don't have to try to remember which judges the paper recommended keeping and which they said to dump, etc. Unlike you, I DO have fundamental issues I vote on - and so no, there is nothing that some nutso Republican is going to say just before closing time that's going to make me vote for them.

Vote how you like. Nothing stopping you. And I will do the same.

[Anonymous]

Why do you consider this ideal?

Because it minimizes the chances for failures outside the standard voting system (post office delivery failure or errors, ballots not completed in secret, ballots stolen or modified in transit, etc.) to affect election outcomes.

[Anonymous]

The essential services have to have a certain minimum amount of workers on shift 24/7. Someone has to have that 12 hour day on election day. Who else will staff the wards, drive fire engines or fix electrical faults.

All shift workers should have the option of early voting and Mail in otherwise they will be disenfranchised.

How about drop boxes in Hospital? Actually, how do the patients vote?

[Anonymous]

As the one who keeps defending in-person election-day voting: I'm confused by this thread. OP asked why there is opposition to universal mail-in voting and to early voting. I provided some reasons. And now everyone here is telling me that I am wrong. Should I not have bothered to answer OP's question? I don't get the hate here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why do you consider this ideal?

Because it minimizes the chances for failures outside the standard voting system (post office delivery failure or errors, ballots not completed in secret, ballots stolen or modified in transit, etc.) to affect election outcomes.

Whatabout Dominion Voting machines OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the one who keeps defending in-person election-day voting: I'm confused by this thread. OP asked why there is opposition to universal mail-in voting and to early voting. I provided some reasons. And now everyone here is telling me that I am wrong. Should I not have bothered to answer OP's question? I don't get the hate here.

Because you and OP are proposing to disenfranchise people over nothing.

What about people who live in rural areas, you two? What if it takes four hours to get to the nearest town. Still gotta vote in person on that one day? What if you're sick that one day, and you live four hours from the nearest town. What if you're out of town. Oh, so it's ok for people out of town - but not for people for whom it is just easier and more pleasant to vote by mail? So let's all just plan to be out of town on that day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the one who keeps defending in-person election-day voting: I'm confused by this thread. OP asked why there is opposition to universal mail-in voting and to early voting. I provided some reasons. And now everyone here is telling me that I am wrong. Should I not have bothered to answer OP's question? I don't get the hate here.

The hate is because you don't seem to understand the hurdles that a lot of people face to try to vote. And, when people face roadblocks, they aren't going to bother trying to overcome that roadblock.

" don't most employers provide time off for voting?" -- that's where you lost the plot.