Election Day (s) 2020

#228
#228
utvolpj said:
You didn't address the issues at all. How can you validate each person cast their own ballot with this method? It's impossible
Click to expand...
If everyone requests a ballot, receives the ballot, returns the ballot, and verifies their ballot was cast then there is a baseline for cross-referencing.

What is the difference in the trustworthiness between that method and filling out a bubble sheet, running it through a machine that gives you a digital message “ballot cast”, and then you trusting that the information was recorded, and recorded correctly on a computer chip? There is no difference. If you’re going to be skeptical of one method, you’ll be skeptical of all methods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: #Vol4Life1991
#229
#229
OHvol40 said:
If everyone requests a ballot, receives the ballot, returns the ballot, and verifies their ballot was cast then there is a baseline for cross-referencing.

What is the difference in the trustworthiness between that method and filling out a bubble sheet, running it through a machine that gives you a digital message “ballot cast”, and then you trusting that the information was recorded, and recorded correctly on a computer chip? There is no difference. If you’re going to be skeptical of one method, you’ll be skeptical of all methods.
Click to expand...
You're describing absentee and not this mass mail balloting that was created for this election. I see absentee as a necessary evil but the mail in ballots need a real process improvement if they're to be used again
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, Orangeslice13 and ajvol01
#230
#230
utvolpj said:
You're describing absentee and not this mass mail balloting that was created for this election. I see absentee as a necessary evil but the mail in ballots need a real process improvement if they're to be used again
Click to expand...
To be clear, you would have to specify which state/states you’re talking about because each one has their own process. Then you need to provide actual evidence that any given method is fraudulent with specific, widespread recurring instances of fraud/inaccuracy. Otherwise it’s just whining that means nothing.
 
#231
#231
ajvol01 said:
Yet mass election fraud is unthinkable to the liberals / never-Trumpers. Because orange man bad.
Click to expand...

LOL, well.

Given how Trump was at the helm for the last four years where HE KNEW the system cracked the door for this sort of stuff - and did nothing about it.... Hard to feel bad for the guy that is losing by a popular margin greater than the total population of the State of Oklahoma.
 
#232
#232
Septic said:
LOL, well.

Given how Trump was at the helm for the last four years where HE KNEW the system cracked the door for this sort of stuff - and did nothing about it.... Hard to feel bad for the guy that is losing by a popular margin greater than the total population of the State of Oklahoma.
Click to expand...
I bet you had to look that up or you read it somewhere and thought "Cool!"
 
#235
#235
Septic said:
LOL, well.

Given how Trump was at the helm for the last four years where HE KNEW the system cracked the door for this sort of stuff - and did nothing about it.... Hard to feel bad for the guy that is losing by a popular margin greater than the total population of the State of Oklahoma.
Click to expand...
4077260 difference in CA,
 
#238
#238
UT_VOLS13 said:
4077260 difference in CA,
Click to expand...

The irony of the electoral college screwing over the electorate is kind of hilarious given the worthless 4,204,244 R California votes (more than the total population of 24 individual States).
 
#240
#240
utvolpj said:
You're describing absentee and not this mass mail balloting that was created for this election. I see absentee as a necessary evil but the mail in ballots need a real process improvement if they're to be used again
Click to expand...

Oregon has been using mail in ballots for about 30 years with no real issues. It works, it's secure and it's easy.
 
#242
#242
OHvol40 said:
If everyone requests a ballot, receives the ballot, returns the ballot, and verifies their ballot was cast then there is a baseline for cross-referencing.

What is the difference in the trustworthiness between that method and filling out a bubble sheet, running it through a machine that gives you a digital message “ballot cast”, and then you trusting that the information was recorded, and recorded correctly on a computer chip? There is no difference. If you’re going to be skeptical of one method, you’ll be skeptical of all methods.
Click to expand...
What about all the unsolicited ballots?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top