Vote at home act 2021

#51
#51
utvolpj said:
giphy.gif
Click to expand...
God that's nasty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and GSD82
#57
#57
n_huffhines said:
What makes us think in-person voting is secure? We still have blind spots in the process. We still have tons of potential for fraud. Seems like there is room for improvement and it could come from technology that can verify and validate at-home voting.
Click to expand...

I didn’t say it was 100% secure. I did say it should be done with ID, which it is not today in most places. I’d also prefer there to be a documented paper trail and on no machines connected to the internet. That eliminates the vote online option for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#61
#61
DinkinFlicka said:
Irrelevant to the discussion. Most presidents in the past thirty years get a pass on that kind of ****.
Click to expand...

Tricky Dick was a very good POTUS minus his getting nailed for his Watergate association. I’m not sure how different the break in was from Barry enabling Hillary’s fake dossier and whut not. Actually I don’t think Nixon’s was as bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, SpaceCoastVol and GSD82
#66
#66
utvolpj said:
Why would this only give dems the power? Isn't everyone eligible?

I don't agree with it but don't see how it only benefits one side. Demonizing mail in votes was a bad strategy in Nov
Click to expand...
Because they tend to be the people in the country who have a propensity (genetic or learned) to cheating, committing crimes, etc.
 
#67
#67
GSD82 said:
I hear guys, even some conservatives who hate her say she's hot. I don't see it. I think she's ugly AF
Click to expand...
She isn't hot. She isn't bad looking though, especially considering her ethnicity. Still wouldn't smash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GSD82
#68
#68
SpaceCoastVol said:
So what is the point of your post?
Click to expand...

The point is in the first sentence of my original post and was later corrected when I noticed my error. I was looking at the population breakdown incorrectly when I posted first.

Based on historical voting percentages by race and the general population makeup by race, the vote at home act would benefit democrats. Assuming voting percentages(republican vs Democrat) among the races stay the same.
 
#69
#69
Fun coupon VOL said:
The point is in the first sentence of my original post and was later corrected when I noticed my error. I was looking at the population breakdown incorrectly when I posted first.

Based on historical voting percentages by race and the general population makeup by race, the vote at home act would benefit democrats. Assuming voting percentages(republican vs Democrat) among the races stay the same.
Click to expand...
iu
 
#71
#71
utvolpj said:
Why would this only give dems the power? Isn't everyone eligible?

I don't agree with it but don't see how it only benefits one side. Demonizing mail in votes was a bad strategy in Nov
Click to expand...
Lol, i have some bridges to sell you. Lol, ignorance is bliss or is it utvolpj?
 
#72
#72
Septic said:
How do you figure this only benefits the dems?

Making it easier to vote securely should benefit ALL American's. You need to come to terms with the fact that voter suppression as a means to victory isn't going to be on the menu much longer; don't fight digital voting - advocate for it to be done securely.
Click to expand...

So how do you insure with mail in or computer voting that the person filling in the ballot is identified as the registered voter and as the actual person having filled in the ballot? This is done with in person voting when the voter is verified with photo ID and can't have a surrogate along to fill it in. Tidy that one up without it involving the same steps as in person voting and maybe you'll have a valid comparison of the methods. Otherwise it's fraud.
 
#73
#73
n_huffhines said:
What makes us think in-person voting is secure? We still have blind spots in the process. We still have tons of potential for fraud. Seems like there is room for improvement and it could come from technology that can verify and validate at-home voting.
Click to expand...

You are basically comparing a monitored test in the classroom with a take home test having the same requirements. How exactly do you insure someone with the take home test doesn't cheat when both are instructed - closed book, no notes, no internet. People have certainly found ways to cheat in the classroom, but the home version is like the wild west - cheat at will. This is why we do in person voting; it isn't rocket science.
 
#74
#74
Selling votes would become a major issue. It’s one thing to physically round up eligible voters in subsidized housing on buses and giving them a sandwich to come along to the polls. It’s another to give them a crisp Harriet Tubman $20 bill to borrow their voter ID#.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#75
#75
utvolpj said:
Why would this only give dems the power? Isn't everyone eligible?

I don't agree with it but don't see how it only benefits one side. Demonizing mail in votes was a bad strategy in Nov
Click to expand...
I 100% agree it makes fraud easier but I also agree it’s a 2-way street. Reps better wake up and start figuring out how to adjust to mail in voting or they stand no chance.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top