I picked multiple points. And I could pick a bunch more. What do I need to back it up with? You asked for fact free stuff from the GOP. And the only limits to that in the last four years are time and possibly the character counts on the forum.
It’s exactly what you asked for. Fact free stuff from the current leader of the GOP and the parties face for the last four years. Also they didn’t bother making a platform so they said orange man good. If I was the GOP or a defender I think calling the opposition fact free is hilarious. It doesn’t get more fact free than the POTUS.
What exactly do you need? Or is this the part yet again where we say stuff like “Trump stretches the truth” or something else dismissive like TDS, orange man bad etc? Hey I wouldn’t want to try and defend him either I get it. And that’s why his followers don’t even try. “Oh you’re quoting the President…TDS!”
This is just untrue. Please do some research. Mail-in or absentee ballots are handled, tracked, and validated exactly the same. Please show me evidence that one is better tracked and more secure than the other. There just isn’t any. Now, if you want to ban all non-in-person voting, then at least you have a defendable, consistent position. As I said, 33 million votes in the 2016 election were mail-in votes. Five states hold their elections entirely by mail: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah. Sixteen states had over 50% of their votes done by mail in 2016 (9 won by Trump). Do you doubt the legitimacy of that election outcome? If not, why not? The numbers of mailed votes dwarfed the amount of votes that decided the election, and they are “obvious potential for fraud.”
It’s also how the majority of the Presidents administration voted. If we have an issue with it than we have an issue with the 2016 (and further back) elections as you said.
Nothing is keeping Republicans from doing this. In fact a large number of Republicans have already voted this way. Hell it could have won him 2016.
I actually don’t think even Trump believes this is a problem (or he wouldn’t vote by mail). He’s just planting the seeds for calling the result into question if he doesn’t like it.
It’s working, though. Folks like @chris_ottawa are convinced mail-in voting is suddenly filled with fraud despite 33 million mail-in votes last election, and a high probably that mail in votes were helpful to Trump in 2016.
If Trump was cheerleading vote by mail, every PhD on this thread would be screeching for the sensibility of voting in person - which the example of trillions of votes historically cast, has already proven.
But for real why? The argument would be just as lame the other way. I’m not sure what we ended up with in 2016? Over 20 million I’d guess. At what number is it a problem if 20 million is fine? 30? 40? 70? Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t remember Republicans saying on election night that we should do the whole thing over because many didn’t vote in person and therefore Trump could have won by fraud? I must have missed that.
Seems to me the most logical answer is either we can’t trust ballots that aren’t cast in person at all or we can. This idea that if the number is higher than last time it all goes to hell is what I don’t get. And it’s not like we haven’t had problems with in person ballots either.
A lot of votes get thrown out every single national election. It’s far from a perfect process. I’m just not sure why all the hand wringing about this in 2020 and not in the years prior when it has done nothing but jump up. Shit of all the years it makes sense to not vote in person isn’t this the one?
You know that these fact checkers are mostly lying and wrong. They just want to create a narrative. I have checked a few of these and they are taken so out of context that you need to lack any kind of critical thinking to land in such conclusions.
Once more I will return to the bleach injecting. Trump never suggested that. He said literaly if bleach removes Covid easily then perhaps we can think of a technique that is as easy to implement. Maybe injecting some kind of a strong drug that acts as bleach for surfaces. However the media and the fact checkers lied that Trump suggests we inject bleach.
500k votes were tossed out in the Democratic primary alone. In California, there are over 1 million ineligible voters registered to vote this year. In the 2018 midterms, there were 6 House seats won by Republicans on election night, and all 6 flipped Democrat once the ballot harvesting was tallied.
See, this is the problem - you can’t talk policy. I show a very basic solution to helping prevent the (unjustified) fear of massive voter fraud in mail - very basic, I’m sure there are far better ways - and you can’t respond except for this shtick. Over and over.
Bottom line is Trump could have formed a task force to come up with ways to help mitigate against voter fraud in the US mail and given them an unlimited budget - were he a President that cared about such things as election integrity, regardless of who wins and who loses. But he has no such interest - a) that requires work, which he is allergic to, and b) he’d rather play the gane of first trying to suppress votes and second building in a conspiracy theory in case he loses.
My bank sends periodic notices saying they will not request my identifying numbers, passwords, etc with communication starting on their end.
If such is discussed, the call must begin from the client into the bank.
Why? So there isn’t just random harvesting of info (votes) but only activity initialized by the client (voter) which can then be more fully and securely controlled by the bank.
Why at a most basic level do personal mail boxes have a prohibition against others using them for non mail purposes, or mail collection boxes have rudimentary security like one way drop/ locking door.
Expand that to electronic - why passwords, encription, multiple levels of security.
In person voting between opposing parties in a civilized society is a somewhat decent safety measure as each side has an interest in preventing hanky panky from the other side. Not fail safe, but preferable to someone knocking on your door and saying vote Jones. Dictatorships already give you that example.
Im not into change, just because something can be changed.
There is no one on a public forum so dim as to confuse - not wanting a nanny state making every decision in every area in one’s life and knowing that some collectivism is necessary in any society.
Your constant badgering is no more compelling than if you proclaimed, either win an Olympic medal or justify why you are a fat slob that despises physical movement.
Silly and if you actually feel this way, disingenuous.
So what exactly are you trying to argue? That Trump doesn’t lie often? That the fact checkers are all wrong and Trump is a beacon of truth? Mostly lying and wrong is quite a leap. Sure some have had things wrong and you have issues when you’re evaluating opinions especially. But you’re crazy if you think the issue is the fact checkers are lying and Trump isn’t.
Come on man even if you’re a fan he’s by far the most dishonest President in American history. His frequency of lies and disregard for facts is unparalleled.
That’s my definition, but I’m not using mine - I’m using the definition of self-described right-wingers who abide no such entry into the private provision of services and say they will vote accordingly.
It’s a good idea, but what are the odds that the media and Democrats would entertain such a task force ? These are the same people who lied every minute, of every single day, for 3 years, about a Russian collusion conspiracy that never happened and no one was punished or lost their job.
How many times did president Obama lie ? The problem isn’t that no one knows, but that the media protected him to a point where they didn’t want to even count that number.
If he lied he’s a much better liar than trump. Trump has over 10k verified lies and most can be fact checked very easily. So if you are going to argue that President Obama lied as much as trump then that just one more lie.
Proposing an alternate history scenario isn’t discussing policy. What you are discussing requires a time machine to implement.
The date today is October 13th. I see no reason any number of states need to overhaul the voting system.
@antiquity I’m not sure how else to explain the concern if you insist that absentee voting in the past is somehow equivalent to an unproven system of sending ballots out en masse without an absentee request. It is above if you care to read it again.