Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots. Some signature-match rules have been struck down. How is this possible?

[shockedcanadian]

I saw this on Fox News so I wanted to look into it further. I've also heard of some locations accepting as low as 40% accuracy signature matching. A bank requires a far higher % I'm sure, but voting for the president of the U.S does not?

There is a famous dataset in Machine Learning referred to as the MNIST dataset. It's a series of hand writtern numbers, approx. 70k of them from I think the 1950s, and they were used to help current banking software "learn" deposited cheque numbers etc. They probably use more updated datasets, and many more of them; but, this one the most famous one.

I've worked on the dataset myself, as have countless others and if someone said they achieved even 75% accuracy, people would either tell them to make some simple tweaks to their model, they would laugh at them, or, remain silent, not knowing how to respond to such a low accuracy % for such a classic dataset.

The point I'm making, is that current A.I software can easily hit over 98% accuracy using a Convolutional Neural Network to provide accurate results, and that is for numbers. For an election to choose the president of the U.S, some won't require signature, or, such a low bar of 40%, that abuse won't just be rampant, it will be invited. How can anyone argue differently? It's shocking to me that this would be acceptable.

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Some signature-match rules have been struck down; others repealed by election officials.

justthenews.com

Election rules in multiple key battleground states permit voters to submit mail-in and absentee ballots without having their signatures checked to ensure the vote is valid.

Five states that have historically been competitive in presidential races — North Carolina, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire — do not require signature-matching for mailed voting forms.

In some cases, state officials have explicitly codified that rule. In August, Karen Bell, the executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, wrote in a memo to all local county boards that a voter's siagnture "shall not be compared with the voter's signature on file because this is not required by North Carolina law."


"County boards shall accept the voter's signature on the container-return envelope if it appears to be made by the voter," she continued, "meaning the signature on the envelope appears to be the name of the voter and not some other person."

"Absent clear evidence to the contrary," she added, "the county board shall presume that the voter's signature is that of the voter, even if the signature is illegible."

In other cases, signature-match rules have been struck down by jurists. Judges in New Hampshire and Iowa in recent years both struck down provisions of state laws mandating signature-match policies for absentee ballots.

In New Hampshire in 2018, a judge struck down a state law ordering election officials to match a voter's signature on the application for a mail-in ballot with the voter's signature on an affidavit accompanying the ballot itself.

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Some signature-match rules have been struck down; others repealed by election officials.

justthenews.com

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It's a huge communist conspiracy to cheat. Been brewing for years.

 

[Moonglow]

I saw this on Fox News so I wanted to look into it further. I've also heard of some locations accepting as low as 40% accuracy signature matching. A bank requires a far higher % I'm sure, but voting for the president of the U.S does not?

There is a famous dataset in Machine Learning referred to as the MNIST dataset. It's a series of hand writtern numbers, approx. 70k of them from I think the 1950s, and they were used to help current banking software "learn" deposited cheque numbers etc. They probably use more updated datasets, and many more of them; but, this one the most famous one.

I've worked on the dataset myself, as have countless others and if someone said they achieved even 75% accuracy, people would either tell them to make some simple tweaks to their model, they would laugh at them, or, remain silent, not knowing how to respond to such a low accuracy % for such a classic dataset.

The point I'm making, is that current A.I software can easily hit over 98% accuracy using a Convolutional Neural Network to provide accurate results, and that is for numbers. For an election to choose the president of the U.S, some won't require signature, or, such a low bar of 40%, that abuse won't just be rampant, it will be invited. How can anyone argue differently? It's shocking to me that this would be acceptable.

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Some signature-match rules have been struck down; others repealed by election officials.

justthenews.com

Election rules in multiple key battleground states permit voters to submit mail-in and absentee ballots without having their signatures checked to ensure the vote is valid.

Five states that have historically been competitive in presidential races — North Carolina, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire — do not require signature-matching for mailed voting forms.

In some cases, state officials have explicitly codified that rule. In August, Karen Bell, the executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, wrote in a memo to all local county boards that a voter's siagnture "shall not be compared with the voter's signature on file because this is not required by North Carolina law."


"County boards shall accept the voter's signature on the container-return envelope if it appears to be made by the voter," she continued, "meaning the signature on the envelope appears to be the name of the voter and not some other person."

"Absent clear evidence to the contrary," she added, "the county board shall presume that the voter's signature is that of the voter, even if the signature is illegible."

In other cases, signature-match rules have been struck down by jurists. Judges in New Hampshire and Iowa in recent years both struck down provisions of state laws mandating signature-match policies for absentee ballots.

In New Hampshire in 2018, a judge struck down a state law ordering election officials to match a voter's signature on the application for a mail-in ballot with the voter's signature on an affidavit accompanying the ballot itself.

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Some signature-match rules have been struck down; others repealed by election officials.

justthenews.com

How is it possible? Did you read the article to find out that signatures on the electronic blocks look nothing like signatures on a piece of paper it is relative.

 

[Norman]

The decisions are being contested. The decision that PA has three days to count the ballots will also be ruled over again, this time with Barrett.

Mail in voting is a fraud.

 

[Mac-7]

How is it possible? Did you read the article to find out that signatures on the electronic blocks look nothing like signatures on a piece of paper it is relative.

Another reason why mail-in voting should be illegal

the possibility for cheating is too strong

 

[ColonelAngus]

Its possible because Democrats are corrupt and going to try to steal the election.

 

[Mac-7]

The decisions are being contested. The decision that PA has three days to count the ballots will also be ruled over again, this time with Barrett.

Mail in voting is a fraud.

I’m thinking that republicans can contest every district and state they lose and force a hand count of the mail-in ballots

it will cost a lost of money but would be worth it

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The decisions are being contested. The decision that PA has three days to count the ballots will also be ruled over again, this time with Barrett.

Mail in voting is a fraud.

I’m thinking that republicans can contest every district and state they lose and force a hand count of the mail-in ballots

it will cost a lost of money but would be worth it

Absolutely they should. Some years ago my father had a surgery done to his arm that affected his ability to write normally. After he signed his name at the polls, a worker caught it stating the signatures didn't match. He had to show two forms of verifiable identification to vote and an explanation of why he couldn't write. He even showed them the surgical scars. Now if he used mail in voting where they actually did check comparisons, his ballot would have been discarded, and perhaps he would have been contacted by authorities.

If you don't want to vote in person, then don't vote at all. It can be done safely and effectively: Have a drive-up ballot handout in the street or parking lot. Fill out your ballot at home, work, or even park your car and do it. When complete, go back and there should be a ballot reader outside. You present your ID, slip the ballot in the machine, and you're there less than one minute. That's what we should be doing. If weather prevents the ballot reader from being outside, then it can be placed inside right by the doors.

 

[Mac-7]

If you don't want to vote in person, then don't vote at all.

Absolutely.

every vote should count rather than being nullified by an illegal mail-in vote

 

[TheGreatSatan]

It's a huge communist conspiracy to cheat. Been brewing for years.

Biden admitted as much

 

[2aguy]

I saw this on Fox News so I wanted to look into it further. I've also heard of some locations accepting as low as 40% accuracy signature matching. A bank requires a far higher % I'm sure, but voting for the president of the U.S does not?

There is a famous dataset in Machine Learning referred to as the MNIST dataset. It's a series of hand writtern numbers, approx. 70k of them from I think the 1950s, and they were used to help current banking software "learn" deposited cheque numbers etc. They probably use more updated datasets, and many more of them; but, this one the most famous one.

I've worked on the dataset myself, as have countless others and if someone said they achieved even 75% accuracy, people would either tell them to make some simple tweaks to their model, they would laugh at them, or, remain silent, not knowing how to respond to such a low accuracy % for such a classic dataset.

The point I'm making, is that current A.I software can easily hit over 98% accuracy using a Convolutional Neural Network to provide accurate results, and that is for numbers. For an election to choose the president of the U.S, some won't require signature, or, such a low bar of 40%, that abuse won't just be rampant, it will be invited. How can anyone argue differently? It's shocking to me that this would be acceptable.

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Some signature-match rules have been struck down; others repealed by election officials.

justthenews.com

Election rules in multiple key battleground states permit voters to submit mail-in and absentee ballots without having their signatures checked to ensure the vote is valid.

Five states that have historically been competitive in presidential races — North Carolina, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire — do not require signature-matching for mailed voting forms.

In some cases, state officials have explicitly codified that rule. In August, Karen Bell, the executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, wrote in a memo to all local county boards that a voter's siagnture "shall not be compared with the voter's signature on file because this is not required by North Carolina law."


"County boards shall accept the voter's signature on the container-return envelope if it appears to be made by the voter," she continued, "meaning the signature on the envelope appears to be the name of the voter and not some other person."

"Absent clear evidence to the contrary," she added, "the county board shall presume that the voter's signature is that of the voter, even if the signature is illegible."

In other cases, signature-match rules have been struck down by jurists. Judges in New Hampshire and Iowa in recent years both struck down provisions of state laws mandating signature-match policies for absentee ballots.

In New Hampshire in 2018, a judge struck down a state law ordering election officials to match a voter's signature on the application for a mail-in ballot with the voter's signature on an affidavit accompanying the ballot itself.

Key battleground states don't require signature-matching on mail-in ballots

Some signature-match rules have been struck down; others repealed by election officials.

justthenews.com

That's easy.......democrat party judges.

 

[2aguy]

The decisions are being contested. The decision that PA has three days to count the ballots will also be ruled over again, this time with Barrett.

Mail in voting is a fraud.

I’m thinking that republicans can contest every district and state they lose and force a hand count of the mail-in ballots

it will cost a lost of money but would be worth it

Absolutely they should. Some years ago my father had a surgery done to his arm that affected his ability to write normally. After he signed his name at the polls, a worker caught it stating the signatures didn't match. He had to show two forms of verifiable identification to vote and an explanation of why he couldn't write. He even showed them the surgical scars. Now if he used mail in voting where they actually did check comparisons, his ballot would have been discarded, and perhaps he would have been contacted by authorities.

If you don't want to vote in person, then don't vote at all. It can be done safely and effectively: Have a drive-up ballot handout in the street or parking lot. Fill out your ballot at home, work, or even park your car and do it. When complete, go back and there should be a ballot reader outside. You present your ID, slip the ballot in the machine, and you're there less than one minute. That's what we should be doing. If weather prevents the ballot reader from being outside, then it can be placed inside right by the doors.

If you don't want to vote in person, then don't vote at all. It can be done safely and effectively: Have a drive-up ballot handout in the street or parking lot. Fill out your ballot at home, work, or even park your car and do it. When complete, go back and there should be a ballot reader outside. You present your ID, slip the ballot in the machine, and you're there less than one minute. That's what we should be doing. If weather prevents the ballot reader from being outside, then it can be placed inside right by the doors.


Then how do the democrats cheat?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Absolutely.

every vote should count rather than being nullified by an illegal mail-in vote

Well......you're right. At least that's what the Democrats told us when they made accusations that Voter-ID could disenfranchise some voters.