I do...Obviously the articles are going to downplay the problems with signatures, especially in terms of millions of mail in ballots where there is NO matching of signatures on the ballots, with signatures on file with the registration...It's a recipe for fraud, and that's just one of the problems I see in this election with the states that went along with doing away with this protection....
Ok. Well you articles disagree with you. They indicate that signature fraud is very rare. Here are a few quotes from your own articles:
"Vote-by-mail fraud is also very rare, but signatures are intended to add an extra layer of security"
"But the number resulting in fraud is 'exceedingly small.' He said one study showed nine instances over seven years where someone other than the voter signed -- and that's out of 16 million votes cast."
It's so rare that the numbers indicate that they're much more likely to throw out several valid ballots when trying to identify the invalid ones. Here are a few quotes from your own articles:
"Fraud is exceedingly rare; the much greater danger is that legitimate ballots will be thrown out."
"97 percent of rejected signatures are likely to be authentic—or, for every invalid ballot, 32 valid ones are thrown out."
I'm not sure why you would push articles that disagree with your assertion. It kind of makes it really easy to refute your argument.
Furthermore, as small as a problem as this is, it looks like they're taking extra precautions to ensure that the integrity of the election is maintained. These extra precautions include extra training for people verifying signatures and "curing" laws that allow voters the opportunity to verify their identify in the event that their ballot is flagged and rejected. Here are a few quotes from your articles:
"a 2019 lawsuit filed by Democrats complained that the state offered no training or procedures for officials assessing signatures, “resulting in processes that are demonstrably standardless, inconsistent, and unreliable.” Under a new law, the state must offer standardized training"
"curing isn’t merely a way to help get votes counted, as its detractors claim—it’s also an important anti-fraud tool, because there’s no way to know whether a rejected signature is malfeasance or just messiness unless officials contact voters."
These measures seem perfectly reasonable to me. Additionally, they were passed by state legislatures, so it's really up to them anyway.
All together, the rules had been laid out. Whether you like the rules or not is your problem. Biden won by those rules and as this process finalizes, Biden will be your president.
