trump Threatens Virus Funding After Michigan Absentee Ballot Move

[Olde Europe]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

trump Threatens Virus Funding After Michigan Absentee Ballot Move

The mob boss doesn't quite get rid of his stench, does he?

You ain't getting the money, unless... "I'd like you to do us a favor, though..."

 

[Rambunctious]

The dems are trying to set the stage for huge voter fraud in November....I hope the Trump campaign and the RNC are up to speed....

Obviously you are afraid of a higher turnout. There is no evidence of any fraud.

I welcome a higher turnout as long as the higher number consists of registered living American citizens of voting age.....In CA we have Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck voting along with thousands of dead people.....

Prove it. Post a link that is not from a right wing trash site because this is just another lie.

I won't waste my time...there have been plenty of links showing how the dems cheat in elections....

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

You shouldn't have to risk your life for the right to vote. I can get groceries delivered to my home...just like my ballot.

Prove your life is at risk.

 

[Seawytch]

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

You shouldn't have to risk your life for the right to vote. I can get groceries delivered to my home...just like my ballot.

Prove your life is at risk.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the U.S.

View the number of confirmed cases COVID-19 in the United States.

www.cdc.gov

 

[Seawytch]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

This is an opinion site and I provided mine. Only an idiot would pay $5 for coffee.

 

[FA_Q2]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

Because signatures are a joke in the modern world. Your signature can change a lot. Break your arm? No mail in ballot for you - your signature will be drastically different.

Don't really see a need to confirm signatures tbh, there should be better ways to verify ballots - ones that do not allow a random person to reject it.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

Because signatures are a joke in the modern world. Your signature can change a lot. Break your arm? No mail in ballot for you - your signature will be drastically different.

Don't really see a need to confirm signatures tbh, there should be better ways to verify ballots - ones that do not allow a random person to reject it.

Thank you

 

[Seawytch]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

Because signatures are a joke in the modern world. Your signature can change a lot. Break your arm? No mail in ballot for you - your signature will be drastically different.

Don't really see a need to confirm signatures tbh, there should be better ways to verify ballots - ones that do not allow a random person to reject it.

I cannot speak for any other state than my own, but rejected signatures get checked by two people. First by the line staff checking signatures and then by a supervisor. Once rejected, the voter gets notified that it has been rejected and gives the voter the chance to cure the issue.

If there's a better way, nobody has come up with it yet.

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

Trump’s own voter fraud task force, headed by Chris ******* Kobach, found virtually no voter fraud. This is Trump and Republicans trying to tip the scales.

 

[theHawk]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

Show up in person, prove your I.D and your single vote per person and you can control abuses significantly. Every Western democracy demands voting in person and proper I.D to do so.

There is no evidence of any abuse. The fact is that the military has been doing this for decades.

Yea and many of us who were military got screwed because of it. For example last time I requested a mail-in ballot while overseas I never received it.

 

[Aldo Raine]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

trump Threatens Virus Funding After Michigan Absentee Ballot Move

The mob boss doesn't quite get rid of his stench, does he?

You ain't getting the money, unless... "I'd like you to do us a favor, though..."

I hope he does because it is just proof of his total ineptitude.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

Because signatures are a joke in the modern world. Your signature can change a lot. Break your arm? No mail in ballot for you - your signature will be drastically different.

Don't really see a need to confirm signatures tbh, there should be better ways to verify ballots - ones that do not allow a random person to reject it.

I cannot speak for any other state than my own, but rejected signatures get checked by two people. First by the line staff checking signatures and then by a supervisor. Once rejected, the voter gets notified that it has been rejected and gives the voter the chance to cure the issue.

If there's a better way, nobody has come up with it yet.

Better way is to vote in person and to show ID. Voting is a privilege not a right. Are you a volunteer?

 

[Seawytch]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

Because signatures are a joke in the modern world. Your signature can change a lot. Break your arm? No mail in ballot for you - your signature will be drastically different.

Don't really see a need to confirm signatures tbh, there should be better ways to verify ballots - ones that do not allow a random person to reject it.

I cannot speak for any other state than my own, but rejected signatures get checked by two people. First by the line staff checking signatures and then by a supervisor. Once rejected, the voter gets notified that it has been rejected and gives the voter the chance to cure the issue.

If there's a better way, nobody has come up with it yet.

Better way is to vote in person and to show ID. Voting is a privilege not a right. Are you a volunteer?

No, voting is a fundamental right. Voting by mail is a valid choice and makes sense during a pandemic.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

This is disgusting.

What the secretary of the state has done is very legal and above board.

There is no clear way for trump to withhold virus funding because of this.

It just seems to me that trump is doing all he can to tick off the people of Michigan to get them to not vote for him.

Intelligent people know why he's doing this. He knows if everyone in Michigan is allowed to vote, trump loses Michigan.

Trump threatens funding after Michigan absentee ballot move

I agree with this. The state is certainly in its right to determine how they handle their elections. I don't see any way the president can legally withhold funding over this. That said, there are some legitimate concerns over strictly mail-in voting. There has been an article posted a couple of times in other threads showing around 28 million mail in ballots were lost between 2012 and 2018. That's a lot of people's votes who didn't get counted and that's just one reason why I'm iffy on a completely mail-in election. Furthermore, the couple of states that already do completely mail-in elections spent years setting up that system to ensure it was reliable. They weren't implementing it on the fly. I'm concerned if states like Michigan and others do this for the general election we could end up with another Florida 2000 crisis.

I have seen no scientific evidence that standing in line to vote is any more or less risky than going to you grocery store and I don't feel like asking people to stand in line to vote once or twice a year is over the top. Many people in the world don't get this opportunity and we take it for granted.

I signed up for mail in voting in the 90s. The last time I voted in person was the second time Clinton ran for president.

My state went to 100% mail in ballots in 2005. Yes it took a few years to fully implement but by 2005 it was fully implemented.

As for trump's claims of fraud? The following is a good article about that:

Does vote-by-mail lead to voter fraud? Washington's 2018 election data says no

Yes there's a problem in some states with ballots reaching voters and ballots being counted. Which should be addressed. The answer isn't to not allow mail in voting. The answer is to make sure everyone gets a ballot in time and all ballots are counted.

That same counting problem happens with in person voting too. It's not just mail in voting.

Standing in line to vote, especially if people are forced to do it for hours, isn't the same thing as shopping. People are moving around shopping. No one stands in the same place for hours like a lot of people are forced to with in person voting.

In person voting will require much longer extended days of voting. More voting places. More voting machines in the voting places and social distancing. That will cost a lot more money than doing it mail in ballot.

That is IF the goal of the state is to have everyone vote and do it safely. Which I don't believe many states will do those things. They will probably do what Wisconsin did in April, close voting places. People were only able to vote at 5 voting places in Milwaukie in April because of closed voting places.

Not allowing mail in voting is designed to prevent people from voting. It's trump's only hope of winning in November. Republicans and trump knows if everyone is allowed to vote trump and the republican lose in most of the country.

That is the only reason why trump and republican politicians are doing all they can to prevent mail in voting.

I have never stood for hours to vote. The fact that they never check my ID is mind boggling. Mail in voting is BS. How do you know someone is not being coerced or I don't take a ballot and fill it out for my wife and for me? If you're too lazy to stand in line then you don't deserve to vote.

Goodie gumdrops for you. Just because you've never experienced it, screw the people that have?

No mail in voting isn't "BS". It's.the way millions of people, including your naked emperor, vote every election.

You do realize signatures on the Vote by Mail envelope are checked against voter registration, right? Unless you can forge her signature, you can't "fill it out for your wife".

She signs my name all the time with my permission. We have been together since we were 19...so 20 years. "forging" a signature is not overly difficult and it is tough if not impossible to check every signature so they just grab a select few. It can also go the other way. Signature could be legit but it gets pulled by the person vetting it. Saw that happen in town elections, where there are fewer signatures and they are easier to check multiple times. Now that was on petitions but the same principal applies. I would only allow this for military and Gov't personnel.

No they don't check a select few, they check every single signature on every single vote by mail ballot. I watch it happen every election.

Then it becomes subjective. As I said, I experienced this firsthand in local elections on petitions. As I understand it, states like Utah and Oregon do this but it took them years to implement the system. Cannot do it overnight. If people can stand in lines at Home Depot. They can stand in lines to vote. And present ID!

Petitions are not the same as ba!lots. You do statistical sampling with petions. Here in CA we do a random 3% sample. If enough are good statistically, the initiative goes on the ballot. If it doesn't, it fails. If the number falls in the gray area we check 100% of the signatures. Ballots are not the same. 100% of signatures on ballots are checked against registration.

And it becomes subjective if the signature is legit or not. I dont Like that.

How is it subjective? Who gives a shit if you "like" it or not. Your dislike of voting by mail and $5 will get you coffee at Starbucks.

Because signatures are a joke in the modern world. Your signature can change a lot. Break your arm? No mail in ballot for you - your signature will be drastically different.

Don't really see a need to confirm signatures tbh, there should be better ways to verify ballots - ones that do not allow a random person to reject it.

I cannot speak for any other state than my own, but rejected signatures get checked by two people. First by the line staff checking signatures and then by a supervisor. Once rejected, the voter gets notified that it has been rejected and gives the voter the chance to cure the issue.

If there's a better way, nobody has come up with it yet.

Better way is to vote in person and to show ID. Voting is a privilege not a right. Are you a volunteer?

No, voting is a fundamental right. Voting by mail is a valid choice and makes sense during a pandemic.

Bullshit. Pandemic is a media hoax.