What You Can do to Prevent Election Fraud in November: Demand Full Local Signature-Matching of Mail-In Ballots, with Observers Present

[munkle]

All states already have a requirement of signature matching for their mail in and absentee ballots. Overseen by elections officials from both parties in each state who have been doing the job for a long time. The fault for lack of trust in US elections falls exclusively at the doorsteps of urchins like Bannon and this douchebag crusty.

No it varies by state. People should find out what their state laws say.

National Conference of State Legislatures: How States Verify Voted Absentee/Mail Ballots​

Twenty-seven states conduct signature verification on returned absentee/mail ballots:

• Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and West Virginia.

Nine states, the Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C., verify that an absentee/mail ballot envelope has been signed but do not conduct signature verification:

• Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Wyoming.

Furthermore even states that do conduct signature verification vary in whether they allow observers to witness that the signatures match.

Policies for Election Observers, National Conference of State Legislatures:​

Policies for Election Observers

Summary of state laws on election observation in the U.S. Who can observe, how are observers accredited and which aspects of the process can they access?

www.ncsl.org

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

"Evidence of absence is not absence of evidence."

You need to prove this. With reputable sources. ^Shrug^.
So far, that hasn't happened (not you personally, the other side).

 

[TemplarKormac]

But there's no evidence of willful incompetence. These are public servants.

This is the 'blind faith' I spoke of earlier. Being a public servant does not make one a dutiful and trustworthy servant, no more than being a Christian can make you a good Christian.

If there is already doubt in the process, then you have failed as a public servant, either through your own incompetence or the incompetence of other 'public servants'

You act as if this title grants them an immunity from committing errors, or imbues them with immunity from biased determinations.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You need to prove this. With reputable sources. ^Shrug^.
So far, that hasn't happened (not you personally, the other side).

Your insistence is not evidence, either.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You need to prove this. With reputable sources. ^Shrug^.
So far, that hasn't happened (not you personally, the other side).

Reputable sources, according to you. Hard pass. I will not appease your preconceived biases.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

No it varies by state. People should find out what their state laws say.

National Conference of State Legislatures: How States Verify Voted Absentee/Mail Ballots​

Twenty-seven states conduct signature verification on returned absentee/mail ballots:

• Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and West Virginia.

Nine states, the Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C., verify that an absentee/mail ballot envelope has been signed but do not conduct signature verification:

• Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Wyoming.

Furthermore even states that do conduct signature verification vary in whether they allow observers to witness that the signatures match.

Policies for Election Observers, National Conference of State Legislatures:​

Policies for Election Observers

Summary of state laws on election observation in the U.S. Who can observe, how are observers accredited and which aspects of the process can they access?

www.ncsl.org

Of course. But.....let's take CT as an example. I think this is pretty secure.

Connecticut voter ID​

In Person​

• 
  
• Connecticut has 2 different ID requirements, depending on when you registered to vote. Most voters must present one of the following forms of ID to vote in person:
  • Social Security card; or
  • Any pre-printed form of ID that shows your name and address, name and signature, or name and photo
  If you cannot present an ID, you'll be required to sign a brief statement confirming your identity.
  But, if you're a first time voter who registered by mail and you didn't provide ID when you registered, you must present one of the following forms of ID to vote in person:
  • A copy of a current photo ID that shows your name and address; or
  • A copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows your name and address
  Absentee

If you're not voting for the first time in Connecticut, you don't need to provide ID to vote absentee.
If you're a first time Connecticut voter who registered by mail and you didn't provide ID when you registered, you'll need to provide a photocopy of one of the following forms of ID along with your absentee ballot:

• A copy of a current photo ID showing your name and photograph or
• A copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows your name and address

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Reputable sources, according to you. Hard pass. I will not appease your preconceived biases.

Yep. And that's how the lie survives. You're presented with facts..and you dismiss them..because of your bias.

 

[Esdraelon]

And what is to stop GOP poll watchers being thrown out and the demrats pulling boxes of ballots out from under the table so to speak like we seen on tape in Fulton county GA in 2020?

Local residents who are willing to raise HELL in the face of local "authorities". If they get booted then they need to get in the faces of these criminals, video everything and DEMAND access through attorneys who should be waiting and ready to file for emergency injunctions. ANYONE who balks at that is someone trying to deceive and they have no reasonable excuse.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Yep. And that's how the lie survives. You're presented with facts..and you dismiss them..because of your bias.

Nope. I hate being lied to and misled. And news, having been irreparably tainted by personal biases on both sides, is no longer 'reputable.'

Anything that refuses to be objective in its reporting of current events or facts is just an opinion.

The mainstream media has easily demonstrated they are not interested in simply reporting something without tainting it with the biases of their employees and editors.

So, not interested.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Nope. I hate being lied to and misled. And news, having been irreparably tainted by personal biases on both sides, is no longer 'reputable.'

Anything that refuses to be objective in its reporting is just an opinion.

The mainstream media has easily demonstrated they are not interested in simply reporting something without tainting it with the biases of their employees and editors.

So, not interested.

How have you been misled? The only people "misleading" you are the ones who claim the 2020 election was stolen and fraudulent. When there is NO evidence that happened. None.
Politicians lie all the time. That's just life. But you are specifically calling out the need to verify that an election is valid. And at the same time, denigrating the public servants who oversee these elections and bend over backwards (regardless of party) to ensure that they are fair and free. Why? There is no evidence the 2020 election was affected by widespread fraud.

Again, this is how the lie survives. There are enough people swayed by weak reasoning. Eventually, enough weak kneed people just want the issue to "go away" and agree to give in to the demands of the people..who haven't proved ANYTHING.

And..that's how democracy..dies. ^Shrug^.

 

[TemplarKormac]

How have you been misled? The only people "misleading" you are the ones who claim the 2020 election was stolen and fraudulent. When there is NO evidence that happened. None.
Politicians lie all the time. That's just life. But you are specifically calling out the need to verify that an election is valid. And at the same time, denigrating the public servants who oversee these elections and bend over backwards (regardless of party) to ensure that they are fair and free. Why? There is no evidence the 2020 election was affected by widespread fraud.

Again, this is how the lie survives. There are enough people swayed by weak reasoning. Eventually, enough weak kneed people just want the issue to "go away" and agree to give in to the demands of the people..who haven't proved ANYTHING.

And..that's how democracy..dies. ^Shrug^.

I will leave you to your tangents.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

I will leave you to your tangents.

I'm addressing all your points.
Sorry. You're just coming off as another alt-right board shill.
I give you facts and reasoned arguments and you ignore them.

That's too bad.

 

[munkle]

Nope. I hate being lied to and misled. And news, having been irreparably tainted by personal biases on both sides, is no longer 'reputable.'

Anything that refuses to be objective in its reporting of current events or facts is just an opinion.

The mainstream media has easily demonstrated they are not interested in simply reporting something without tainting it with the biases of their employees and editors.

So, not interested.

Typical "objective" headline: "Citizens Baselessly Claim Ballots Were Stolen in 2020 Election, Repeating False Claims."

Right real objective.

 

[Care4all]

Young, tall, strong Republican poll watchers who don't take shit from anyone.

Bring your guns, that'll make it even safer!

 

[Care4all]

What's funny is that you actually trust a felon and thief like Bannon.... gosh, I don't know what to say, but ......sad!

 

[candycorn]

I'm sorry a little scrutiny hurts their feelings, but if they don't want to be impugned, they should strive to do their jobs dutifully. If the electoral process is that sacrosanct, they need to make sure they give the public no room to criticize. They should make it so that not even one modicum of distrust is justified.

Okay... we've had a lot of scrutiny on the 2020 election. Where has it got us? Biden is still President and you guys are still bitching about the results.

So whose feelings are hurt?

 

[TheReaper]

Hand counted ballots and mail-in ballot observed signature verification. There is no reason for anyone of any political party to object to these measures.

What You Can do to Prevent Election Fraud in November: Demand Full Local Signature-Matching of Mail-In Ballots, with Observers Present

#StopTheNEXTSteal On a Bannon War Room podcast, a NM law professor, former prosecutor, and election integrity activist said that acting locally, at the County election commission level, is the key …

coronanews123.wordpress.com

On a Bannon War Room podcast, a NM law professor, former prosecutor, and election integrity activist said that acting locally, at the County election commission level, is the key for anyone wishing to help prevent voter fraud in the upcoming midterm elections, by demanding of county commissioners that they ban the use of vote counting machines such as Dominion and ES&S, in favor of hand counting ballots. Ballots are counted by hand in Germany, Canada, France, Ireland, Italy, Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, and at least 53 other countries.

Also high on the list of confidence-building safeguards against systemic election fraud is the public observation of the signature verification process for mail-in ballots, an area which was especially contentious in the 2020 presidential election.

In the 2020 report “Signature Verification and Mail Ballots: Guaranteeing Access While Preserving Integrity: A Case Study of California’s Every Vote Counts Act,” a Stanford University Law School team recommends that election officials should:

“Ensure public observers have sufficient access to the signature verification process. Public observers must be allowed “sufficiently close access” to verify whether county officials are following established procedures for verifying whether ballot return ID envelope signatures match those in a voter’s registration file.”

This would mean that an observer from each political party would have “sufficiently close access” to discern whether a signature matched or not. Where there are questions, further contact with the voter by the election department is warranted.

The NM law professor, David Clements, of Las Cruces, says that voters can “save the country, by fixing their county.”

He urges citizens to confront their county election with clear demands to earn back the trust of voters in US elections, which is at an all-time low.

As controversy rages over mail-in voting, none other than Jimmy Carter has warned that large numbers of mail-in ballots are a recipe for mischief, saying:

“Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud”.... MORE....

Professor David Clements Interview, pertinent remarks on elections at 4:00 minutes (view at Rumble)

Excellent

 

[munkle]

Okay... we've had a lot of scrutiny on the 2020 election. Where has it got us? Biden is still President and you guys are still bitching about the results.

So whose feelings are hurt?

Just like a libtard to make it all about feelings rather than what is right or wrong.

 

[Billo_Really]

Hand counted ballots and mail-in ballot observed signature verification. There is no reason for anyone of any political party to object to these measures.

What You Can do to Prevent Election Fraud in November: Demand Full Local Signature-Matching of Mail-In Ballots, with Observers Present

#StopTheNEXTSteal On a Bannon War Room podcast, a NM law professor, former prosecutor, and election integrity activist said that acting locally, at the County election commission level, is the key …

coronanews123.wordpress.com

On a Bannon War Room podcast, a NM law professor, former prosecutor, and election integrity activist said that acting locally, at the County election commission level, is the key for anyone wishing to help prevent voter fraud in the upcoming midterm elections, by demanding of county commissioners that they ban the use of vote counting machines such as Dominion and ES&S, in favor of hand counting ballots. Ballots are counted by hand in Germany, Canada, France, Ireland, Italy, Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, and at least 53 other countries.

Also high on the list of confidence-building safeguards against systemic election fraud is the public observation of the signature verification process for mail-in ballots, an area which was especially contentious in the 2020 presidential election.

In the 2020 report “Signature Verification and Mail Ballots: Guaranteeing Access While Preserving Integrity: A Case Study of California’s Every Vote Counts Act,” a Stanford University Law School team recommends that election officials should:

“Ensure public observers have sufficient access to the signature verification process. Public observers must be allowed “sufficiently close access” to verify whether county officials are following established procedures for verifying whether ballot return ID envelope signatures match those in a voter’s registration file.”

This would mean that an observer from each political party would have “sufficiently close access” to discern whether a signature matched or not. Where there are questions, further contact with the voter by the election department is warranted.

The NM law professor, David Clements, of Las Cruces, says that voters can “save the country, by fixing their county.”

He urges citizens to confront their county election with clear demands to earn back the trust of voters in US elections, which is at an all-time low.

As controversy rages over mail-in voting, none other than Jimmy Carter has warned that large numbers of mail-in ballots are a recipe for mischief, saying:

“Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud”.... MORE....

Professor David Clements Interview, pertinent remarks on elections at 4:00 minutes (view at Rumble)

There is no voter fraud! Why spend energy preventing something that occurs .006% of the time?

 

[candycorn]

Just like a libtard to make it all about feelings rather than what is right or wrong.

The only difference is she stopped crying.

You? Not so much.