Herman Cain dies from COVID

[Jason Harvestdancer]

They are mailed to every address where there is or has been a voter at that address. Think about that.

I get the voter guides from the government, informing me of my polling location and listing the candidates and ballot props.

After 12 years at that address, I only received two of each: one for me, one for my wife. During that 12 years I spent several years getting more than two, as I got them for people who had moved from my address.

During the time before they cleaned the voter rolls (must have been a secret right-winger in the LA county registrar office because only evil right wingers ever cleanse voter rolls) how many mail-in ballots would I have gotten?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So you are admitting to voter fraud, that you voted with other people’s ballots and somehow managed to forge their signatures?

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

They are mailed to every address where there is or has been a voter at that address. Think about that.

My state requires me to request a mail-in ballot. It is not automatically sent to every registered voter, much less every address. And no, I’m not talking about an absentee ballot.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We’ve known for a long time the people involved with cause of death were playing fast and loose with the data. There excess deaths of course there are but to claim that a 90 year old with cancer was offed by Covid is risible.

No, we don't. You've merely claimed this, with no evidence to back up your claim, or an attempt to quantify by how much the death rate is being overstated.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSq3d07WXa4[/youtube]

The British Government ADMITS it inflated the Covid numbers.

Crap. In an awful lot of cases we do not know for sure what somebody died of. This was especially an issue early on when we had less understanding of what Covid does to the body--was that heart attack from Covid or would it have happened anyway?

Since we can't prove it one way or the other we simply have to define what we will call a Covid death. They changed that definition a bit based on updated information. This doesn't mean they were doing anything dirty.

 

[bilby]

They are mailed to every address where there is or has been a voter at that address. Think about that.

I get the voter guides from the government, informing me of my polling location and listing the candidates and ballot props.

After 12 years at that address, I only received two of each: one for me, one for my wife. During that 12 years I spent several years getting more than two, as I got them for people who had moved from my address.

During the time before they cleaned the voter rolls (must have been a secret right-winger in the LA county registrar office because only evil right wingers ever cleanse voter rolls) how many mail-in ballots would I have gotten?

I thought about it.

It seems like it doesn't enable any kind of fraud that would be effective in changing election results, without being FAR more likely to get the fraudsters caught and jailed.

In other words, it's no more risky than any other part of the election process, and significantly LESS risky than many elements of the process that people have been taking for granted for decades.

Mail-in ballot fraud is a nothingburger. It's impractical and highly risky to attempt to distort the outcome of an election using such ballots; And there are dozens of more effective and safer ways to cheat, should that be your desire.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Of course it's a nothing burger, because it hasn't become a something YET.

Did you know that if you are falling to your death, your death is a big nothing burger because it hasn't happened yet? You're only falling, you're not crashing.

 

[bilby]

Of course it's a nothing burger, because it hasn't become a something YET.

Did you know that if you are falling to your death, your death is a big nothing burger because it hasn't happened yet? You're only falling, you're not crashing.

Did you know that my argument is that it cannot be effective, not that it has not been?

Of course not, because you're not reading for comprehension, your reading with the intent of finding fault. Because you have zero intent of considering your position, much less abandoning it when it's shown to be based on false premises.

 

[ZiprHead]

I cannot imagine thinking they are the same without a deliberate effort to convince oneself they are the same..

I got an application for absentee ballots, for the election and the primaries, from the state of Massachusetts. I also got two applications for absentee ballots from candidate campaigns, already filled in with my name and address as listed with the registrar. Any discrupulous person with access to my mail would be in the exact same position to commit fraud whether by absentee ballot or by direct mail ballots.

Anyone without access to my mail would also be in the same position, to wit, shit-outta-luck.

Sorry, no. just because you got two applications does not mean you will get two ballots. And even if you did, it's an easy catch by the authorities and carries heavy penalties if you actually filed both ballots.

 

[Rhea]

They are mailed to every address where there is or has been a voter at that address. Think about that.

I get the voter guides from the government, informing me of my polling location and listing the candidates and ballot props.

After 12 years at that address, I only received two of each: one for me, one for my wife. During that 12 years I spent several years getting more than two, as I got them for people who had moved from my address.

During the time before they cleaned the voter rolls (must have been a secret right-winger in the LA county registrar office because only evil right wingers ever cleanse voter rolls) how many mail-in ballots would I have gotten?

Jason, why is it that you think a person getting their hands on a mail in ballot will be able to execute it? You have to sign the envelope. The signature to match is on file.

Do you know how many of these need to happen by accomplished forgers in order to change an election? That’s why no one is taking you seriously when you claim that absentee and mail in are different.

Anything I do to fraudulently request a mail in ballot will be caught just as easily as anything I do to fraudulently submit a mail in ballot.

The mchanism for detecting fraud is the same either way. AAnd it works to a high degree of accuracy.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Of course it's a nothing burger, because it hasn't become a something YET.

Did you know that if you are falling to your death, your death is a big nothing burger because it hasn't happened yet? You're only falling, you're not crashing.

33 million votes by mail in 2016. SCROTUS’s Presidential commission investigating fraud came up empty.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Sorry, no. just because you got two applications does not mean you will get two ballots. And even if you did, it's an easy catch by the authorities and carries heavy penalties if you actually filed both ballots.

no, no, i would only get one this address.
What i was saying is if i moved recently, and the state, and the candidates thought i was still here, someone would be equally capable of fraud by any postal voting method.
Whether a high risk or low is a separate issue.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Of course it's a nothing burger, because it hasn't become a something YET.

Did you know that if you are falling to your death, your death is a big nothing burger because it hasn't happened yet? You're only falling, you're not crashing.

33 million votes by mail in 2016. SCROTUS’s Presidential commission investigating fraud came up empty.

Well, to be fair, that's because they were so clearly setting up a fraudulent investigation that almost no state cooperated.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

When you say "33 million votes by mail in 2016" were you talking "absentee ballots that people actually had to apply for" or are you talking "general mailed ballots like is being proposed but is entirely different from absentee ballots"?

I thought back in 2016 we did have absentee ballots but not the proposed votes by mail that are quite different.

 

[ZiprHead]

When you say "33 million votes by mail in 2016" were you talking "absentee ballots that people actually had to apply for" or are you talking "general mailed ballots like is being proposed but is entirely different from absentee ballots"?

I thought back in 2016 we did have absentee ballots but not the proposed votes by mail that are quite different.

Five states – Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington – conduct what are commonly referred to as all-mail elections.

And they have had it for many years.

https://ballotpedia.org/All-mail_voting

Much more info in the link, some of it incorrect.

For example, Michigan did not implement vote by mail in response to covid. It was done by referendum years before covid was ever heard of.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So there were a few places where it was done. Of course even your source makes a distinction not made in this thread.

* Automatic mail-in ballots: Officials automatically transmit mail-in ballots to all eligible voters. Voters may return these ballots by mail or by using designated deposit sites. Limited in-person voting is generally available, although the number of polling sites and terms of accessibility vary from state to state.
* Automatic mail-in ballot applications: Officials automatically transmit mail-in ballot applications to all eligible voters. A voter must in turn submit a completed application in order to receive a ballot. The voter then returns the completed ballot by mail or by using designated deposit sites. In-person voting is widely available, but it is not necessarily the dominant means by which voters cast their ballots.

Is the fact that even your friendly source makes a distinction the reason you say that some of the information on that page is incorrect?

 

[laughing dog]

What on earth are you talking about?

I hear this tripe from the paranoid facebook crowd and it makes no sense. There is no difference.

This one new york city district means the whole system is broken? No, I don’t think so.

An absentee ballot is requested by the person who will be voting. You have to make an effort to become an absentee ballot. Granted it isn't much of an effort, barely any effort at all, but it still requires proactive effort.

Mail in voting reverses that and sends a ballot to everyone on the rolls.

Yes, they are very different. Very very different. I cannot imagine someone unable to tell the difference.

The ballots are identical to the eye. The process by which one receives the ballot is different. The process by which the ballot is authenticated is the same.

For example, how would the person authenticating the ballot tell the difference between an absentee ballot and a mail in ballot?

 

[ZiprHead]

He's not really dead. He's just pinin'... for the fjords.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

The ballots are identical to the eye.

Yep, there's no difference whatsoever because they look the same. If it looks the same to the naked eye, it means that there are absolutely no difference at all in any way.

You've made that argument before, that appearances are everything when it comes to voting methods.

 

[laughing dog]

The ballots are identical to the eye.

Yep, there's no difference whatsoever because they look the same. If it looks the same to the naked eye, it means that there are absolutely no difference at all in any way.

I did not make any such argument as anyone who reads the two sentences that followed and that you ignored - ""The ballots are identical to the eye. The process by which one receives the ballot is different. The process by which the ballot is authenticated is the same." which clearly indicates there is a difference. " can easily see.

[
You've made that argument before, that appearances are everything when it comes to voting methods.

I don't recall making any such argument, so please provide a link (not some sort of paraphrase like you did above) to substantiate your claim of fact.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Ah, so there are differences if you look beyond the superficial?