DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump says he opposes mail-in voting for November

I am not against that at all.


I am against illegals and dead people voting. Grandma died last year but was never removed from the voter rolls. She gets a ballot. Now daughter or grandson vote for her.

The only way to a fair election is to show up and show proper ID.

Tell you what my friend, if you can figure a way to provide a secure system that prevents illegals or dead people from voting, I will go with the plan. I can't figure out a way.


I am trying to have a honest conversation here and people are talking about Germans bombing Pearl Harbor.


That is why this country has gone to crap, and it ticks me off.

I voted by mail-in-vote in the Ohio primary. This was my first time through this process. Here was the experience.

To request a ballot, I had to print out the proper request forms for my county's board of elections.

On the request form you had to provide your SSN#, state ID# or driver's license # and then sign the form.

The Board of Elections then verified that information and your signature had to match the signature on file when you completed your voter registration.

Once I received the actual ballot, you cast your votes by coloring in the bubbles next to your choice of candidate with black or blue ink.

Once completed, you signed your ballot and again had to write either your SSN#, driver's license # or state ID #. I then had to put the ballot in the Board of Elections envelope, seal it and then seal that envelop in another Board of Elections envelop and return either by mail or drop-off in person at the county Board of Elections.

Again, if the signature on the ballot does not match the signature on the voter registration on file with county Board of Elections, the ballot gets tossed.

So, if someone was to steal your ballot from your mailbox, they either need to have your SSN#, Driver's License# or State ID# and also be able to accurately duplicate your signature.

But that is a legal request for an absentee ballot. The democrat idea is to mail ballots out to everyone, with no proof of person. Big difference.

Facts dictate that your statement is totally devoid of reality.

But you keep repeating the same lies and propaganda despite it being proven - factually - to be incorrect. smh

Then you aren't for democratic process. I have developed some tremors in my hands. My signature looks way different from what it might have been when I first registered. You can't hardly read it.

So I am willing to go down and prove who I am to vote but you want my vote tossed because my signature looks different?


I don't want people forging signatures.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rejects Suit Delaying Mail-in-Ballot Deadline


Katherine Rodriguez

16 May 2020


The Pennsylvania state Supreme Court on Friday rejected a lawsuit that would force election officials to accept mail-in-ballots as long as they are received within a week after the primary or general elections while the coronavirus pandemic is in place.

The Senior Law Center, Disability Rights Pennsylvania, and other organizations filed the suit in late April, arguing that postal delays caused by the coronavirus pandemic could cause ballots not to be received at their destinations in time to count, the Associated Press reported.

However, Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration argued against it, saying the plan would be unconstitutional because it would give voters different deadlines.

According to a 2019 law, the deadline for county elections offices to receive mail-in-ballots is 8:00 p.m. when the polls close on election day.

Pennsylvania’s primary was postponed from April 28 until June 2 because of the coronavirus, and officials say many votes will be cast by mail.

Meanwhile, counties are planning on limiting the number of polling locations due to the coronavirus.

The state legalized mail-in-ballots last fall, and they will be implemented for the first time this year. If voters wish to request a mail-in-ballot, they must do so by May 26, NBC 10 Philadelphia reported.

Recent data has not shown a compelling public health justification for mail-in-ballots.

Wisconsin is one of the only U.S. states that held its primary election with in-person voting after the nation’s coronavirus lockdowns began.

The election drew 413,000 participants, and only a few dozen out of that group were confirmed to have contracted the virus by either voting or serving as a poll worker. None of those cases was fatal, and the data on the current infection rate equals a rate below two-hundredths of one percent.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/...ftcyOpaOA7zyRKU

I didn't set the requirements. I explained my experience that was in place for the mail in voting for Ohio this past primary election.

So no, I don't want your vote tossed. It's not up to me.

Don't be a goof.

Yes, mailing a ballot to everyone, whether requested or not, likely will present challenges. I'd like to read a detailed plan on the verification process before committing to a strong opinion. I do not see a lot of data to support widespread voter fraud. It's more of a boogeyman than anything else at this time.

Voters, republican, democrat, independent or otherwise, however, need to fulfill their end of the bargain as well in the verification process, whether it be in-person or mail-in.

For me, it was more of a process to vote by mail vs. voting in person, due to the double and triple checking to make sure every 'I' was dotted and 'T' was crossed to ensure my ballot would be counted. I can see where mistakes would be made in the process and votes not counted.

As an example, data from an article in the FiveThirtyEight...



https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the...y-an-advantage/

Because they are asking for the money to help state and local governments use mail in voting. It doesn't force them to.

I'm going to leave my perpetual vote in my will to the OCD screw the GOPers foundation... lol

Pretty funny, but in a way, that is my fear. LOL In the year 2120 your vote is still being counted.


That was good my friend. Somebody looks at the records..."This guy is 165 years old!" LOL

Might as well let me vote, Some Nigerian is probably going to be collecting my social security.

It is 100% worth a look. I would be lying if I said I had full confidence in our federal OR state governments to get this set up and executed in orderly fashion in under 6 months, considering the scale that it has to be set up on...

I am not opposed to the concept of mail in voting. Heck I'm not opposed to the concept of on-line voting... but my faith in the government to do it well?...

I'm always weary of this, "let the experts" line of thought.

The experts once thought we were entering a new ice age in the 70s. Then they tried to convince us that we would all burn to death in 20-30 years in the 90s. They all thought it was good to trade mortgages on the stock market in the 00s. Lately, they told us millions would die in the US due to the virus.

The experts have not been doing so well in the last 50 to 60 years.

Sort of falls into the 'death of expertise' discussion which is very close to the anti-intellectualism discussion on a different thread.

"Experts have not been doing well for 50-60 years" ?

And you sight a single topic - climate change - a new science with limited data and an evolving amount of data/science/expertise to make or back up your claim?

I am assuming that was a flippant comment - but still.

As for them telling us millions "would" die .... that's not what they said but I guess it fits with your motive. I believe what they said was millions 'could' / 'might' die.... and action was needed. . . . and with a death toll getting close to 100K - and with no vaccine in sight and with all sorts of other unknowns - I don't know that I would be so quick to assume the numbers are in a nose dive. 1,000 deaths a day is nothing to be dismissed.

Actually, I was using some of the far sweeping predictions that the experts have been using for years to change our way of life. Here's your millions prediction from a source that also repeats "experts" predictions on climate change.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/19/the-coro...visor-says.html
It looks like they did say that.

I do appreciate your claim of climate change being a "new science" that changes constantly with new data. People call me a denier when I say things like that.

Whooosh.

Point missed. Totally.

And as for Climate change. It is a newer science. Unquestionably.
I guess if things are new you want to dismiss them? That's your opinion which is all fine and dandy - but again, not the point.

I'd say you missed the point. I cited 4 different expert predictions. Global cooling, global warming, trading mortgages, predictions on covid. All of them have been wrong, while all were pronounced true when they were made.

Our voting in this country has evolved slowly over time, and has been proven rather stable. Now a group of people want to suddenly make wholesale changes due to a temporary situation that can be easily mitigated with a little personal responsibility.

And if social responsibility was a strong American trait, I'd agree you have a point. But we have a blend of responsible people in a sea of idiots during normal times. Now that scoffing at science and making death threats for those that oppose your personal views are in vogue, I don't want to stand in line with Karen and Billy Bob on election day.

Seriously? Have you been to the grocery store in the past two months?

So we are up to "four" areas of "expertise" and even though two of them are essentially the same field - you think that nullifies Experts everywhere in all fields which is your original comment which is what I responded too. Sure.

So now you are up to "four" examples and you think it justifies your claim that Experts have not been doing well for 50-60 years. Pfffft.

Nothing about the "millions" comment? I found you proof on that one in about 3 seconds.

If you're too scared to go to the polls, get an absentee ballot. I prefer to vote the old fashioned way. In person.

I should challenge you to find me something the experts have been right about in the past 50-60 years.

Michigan sends mail-in vote applications to all registered voters

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-michigan-idUSKBN22V2VQ

Elections are handled on a state to state basis. Which is why some states have far more restrictions and have taken measures to make voting harder. Each state has their own rules and laws concerning elections. But Trump doesn't like that. So King Trump is now threatening states......

Trump threatens to hold up funding to Michigan and Nevada for expanding vote-by-mail access

President Donald Trump threatened on Wednesday to withhold funding from Michigan and Nevada for expanding their mail-in voting services in an effort to avoid crowded polling centers during the coronavirus pandemic.
Trump’s tweet incorrectly said voters in Michigan, a crucial swing state, will receive an absentee ballot in the mail.

“Breaking: Michigan sends absentee ballots to 7.7 million people ahead of Primaries and the General Election. This was done illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State,” Trump tweeted. “I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path!”

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, quickly corrected the president with her own tartly worded tweet.
“We sent applications, not ballots. Just like my GOP colleagues in Iowa, Georgia, Nebraska and West Virginia,” Benson said.

Benson’s office did not immediately return a request for comment.
It’s unclear what “funding” Trump is referring to. The White House declined to comment.
A senior administrative official at the Office of Management and Budget, which develops and executes the budget across the Executive Branch, told CNBC in a statement that “no decisions have been made at this time” regarding Trump’s threat to withhold funding and that “discussions are on-going.”
And it is unclear whether Republicans in the state will challenge the move.
Shortly after that tweet, Trump unloaded on Nevada for expanding mail-in voting to carry out the state’s congressional primaries on June 9.

“State of Nevada ‘thinks’ that they can send out illegal vote by mail ballots, creating a great Voter Fraud scenario for the State and the U.S. They can’t! If they do, ‘I think’ I can hold up funds to the State. Sorry, but you must not cheat in elections,” he tweeted.

Republicans vying in the primary for Nevada’s 4th Congressional District are itching to win that seat held by Democratic Rep. Steven Horsford.
Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, a Republican, introduced the vote-by-mail initiative in March in response to the coronavirus outbreak, Nevada TV station KSNV reported.

Trump has been a staunch critic of vote-by-mail expansion. In April, he said mail-in voting “doesn’t work out well for Republicans,” suggesting that easier access to absentee ballots could determine whether the Republicans retain control over the Senate or win the House. It may also affect Trump’s own fortunes in his reelection bid this year, especially in swing states where margins could be razor thin.

He has claimed that voting by mail leads to voter fraud, but there is no evidence that this is true. Earlier this year, Trump submitted an absentee ballot to vote for himself in Florida’s presidential primary.

Michigan is among several states to take action to limit in-person voting due to the fear of spreading the coronavirus.

The pandemic has upended 2020 elections, forcing officials to seek safer or alternatives for Americans to cast their votes.

In the last two months, multiple states and territories either delayed or adjusted their presidential primaries due to a fear of spreading the virus among large groups.

Already, more than a dozen states have begun to prepare for the November election, with the anticipation that more voters will choose mail-in ballots over in-person voting. California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order on May 8 allowing all registered voters in the state to receive a mail-in ballot for the November election.

The issue has attracted the attention of several heavyweight Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

On Tuesday, Warren urged the Senate to include $4 billion in the next coronavirus relief package to allow states to expand their vote-by-mail services for the general election.

The outbreak has spread to dozens of countries, with more than 4.9 million confirmed cases worldwide and over 323,653 deaths, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. There are at least 1.5 million cases in the United States and at least 91,938 deaths, according to the latest tallies.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/20/coronavi...-expansion.html

I guess he hasn't been able to figure out that some states already vote by mail in some, or all of their elections already and have been for some time in certain cases.....

State Statutes on All-Mail Elections

States that conduct all elections by mail:

Colorado (CRS §1-5-401)

Hawaii (Hawaii Stat. §11-101)

Oregon (ORS §254.465)

Utah (Utah Code Ann. §20A-3a-302)

Washington (Rev. Code of Wash. 29A.40.010)

States that permit counties to opt into conducting all elections by mail:

California: Any county may conduct any election as an all-mail election following statutory guidelines. (Cal. Elec. Cde §§4005-4008).

Nebraska: Any county of less than 10,000 inhabitants may apply to the secretary of state to mail ballots for all elections in lieu of establishing polling places (Neb. Rev. Stat. §32-960).

North Dakota: Counties may conduct any election by mail. Applications for mailed ballots are sent to each individual listed on the central voter file (note that North Dakota does not require voter registration ahead of the election) and there must be one or more polling places in the county for voting in the usual manner (ND Cent. Code §16.1-11.1-01 et seq.)

States that permit some elections to be conducted by mail:

Alaska: Elections that are not held on the same day as a general, party primary or municipal election (Alaska Stat.§15.20.800)

Arizona: A city, town, school district or special district may conduct elections by mail (Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §16-409, §16-558)

Florida: Referendum elections at the county, city, school district or special district level (Fla. Stat. §101.6102)

Kansas: Nonpartisan elections at which no candidate is elected, retained or recalled and which is not held on the same date as another election (Kan. Stat. Ann. §25-432)

Maryland: Special elections not held concurrently with a regularly scheduled primary or general election (Md. Election Code §9-501)

Missouri: Nonpartisan issue elections at which no candidate is elected, retained or recalled and in which all qualified voters of one political subdivision are the only voters eligible to vote (Mo. Rev. Stat. §115.652 et seq.)

Montana: Any election other than a regularly scheduled federal, state, or county election; a special federal or state election, unless authorized by the legislature; or a regularly scheduled or special election when another election in the political subdivision is taking place at the polls on the same day (MCA 13-19-101 et seq.)

Wyoming: Counties may decide to conduct special elections not held in conjunction with a primary, general or statewide special election entirely by mail (Wyo. Stat. 22-29-115)

States that permit certain jurisdictions or portions of a jurisdiction to be designated as all-mail based on population:

Idaho: A precinct which contains no more than 140 registered electors at the last general election may be designated by the board of county commissioners a mail ballot precinct no later than April 1 in an even-numbered year (Idaho Code §34-308)

Minnesota: Elections conducted by a municipality having fewer than 400 registered voters on June 1 of an election year and not located in a metropolitan county (Minn. Stat. §204B.45)

Nevada: Whenever there were not more than 20 voters registered in a precinct for the last preceding general election (Nev. Rev. Stat. §293.213)

New Jersey: A municipality with a population of 500 or fewer persons, according to the latest federal decennial census, may conduct all elections by mail (NJRS §19.62-1)

New Mexico: A county may designate a precinct as a mail ballot election precinct if it has fewer than 100 voters and the nearest polling place for an adjoining precinct is more than 20 miles driving distance from the precinct boundary in question (N. M. Stat. Ann. § 1-6-22.1)

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-mail-elections.aspx

I'm predicting right now, write it down... if Trump wins the election in November, there will be a whole slew of articles blaming the victory on improprieties with mail in voting and demanding recounts and investigations...

It's likely to happen if he loses as well... both will be fun to watch..

And it will all boil down to who has control of the state. In most cases that would be Democratic run states that will allow mail in voting. Most of them already know Democrats will win the state regardless if they allow mail in voting or not. So while I won't rule out what you say, it would be much less likely that most states who allow mail in voting will go Republican.

But hey, we already know what Trump will do. I mean remember 2016? If he won he would accept the election results. If he lost, it was fixed.

So we can be 100% sure you will at lest be half right.

Here were the tweets...

I sure do remember that. I remember what Hillary and the democrats did too.. I remember them all having a cow when Trump said he would respect the outcome of the election... if he won. Then Obama had to persuade Hillary to make the concession call after learning that she lost, then months (years) of whining about the electoral college and throwing the popular vote results into every conversation (as if it mattered)... I sure do remember it like it was yesterday.. because I saw it just yesterday.

So one sid did accept it even though it took some persuading and the other side took refusing to accept it as a preemptive strike to anger and work up their supporters and sow the seed of contempt. that would be correct.

And this isn't the first time Democrats lost the presidency because every Americans vote isn't counted the same.

Hey, don't blame me because Donald Trump had the courage to say out loud what Hillary was also thinking.


The electoral college works, get over it.

j/c

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/politics/more-than-80-ballots-sent-to-san-pedro-apartment/106443/

Does the election get invalidated if 150% of the population votes?

Depends on who wins.

Must be a big apartment!! :-p

I am honestly curious as how you think the electoral college works? I'm not saying we should even get rid of it, but when we are taught our entire lives that "every vote counts" and then you learn that essentially certain votes count "more" than others, then it's not really even anymore.

How we use something that isn't simply popular vote is beyond me, regardless of which party would win.

I can see clearly the Constitution and history of this country is no longer taught in school.

To make this quick, the US is supposed to be a union of 50 separate countries, with an overseeing federal government. The federal government was originally supposed to settle disputes between states, and set an overall policy for the states to act as a whole.

In this light, the House was to be directly elected by the people, and be direct representatives of those people. The Senate was to be appointed by state representatives that were elected directly by the citizens of each particular state. That was changed to a direct election by the 17th amendment. The House was to represent the people, and the Senate was to represent the states.

The president is to be elected by electors of each state, with the number of those electors determined by the state's population. The electors are to vote for a president based on the votes of the citizens of each state. This was to prevent large population centers from completely controlling the presidency. The electoral college was to assure each state's populace had a say in the presidency, and maintain a ballance between the cities and rural areas.

A popular vote now would have the populations of NY, CA, and IL electing the president, with no other state's populace having much say.

Yeah, nothing has changed since 1781 when it was approved.

And there in lies the rub. Utah isn't the only Republican state that mainly votes by mail. The difference is Trump says nothing about those states. He picks and chooses. He targets Democratic states and his legend of followers blindly applaud.

At least this is something we can agree on.