Crooked Operative Filmed Pulling Out Suitcases of Ballots in Georgia IS IDENTIFIED

[Kilroy2]

Mail in ballots does make it easy. Their are also checks and balances that elected officials have to do to verify the vote. They are checked against the register voter files that each state has. Signatures are checked. So there are procedures in place.

As local boards of elections meet this week to review the final set of mail-in ballots, they’ll look to make sure that the voter’s name and signature are on the front of each envelope. But they won’t look to see if that signature matches one on file somewhere, because voter signature matching is not required in North Carolina. Signature matching is a common practice, required in 30 states, to help protect the legitimacy of absentee mail-in ballots. But it’s not mandated in everywhere, including in key battleground states such as Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.


Read more here: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article247083467.html#storylink=cpy

well you may be correct in what you say about some and not all but I only said

"Signatures are checked" as I do not like to use the word "all" as it is an opening that can be exploited.

Well at least 30 states require it which is a little more than half.

Yet with Pennsylvania they do check signatures.

" Pennsylvania election law contains a requirement that absentee ballots must be signed by the voter so that the signature can be checked against the one they have on file. If the signatures do not match, the ballot is rejected.

They changed it prior to the election that signature alone cannot be the sole reason for rejection of the ballot. This cause Trump to challenge that they should be rejected for signatures that do no match.

Yet the state sought to use additional methods to verify ballot other than the sole reason being signature mismatch made by people looking at thousand of ballots. . Meaning that they would have to have other reason other than the sole reason of signatures that do not match. I think that they can flag it and would require additional verification of its legitimacy.

I would agree that signature alone should not cause a ballot to be rejected because it calls for poll workers to make subjective decision based on matching signature. They should have other checks to insure that the ballot is legitimate

The problem is that the people doing the counting must make a decision in about 5 minutes. In a court of law signatures verification is done by professionals which may take hours.

 

[Kilroy2]

Yes an email from an unknown person was supposedly sent to a number of people.

Another person in the meeting says he saw one machine hooked up to the internet. If you saw something like that would you snap a picture with your cell phone? Hooking a cable would require a router or modem someplace in the building.

If it is to be investigated it must be done by the FBI or some other investigative team. Not by people appointed by Trump. They are biased. There has been a number of legal cases by Team Trump that have been thrown out of court. If you have deep pockets then they will try anything to see if will float.

this article and another one that I read say the same thing. I do not see it reported by any major network. I could be wrong

Still both sources I looked at says exactly what I posted. The guy who sent the email is an unknown person. He has to come forward into the spot light if he going to make such allegations. Yes he will have to prove what he said is true.

Still an unknown email is hard to swallow if your at least open to both sides of the argument.

Well you have tech guys who have to maintain the machine and check for any problems with the machines. There may be security checks. There is no logical reason for them to be hooked up to the internet. Data from the machine can be retrieved using a device and transported to where it needs to ultimately go as a record of the votes.

Also I believe that they will check these votes with the voter database to catch duplicates or unregistered names.

Well people believe in voter fraud. If you feed them misinformation then they will take it as proof especially if their guy lost. Just because they believe it does not mean it happen on such a scale that it cause Trump to lose.

Voter fraud has to be proven in a court of law. Not in the court of public opinion.

When I get time I'll have to watch the Colonel's video again. Most people, even on Trump's side stated it would be a rough sell to get the SC to hear the case. While it's pretty clear these state judges allowed violations of their state Constitution, the Supreme Court mainly deals with the US Constitution. They don't want to get involved in trying to interpret the Constitution of any particular state.

I agree the FBI should investigate, but along with Trump's tech people. The FBI in recent years has become political and part of the deep state, therefore cannot really be trusted. Speaking of which, as for reporting on it, if the shoe was on the other foot, that's all they'd be talking about.

Besides the voting allegations, the entire election just doesn't make any sense. Biden is as exciting as Bob Dole when he ran. Many voters in surveys believe that Biden does have dementia. So how did this frail and fragile old man not only get more votes than Obama, but the most votes in the history of the Untied States? Stopping the building of the wall, increasing taxes on our job producers when we need them the most, drastically increasing the cost of fuel in spite of people having the least money in a long time, increasing the national minimum wage to $15.00 an hour causing a domino effect which will bring us inflation like we haven't seen in a long time, just doesn't make any sense. Especially when he ran against a President who had the best economy in 50 years.

Biden won because he was not Trump. As we all know, Biden votes were anti-Trump votes. This is evident from the number of voters that only voted for the president, ignoring the rest. Early voting and mail-in voting made a huge different in turnout. Think about. With mail-in voting you could vote any day, any time, and anywhere. You didn't have take time off work, no walking or driving to a polling place and standing in line, possibly in bad weather. Your polling place was as near as your mailbox. This made a huge difference in turnout. We had more minorities and more White voters than ever before. And generally, large turnouts favors democrats.

It would be nearly impossible to rig a US presidential election because a presidential election is decentralized. Voting and tabulations are maintained at over 200,000 polling places, 3000 counties, and 50 states. In countries where elections are stolen they are almost always centralized where all vote tabulation occurs in one or just a few places. Our electoral college system makes it even more difficult. The votes can't just be stolen in any state. The vote stealing would have to be in selected multiple states and which states are not know until after the voting is complete. In this election, there were 10 potential swing states.

Interesting point about selecting only the presidential candidate on some ballots.

Mail in ballots does make it easy. Their are also checks and balances that elected officials have to do to verify the vote. They are checked against the register voter files that each state has. Signatures are checked. So there are procedures in place.

Trump has to come up with a massive voter fraud plot and he certainly is not up to such a task with the people he associates with. Proof or evidence has to be conclusive. Without it then the next best thing is to spread rumors to the group of people who shout out fake news. Funny thing is they like to shout out fake news and turn around and applaud fake facts.

For voter fraud, which is individual voters, to matter it would require a vast conspiracy.

In effect, we have 50 different elections that are held under different laws and regulations and using different voting equipment and procedure. To pull off the massive voter fraud that Trump claims happened, the perpetrators would have to guess which states need to have their votes manipulated and by how much. Since voting is by precinct, within county within state, the perpetrators would have to have a remarkably accurate crystal ball to determine exactly where to flip votes and how many. Without that information, the chance of success would be very small and if we are talking about tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of votes, the chance of success is exceedingly small and the chance of being caught would be quite high since the perps would have to be working in many vote processing centers or precincts and where audits are recounts were required, the chance of success would be even smaller.

It ain't over yet.

waiting for the fat man to sing, well it will never be over.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

well you may be correct in what you say about some and not all but I only said

"Signatures are checked" as I do not like to use the word "all" as it is an opening that can be exploited.

Well at least 30 states require it which is a little more than half.

Yet with Pennsylvania they do check signatures.

" Pennsylvania election law contains a requirement that absentee ballots must be signed by the voter so that the signature can be checked against the one they have on file. If the signatures do not match, the ballot is rejected.

They changed it prior to the election that signature alone cannot be the sole reason for rejection of the ballot. This cause Trump to challenge that they should be rejected for signatures that do no match.

Yet the state sought to use additional methods to verify ballot other than the sole reason being signature mismatch made by people looking at thousand of ballots. . Meaning that they would have to have other reason other than the sole reason of signatures that do not match. I think that they can flag it and would require additional verification of its legitimacy.

I would agree that signature alone should not cause a ballot to be rejected because it calls for poll workers to make subjective decision based on matching signature. They should have other checks to insure that the ballot is legitimate

The problem is that the people doing the counting must make a decision in about 5 minutes. In a court of law signatures verification is done by professionals which may take hours.

So what about the people who vote in person and the signature doesn't match? That happened to my father after he had arm surgery. He had to fill out a provisional ballot, present two forms of ID, and even showed them his surgical scar.

The bottom line to all this is that mail in voting is a huge problem in this election, and should never be used again except for people who have legitimate reasons for not voting in person. When you vote in person, those signatures are matched and any issues like my father had are addressed and resolved on the spot. If you're too lazy to vote, then voting never mattered that much to you in the first place and you should stay home. I have comorbid medical conditions. If I catch this virus, there is a good chance I won't pull through it and even I voted in person. If I can make it to the grocery store, then I can make it to the polls to vote. My ballot was never in question.

 

[bravoactual]

45 loses lawsuit Number 56.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/12/federal-judge-slaps-down-trumps-lawsuit-to-throw-out-thousands-ballots-in-blue-wisconsin-counties/

.

This Friday, a circuit court judge in Wisconsin rejected President Trump’s lawsuit to throw out thousands of ballots in the blue counties of Dane and Milwaukee, the Wisconsin State Journal reports.

1 - Win.

1 - Set Aside.

56 - LOST.

The loser loses again.

 

[Flopper]

We really have no alternative but to use current technology. It would be virtually impossible to hand count all votes with 150 million ballots with an average of 40 items on each ballot. Voting systems that hand count paper ballots are much less accurate than modern systems and more subject to election fraud.

I doubt you have any evidence of that claim, however if a voting machine is not functioning properly, or was rigged, it can change tens of thousands of votes, and unless they are thoroughly examined, nobody will ever know.

Manually counting 150 million ballots with an average of 40 items would be insane.

There is plenty of room for election fraud in a manual paper counting system. Just one person can transpose 2 numbers in tabulating and change thousands of vote. Also with manual counting there is no backup. If some one bombed the counting office in a large county, we would loose all the votes for that county. Using current voting technology, every ballot is stored in every machine as a backup or the paper ballot produced is backup of the electronic copy. Copies are also are maintained by counties.

When it comes to accuracy, mark sense scanning machines have an error rate of less than 15 errors per million ballots which is far more accurate than manual counting.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Manually counting 150 million ballots with an average of 40 items would be insane.

There is plenty of room for election fraud in a manual paper counting system. Just one person can transpose 2 numbers in tabulating and change thousands of vote. Also with manual counting there is no backup. If some one bombed the counting office in a large county, we would loose all the votes for that county. Using current voting technology, every ballot is stored in every machine as a backup or the paper ballot produced is backup of the electronic copy. Copies are also are maintained by counties.

When it comes to accuracy, mark sense scanning machines have an error rate of less than 15 errors per million ballots which is far more accurate than manual counting.

Actually that tolerance is more than the punch card machines, and we had to get rid of all those thanks to Al Gore.

So we can do it again. Nothing wrong with scanning the ballots, but something wrong with depending on it alone. If we hand counted and used the machines, then any discrepancy between the two can be immediately addressed. As for hand counting, each ballot should get handed to a Democrat poll worker, then a Republican poll worker, and both have to agree it's a valid vote before being tabulated.

However the first step is to destroy all these Dominion machines and Smartmatic software, and any replacement systems should be guaranteed no ability to alter the outcome.

 

[bravoactual]

Loss Number 56.

SCOTUS Rejects Texas-Led Effort To Overturn Biden Victory.

Supreme Court rejects Texas-led effort to overturn Biden’s victory

The move likely marks the end of the line for Trump’s legal push to reverse his defeat.

www.politico.com

.

The Supreme Court has rejected a longshot bid by Texas and other Republican-led states to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in last month’s election, dashing President Donald Trump’s last-ditch hope that the justices effectively hand him a second term.

In a brief order Friday evening, the justices summarily refused the unusual case Texas filed Monday against four swing states whose voters favored Biden.

“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections,” the court wrote in its unsigned order.

As I said before.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America will not touch this.

1- Win.

1- Set Aside.

56 - LOST.

 

[Faun]

Loss Number 56.

SCOTUS Rejects Texas-Led Effort To Overturn Biden Victory.

Supreme Court rejects Texas-led effort to overturn Biden’s victory

The move likely marks the end of the line for Trump’s legal push to reverse his defeat.

www.politico.com

.

The Supreme Court has rejected a longshot bid by Texas and other Republican-led states to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in last month’s election, dashing President Donald Trump’s last-ditch hope that the justices effectively hand him a second term.

In a brief order Friday evening, the justices summarily refused the unusual case Texas filed Monday against four swing states whose voters favored Biden.

“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections,” the court wrote in its unsigned order.

As I said before.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America will not touch this.

1- Win.

1- Set Aside.

56 - LOST.

It's like winning the election yet again.

 

[Coyote]

The biggest step toward communism would be to convince voters that our democratic elections are unfair and rigged. If you accomplish that, the game's over. And Trump is well on his way to doing just that.

No, the biggest step toward Communism is running elections with a determined result no matter who voted how. When our vote doesn't count for anything, we've surrendered our freedom to Big Brother.

But isnt that exactly what you are trying to do?

2016...when Trump looks like he will lose, we hear about fraud and how it is rigged.

2030...same thing...only this time he lost.

Predermined conclusion based on both races and tbe Trump base's willingness to accept them: it is pnly fair and legitimate if Trump wins.

 

[bravoactual]

Loss Number 56.

SCOTUS Rejects Texas-Led Effort To Overturn Biden Victory.

Supreme Court rejects Texas-led effort to overturn Biden’s victory

The move likely marks the end of the line for Trump’s legal push to reverse his defeat.

www.politico.com

.

The Supreme Court has rejected a longshot bid by Texas and other Republican-led states to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in last month’s election, dashing President Donald Trump’s last-ditch hope that the justices effectively hand him a second term.

In a brief order Friday evening, the justices summarily refused the unusual case Texas filed Monday against four swing states whose voters favored Biden.

“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections,” the court wrote in its unsigned order.

As I said before.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America will not touch this.

1- Win.

1- Set Aside.

56 - LOST.

It's like winning the election yet again.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But isnt that exactly what you are trying to do?

2016...when Trump looks like he will lose, we hear about fraud and how it is rigged.

2030...same thing...only this time he lost.

Predermined conclusion based on both races and tbe Trump base's willingness to accept them: it is pnly fair and legitimate if Trump wins.

And you think this is something new? Haven't you been paying attention the last decade or two?

Yes, people will have sour grapes no matter who wins or who loses. However in this election, we had a record historical turnout for a frail, fragile old man that many voters believe has dementia, who's son is under an FBI investigation along with other members of his family, and it all ties into him being VP. To sum up his plans for this country, it's total destruction and financial ruins for our businesses. There are not one or two things that are suspicious with this election, there are dozens of them.

 

[Flopper]

well you may be correct in what you say about some and not all but I only said

"Signatures are checked" as I do not like to use the word "all" as it is an opening that can be exploited.

Well at least 30 states require it which is a little more than half.

Yet with Pennsylvania they do check signatures.

" Pennsylvania election law contains a requirement that absentee ballots must be signed by the voter so that the signature can be checked against the one they have on file. If the signatures do not match, the ballot is rejected.

They changed it prior to the election that signature alone cannot be the sole reason for rejection of the ballot. This cause Trump to challenge that they should be rejected for signatures that do no match.

Yet the state sought to use additional methods to verify ballot other than the sole reason being signature mismatch made by people looking at thousand of ballots. . Meaning that they would have to have other reason other than the sole reason of signatures that do not match. I think that they can flag it and would require additional verification of its legitimacy.

I would agree that signature alone should not cause a ballot to be rejected because it calls for poll workers to make subjective decision based on matching signature. They should have other checks to insure that the ballot is legitimate

The problem is that the people doing the counting must make a decision in about 5 minutes. In a court of law signatures verification is done by professionals which may take hours.

So what about the people who vote in person and the signature doesn't match? That happened to my father after he had arm surgery. He had to fill out a provisional ballot, present two forms of ID, and even showed them his surgical scar.

The bottom line to all this is that mail in voting is a huge problem in this election, and should never be used again except for people who have legitimate reasons for not voting in person. When you vote in person, those signatures are matched and any issues like my father had are addressed and resolved on the spot. If you're too lazy to vote, then voting never mattered that much to you in the first place and you should stay home. I have comorbid medical conditions. If I catch this virus, there is a good chance I won't pull through it and even I voted in person. If I can make it to the grocery store, then I can make it to the polls to vote. My ballot was never in question.

When mail-in ballot signatures do not match county registrar records, one of two things are done with these provisional ballots depending on state law and regulations. The election office attempts to contact the voter so he or she can provide proof of identity at an election office or other designated government offices. Then their ballot can be counted. Other states only validate these provisional ballots if there are very close races.

Mail-in voting is safer, more secure, and produces better voter turnout than voting at polling places for a number of reasons.

• Election center personnel are better trained at verifying signatures, are assisted with signature recognition software and are not under the pressure of workers at polls.
• Poll workers often allow people that are known and not known to them to bypass id checking. A small number of crooked poll workers can allow illegal voters to produce thousands of fraudulent ballots. In fact, most of the election violations, invalid or no id acceptance, intimidation of voters, and variety of other illegal activities are eliminated by eliminating the polls.
• Poll workers generally do not have access to registrar records and software for signature verification.
• Voters are notoriously bad when in comes to updating their registration address. All mail voting states keep their registration rolls up to day with updates from the DMV, the post office change of address notices, state records of deaths, as well as voter requests. The post office returns mail and ballot to the election registrars office if mail is being forward. The voter's registration is then put on hold The Washington Supervisor of elections claims that 99.9% of ballots either reach the voter or are returned to election office. The result of this effort means very few ballots go to the wrong the address.
• The likelihood of a ballot from a fraudulent voter passing signature validation is very low because the signature must match registrar records and most people that get these ballot don't have access to the voters signature that is on record at the registrar office.
• Although ballots can be copied in a copy machine, the unique control number, the special paper and ink that is used will cause fraudulent ballots to be kicked out when scanned.
• Every mail-in ballot has a control number that is torn off when completed. This control number makes it possible for the voter to track their ballot through the mail, and election process.
• Unlike poll voting, where a person can create any number ballots if he or she can pass id checking or is a buddy of a poll worker, a mail-in voter would find it far more difficult.
• In less than half of the states that vote at the polls, there is no paper ballot created for the voter and thus no true audit trail. In mail-in voting state there is a paper ballot for ever voter. This makes it's possible to audit and tracked the ballot from creation through the post office, signature verification and the counting process.
• All mail-in voting is much more convenient for voters allowing voters to vote from anywhere and at anytime. And their polling place is their mailbox. This results is much higher voter turnout.
• Mail-in voting removes so many barriers for Voters with physical or mental disabilities. They have all the time they need and no travelling is required and if they need help it is available over the phone or at any election office.
• For the millions of people who vote by mail now, there is no needed to request a ballot every year because one will be sent for each election.
• Finally, mail-in is safer. This is a real concern for voters who live in very bad crime infested neighborhoods.

 

[Coyote]

But isnt that exactly what you are trying to do?

2016...when Trump looks like he will lose, we hear about fraud and how it is rigged.

2030...same thing...only this time he lost.

Predermined conclusion based on both races and tbe Trump base's willingness to accept them: it is pnly fair and legitimate if Trump wins.

And you think this is something new? Haven't you been paying attention the last decade or two?

Yes, people will have sour grapes no matter who wins or who loses. However in this election, we had a record historical turnout for a frail, fragile old man that many voters believe has dementia, who's son is under an FBI investigation along with other members of his family, and it all ties into him being VP. To sum up his plans for this country, it's total destruction and financial ruins for our businesses. There are not one or two things that are suspicious with this election, there are dozens of them.

First off, no objective evidence of dementia.

Second, he won the election.

I had to suck up and accept the victory of one of the most corrupt anti democratic presidents I have ever encounteted in an election with tighter margins than this one. I had to suck up 4 years of seeing our countries ideals and democratic institutions destroyed by a narcissistic CoC. Are you saying you cant do the same without insisting without evidence, it was fraud?

 

[Flopper]

But isnt that exactly what you are trying to do?

2016...when Trump looks like he will lose, we hear about fraud and how it is rigged.

2030...same thing...only this time he lost.

Predermined conclusion based on both races and tbe Trump base's willingness to accept them: it is pnly fair and legitimate if Trump wins.

And you think this is something new? Haven't you been paying attention the last decade or two?

Yes, people will have sour grapes no matter who wins or who loses. However in this election, we had a record historical turnout for a frail, fragile old man that many voters believe has dementia, who's son is under an FBI investigation along with other members of his family, and it all ties into him being VP. To sum up his plans for this country, it's total destruction and financial ruins for our businesses. There are not one or two things that are suspicious with this election, there are dozens of them.

The most suspicious thing about this election is we have an incumbent with the morals of an alley cat who stood by as hundreds of thousand of our people died and all he had to say was, "What will be will be". Even thou he lost the election by 7 million votes, he has the gall to claim our elections are rigged and fraudulent because he doesn't have the courage to admit defeat. He has done far more harm to the cornerstone of our democracy, than the Russians, the Chinses, and the Iranians combined, and for what? A million to one chance of changing the election results.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The most suspicious thing about this election is we have an incumbent with the morals of an alley cat who stood by as hundreds of thousand of our people died and all he had to say was, "What will be will be". Even thou he lost the election by 7 million votes, he has the gall to claim our elections are rigged and fraudulent because he doesn't have the courage to admit defeat. He has done far more harm to the cornerstone of our democracy, than the Russians, the Chinses, and the Iranians combined, and for what? A million to one chance of changing the election results.

If you are going to blame Trump for the hundreds of thousands of deaths due to Covid, will you blame DumBama for the hundred thousands of death from the flu during his two terms? What is it about you people that make you believe a President has the ability to control a microorganism naked to the eye, and the decisions or actions of the people facing the problem?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

First off, no objective evidence of dementia.

Second, he won the election.

I had to suck up and accept the victory of one of the most corrupt anti democratic presidents I have ever encounteted in an election with tighter margins than this one. I had to suck up 4 years of seeing our countries ideals and democratic institutions destroyed by a narcissistic CoC. Are you saying you cant do the same without insisting without evidence, it was fraud?

There were no great unusual results in the Trump election yet alone dozens of them. What "democratic institutions" did Trump destroy? What "ideals" are you referring to?

Biden is not DumBama. DumBama having such results would have been more understandable: first Mulatto candidate running for President, encouraged black voters to register to vote as well as the white guilt crowd. Spoke well, no corruption beside him. But creepy hair sniffing Joe? There is nobody with a lick of common sense that accepts these results.

Biden's evidence of dementia are apparent in all of his basement recordings. That's besides the fact that it doesn't matter if it's proven or not. What matters is how so many people believed he had dementia actually voted for him. Zero sense whatsoever.

Now the Supreme Court shot down Trump's one last chance. So this country is in the hands of Biden. That means much higher fuel costs, increased taxes on our job creators, a huge increase in inflation once he gets his new minimum wage to $15.00 an hour, bringing back Commie Care fines which robbed the people who least have the money, higher capital gains taxes which will hamper our stock market, paying off college debts to buy future votes even though we are 26 trillion dollars in debt.

Trust me. After two years of Biden destroying this country, opening up our southern border, foreigners taking jobs Americans should be working, you'll be regretting your support to remove the best President we've had in over 20 years. Corruption? Trump's family is not under FBI investigation into money laundering and dealings with our international enemy--Biden's family is.

 

[Kilroy2]

But isnt that exactly what you are trying to do?

2016...when Trump looks like he will lose, we hear about fraud and how it is rigged.

2030...same thing...only this time he lost.

Predermined conclusion based on both races and tbe Trump base's willingness to accept them: it is pnly fair and legitimate if Trump wins.

And you think this is something new? Haven't you been paying attention the last decade or two?

Yes, people will have sour grapes no matter who wins or who loses. However in this election, we had a record historical turnout for a frail, fragile old man that many voters believe has dementia, who's son is under an FBI investigation along with other members of his family, and it all ties into him being VP. To sum up his plans for this country, it's total destruction and financial ruins for our businesses. There are not one or two things that are suspicious with this election, there are dozens of them.

First off, no objective evidence of dementia.

Second, he won the election.

I had to suck up and accept the victory of one of the most corrupt anti democratic presidents I have ever encounteted in an election with tighter margins than this one. I had to suck up 4 years of seeing our countries ideals and democratic institutions destroyed by a narcissistic CoC. Are you saying you cant do the same without insisting without evidence, it was fraud?

well you may be correct in what you say about some and not all but I only said

"Signatures are checked" as I do not like to use the word "all" as it is an opening that can be exploited.

Well at least 30 states require it which is a little more than half.

Yet with Pennsylvania they do check signatures.

" Pennsylvania election law contains a requirement that absentee ballots must be signed by the voter so that the signature can be checked against the one they have on file. If the signatures do not match, the ballot is rejected.

They changed it prior to the election that signature alone cannot be the sole reason for rejection of the ballot. This cause Trump to challenge that they should be rejected for signatures that do no match.

Yet the state sought to use additional methods to verify ballot other than the sole reason being signature mismatch made by people looking at thousand of ballots. . Meaning that they would have to have other reason other than the sole reason of signatures that do not match. I think that they can flag it and would require additional verification of its legitimacy.

I would agree that signature alone should not cause a ballot to be rejected because it calls for poll workers to make subjective decision based on matching signature. They should have other checks to insure that the ballot is legitimate

The problem is that the people doing the counting must make a decision in about 5 minutes. In a court of law signatures verification is done by professionals which may take hours.

So what about the people who vote in person and the signature doesn't match? That happened to my father after he had arm surgery. He had to fill out a provisional ballot, present two forms of ID, and even showed them his surgical scar.

The bottom line to all this is that mail in voting is a huge problem in this election, and should never be used again except for people who have legitimate reasons for not voting in person. When you vote in person, those signatures are matched and any issues like my father had are addressed and resolved on the spot. If you're too lazy to vote, then voting never mattered that much to you in the first place and you should stay home. I have comorbid medical conditions. If I catch this virus, there is a good chance I won't pull through it and even I voted in person. If I can make it to the grocery store, then I can make it to the polls to vote. My ballot was never in question.

You have a right to your opinion. You say mail in votes are a problem. What if your in the military station overseas or working in the embassy or overseas for some reason. Should you not be allowed to vote because your cannot go to a voting center.

elections have been doing mail in ballots for over a century. why is it a problem know. Trump won 4 years ago with mail in or absentee ballots were being used. The two bushes won, Ronald Reagan won.

COVID -19 is a problem. If you do not see it as a reason for doing mail in then that is your opinion. Yet other agree that it is a good idea. People have different perceptions about exposing themselves. Some will protect themselves while others will throw caution to the wind. They both have a right to vote and use the best method that they believe keeps them safe.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You have a right to your opinion. You say mail in votes are a problem. What if your in the military station overseas or working in the embassy or overseas for some reason. Should you not be allowed to vote because your cannot go to a voting center.

elections have been doing mail in ballots for over a century. why is it a problem know. Trump won 4 years ago with mail in or absentee ballots were being used. The two bushes won, Ronald Reagan won.

COVID -19 is a problem. If you do not see it as a reason for doing mail in then that is your opinion. Yet other agree that it is a good idea. People have different perceptions about exposing themselves. Some will protect themselves while others will throw caution to the wind. They both have a right to vote and use the best method that they believe keeps them safe.

I already said mail in should be allowed for people that have a legitimate reason to use it. Being overseas in the military is the best reason ever.

We did use mail in in the past, but a fraction of what was used this time. Why is it okay to go shopping at Walmart in person but too dangerous to vote? The Democrats used Covid as an excuse for more mail in. They've been pushing for more mail in long before Covid. Voting in person could have easily been done safely.

So why do Democrats push for mail in? The same reason they fought against Voter-ID's. The Democrats rely on ignorant voters to win elections. Without ignorant voters, the only time you'd hear of the Democrat party is in history books. People who are politically ignorant don't have an interest in politics, so voting is not that important either. I have no interest in the NFL. I couldn't tell you the teams that played in the last five Super Bowls.

Since voting is not that important to ignorant voters, they will only vote if it's convenient enough: rides to the polls, polls open for several days instead of one, no lines, late evening voting hours.... If there is any inconvenience in voting, ignorant voters will stay home, and that means Democrats losses. The Obama Phone and Obama Money people won't show up.

But when you plop a mail in ballot right on somebody's kitchen table, yes, they will vote. They have no idea of what they are voting on, but vote anyhow. And this is why we end up with people like Biden. Anybody with a D next to their name is going to get the votes from these lazy welfare types.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

well you may be correct in what you say about some and not all but I only said

"Signatures are checked" as I do not like to use the word "all" as it is an opening that can be exploited.

Well at least 30 states require it which is a little more than half.

Yet with Pennsylvania they do check signatures.

" Pennsylvania election law contains a requirement that absentee ballots must be signed by the voter so that the signature can be checked against the one they have on file. If the signatures do not match, the ballot is rejected.

They changed it prior to the election that signature alone cannot be the sole reason for rejection of the ballot. This cause Trump to challenge that they should be rejected for signatures that do no match.

Yet the state sought to use additional methods to verify ballot other than the sole reason being signature mismatch made by people looking at thousand of ballots. . Meaning that they would have to have other reason other than the sole reason of signatures that do not match. I think that they can flag it and would require additional verification of its legitimacy.

I would agree that signature alone should not cause a ballot to be rejected because it calls for poll workers to make subjective decision based on matching signature. They should have other checks to insure that the ballot is legitimate

The problem is that the people doing the counting must make a decision in about 5 minutes. In a court of law signatures verification is done by professionals which may take hours.

So what about the people who vote in person and the signature doesn't match? That happened to my father after he had arm surgery. He had to fill out a provisional ballot, present two forms of ID, and even showed them his surgical scar.

The bottom line to all this is that mail in voting is a huge problem in this election, and should never be used again except for people who have legitimate reasons for not voting in person. When you vote in person, those signatures are matched and any issues like my father had are addressed and resolved on the spot. If you're too lazy to vote, then voting never mattered that much to you in the first place and you should stay home. I have comorbid medical conditions. If I catch this virus, there is a good chance I won't pull through it and even I voted in person. If I can make it to the grocery store, then I can make it to the polls to vote. My ballot was never in question.

When mail-in ballot signatures do not match county registrar records, one of two things are done with these provisional ballots depending on state law and regulations. The election office attempts to contact the voter so he or she can provide proof of identity at an election office or other designated government offices. Then their ballot can be counted. Other states only validate these provisional ballots if there are very close races.

Mail-in voting is safer, more secure, and produces better voter turnout than voting at polling places for a number of reasons.

• Election center personnel are better trained at verifying signatures, are assisted with signature recognition software and are not under the pressure of workers at polls.
• Poll workers often allow people that are known and not known to them to bypass id checking. A small number of crooked poll workers can allow illegal voters to produce thousands of fraudulent ballots. In fact, most of the election violations, invalid or no id acceptance, intimidation of voters, and variety of other illegal activities are eliminated by eliminating the polls.
• Poll workers generally do not have access to registrar records and software for signature verification.
• Voters are notoriously bad when in comes to updating their registration address. All mail voting states keep their registration rolls up to day with updates from the DMV, the post office change of address notices, state records of deaths, as well as voter requests. The post office returns mail and ballot to the election registrars office if mail is being forward. The voter's registration is then put on hold The Washington Supervisor of elections claims that 99.9% of ballots either reach the voter or are returned to election office. The result of this effort means very few ballots go to the wrong the address.
• The likelihood of a ballot from a fraudulent voter passing signature validation is very low because the signature must match registrar records and most people that get these ballot don't have access to the voters signature that is on record at the registrar office.
• Although ballots can be copied in a copy machine, the unique control number, the special paper and ink that is used will cause fraudulent ballots to be kicked out when scanned.
• Every mail-in ballot has a control number that is torn off when completed. This control number makes it possible for the voter to track their ballot through the mail, and election process.
• Unlike poll voting, where a person can create any number ballots if he or she can pass id checking or is a buddy of a poll worker, a mail-in voter would find it far more difficult.
• In less than half of the states that vote at the polls, there is no paper ballot created for the voter and thus no true audit trail. In mail-in voting state there is a paper ballot for ever voter. This makes it's possible to audit and tracked the ballot from creation through the post office, signature verification and the counting process.
• All mail-in voting is much more convenient for voters allowing voters to vote from anywhere and at anytime. And their polling place is their mailbox. This results is much higher voter turnout.
• Mail-in voting removes so many barriers for Voters with physical or mental disabilities. They have all the time they need and no travelling is required and if they need help it is available over the phone or at any election office.
• For the millions of people who vote by mail now, there is no needed to request a ballot every year because one will be sent for each election.
• Finally, mail-in is safer. This is a real concern for voters who live in very bad crime infested neighborhoods.

As local boards of elections meet this week to review the final set of mail-in ballots, they’ll look to make sure that the voter’s name and signature are on the front of each envelope. But they won’t look to see if that signature matches one on file somewhere, because voter signature matching is not required in North Carolina. Signature matching is a common practice, required in 30 states, to help protect the legitimacy of absentee mail-in ballots. But it’s not mandated in everywhere, including in key battleground states such as Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.


Read more here: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article247083467.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Kilroy2]

You have a right to your opinion. You say mail in votes are a problem. What if your in the military station overseas or working in the embassy or overseas for some reason. Should you not be allowed to vote because your cannot go to a voting center.

elections have been doing mail in ballots for over a century. why is it a problem know. Trump won 4 years ago with mail in or absentee ballots were being used. The two bushes won, Ronald Reagan won.

COVID -19 is a problem. If you do not see it as a reason for doing mail in then that is your opinion. Yet other agree that it is a good idea. People have different perceptions about exposing themselves. Some will protect themselves while others will throw caution to the wind. They both have a right to vote and use the best method that they believe keeps them safe.

I already said mail in should be allowed for people that have a legitimate reason to use it. Being overseas in the military is the best reason ever.

We did use mail in in the past, but a fraction of what was used this time. Why is it okay to go shopping at Walmart in person but too dangerous to vote? The Democrats used Covid as an excuse for more mail in. They've been pushing for more mail in long before Covid. Voting in person could have easily been done safely.

So why do Democrats push for mail in? The same reason they fought against Voter-ID's. The Democrats rely on ignorant voters to win elections. Without ignorant voters, the only time you'd hear of the Democrat party is in history books. People who are politically ignorant don't have an interest in politics, so voting is not that important either. I have no interest in the NFL. I couldn't tell you the teams that played in the last five Super Bowls.

Since voting is not that important to ignorant voters, they will only vote if it's convenient enough: rides to the polls, polls open for several days instead of one, no lines, late evening voting hours.... If there is any inconvenience in voting, ignorant voters will stay home, and that means Democrats losses. The Obama Phone and Obama Money people won't show up.

But when you plop a mail in ballot right on somebody's kitchen table, yes, they will vote. They have no idea of what they are voting on, but vote anyhow. And this is why we end up with people like Biden. Anybody with a D next to their name is going to get the votes from these lazy welfare types.

Well so ignorance is you reasoning behind mail in ballots and general voting that you do not agree with. Yet you accept mail in ballots in certain circumstances. Mail in ballots allows more people to vote as is shown in the total numbers. There are controls in place and some votes are thrown out. It allows more people to vote but some do not want more people to vote. They fear getting more people to vote.

Its bad to repub because they lost. The swing states are being attacked by Texas which also has mail in ballots. Florida has mail in ballots. Trump won those states but repubs are not concern with mail in ballots in those states.

So attacking places where they lost is not seen by them as self-serving. Other words for self serving is egocentric, egoistic, egomaniacal

These are the things that make people ignorant. Trump has these qualities that endear him to his followers.

Yet when Mitch would not hold a vote on Obama's pick for the court because he says that the people should decide , Mitch blocked it. Now when trump does it with 3 months left. He rush it thru. The crowd is pleased. They want more.

Is that ignorance? It certainly is self serving. Does self serving make one ignorant?

Well it is the repubs who cannot accept the defeat of their guy. Making claims that have been shot down like ducks in hunting season.

You believe voter fraud cost Trump the election but you cannot prove it. Instead it is more important to spread lies in the hope that certain group of people will believe it without any actual proof. It is also easier to claim ignorance and jump on a bandwagon.

Well you say mail in vote create fraud. IF you allow it in certain situation and disallow it in other then where is this fraud. Who decides when and what group of people can do mail in vote. If you allow one group to do it then in a true democracy you allow others the same convenience.

still states like Texas allow mail in ballot. You do not know what percentage voted Rep or Demo. Fear breeds distrust especially when you do not have the numbers.

thus why they are ignorant in your opinion is because they do not vote repub. The simplicity of this is blinded by motive.

well I would say that you statement lacks any verifiable facts. In fact it is an opinion. When opinions are replaced with facts then that certainly is problematic. Calling others ignorant is in itself ignorance.

The constitution does not require voters to be ignorant or not ignorant. It just requires them to choose. Some even say that the electoral college can be used by the ignorant to overrule the ones they perceive as ignorant. Akin to the blind leading the blind.

Choose is given to everyone who are eligible to vote. Yet some repubs like to take away that choice while waving the flag.

Disagreement amongst people is common but it is a problem if someone cannot handle it. Democracy requires not just lip service but accepting defeat gracefully and accepting the win without demeaning the loser. Well that is one meaning but I am sure your is different.

Well I want to give a shout out to Annie. Hey I miss you but I will stop by soon.