2020 General Election

[JoltinJoe]

Which is why this is the wrong time to allow something different.

Why during the time of COVID19 and physical distancing should in-person voting be limited to a single day? That too is asking for questionable results. Sticking to what we've always done is selfish and stupid.

You continue to confuse what is reasonable with what and how people think.

There is not a broad enough consensus that mail-in voting will work. Far too many people think fraud is going to run rampant.

It doesn't matter that this belief is not reasonable.

This belief, unreasonable as it may be, will result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome, if it is not the outcome they want.

There is a looming electoral disaster before us that will make Bush v. Gore seem quaint.

[kalm]

Except that it’s been done for years in WA and OR with nary a complaint.

These are extraordinary times and safe/verifiable voting is achievable if we want to do it.

When a wide consensus reaches the point where you are, then we can successfully do this.

That time is not now.

Why does a state need the consent of two political parties to allow vote by mail? If it saves lives and can be done efficiently, then it becomes the problem of those opposing it.

Do the right thing.

[HI54UNI]

God Fauci says we can vote in person.

[JoltinJoe]

When a wide consensus reaches the point where you are, then we can successfully do this.

That time is not now.

Why does a state need the consent of two political parties to allow vote by mail? If it saves lives and can be done efficiently, then it becomes the problem of those opposing it.

Do the right thing.

I honestly think you have a comprehension problem. Read what I wrote. If you don't understand what I'm saying, too bad for you. I'm not going to repeat myself constantly for the slow ones here.

[Ivytalk]

When a wide consensus reaches the point where you are, then we can successfully do this.

That time is not now.

Why does a state need the consent of two political parties to allow vote by mail? If it saves lives and can be done efficiently, then it becomes the problem of those opposing it.

Do the right thing.

You’re becoming another Eeyore Dobie with all your gloom-and-doom stuff. Joe is right about the risks of mail-in voting in the absence of a broad consensus as to systemic integrity, reliability, and method uniformity. Are you really comfortable with a nationwide ballot-puke to every voting address of record, regardless of updates for death, moving, etc.?

[UNI88]

Why does a state need the consent of two political parties to allow vote by mail? If it saves lives and can be done efficiently, then it becomes the problem of those opposing it.

Do the right thing.

You’re becoming another Eeyore Dobie with all your gloom-and-doom stuff. Joe is right about the risks of mail-in voting in the absence of a broad consensus as to systemic integrity, reliability, and method uniformity. Are you really comfortable with a nationwide ballot-puke to every voting address of record, regardless of updates for death, moving, etc.?

What if millions of people are afraid to go to the polls on November 3 because of safety concerns with COVID19? If Trump wins will that "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome, if it is not the outcome they want." Joe's crisis is a real possibility if we change nothing too. If we can't have mail in voting, why can't we extend the time for voting to be more than one day? Solve the problem in a way that encourages voting and not fraud but isn't selfish and an example of piss poor leadership.

[Skjellyfetti]

Are you really comfortable with a nationwide ballot-puke to every voting address of record, regardless of updates for death, moving, etc.?

We aren't talking about nationwide mail-in voting. That's not happening by November.

We're talking about some states deciding on their own to do it. Some decided years ago to do it. The Constitution allows them to do administer federal elections.

[Skjellyfetti]

What if millions of people are afraid to go to the polls on November 3 because of safety concerns with COVID19? If Trump wins will that "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome, if it is not the outcome they want."

And thousands or millions of ballots still being left uncounted a week after the election due to a USPS backlog.

[UNI88]

Are you really comfortable with a nationwide ballot-puke to every voting address of record, regardless of updates for death, moving, etc.?

We aren't talking about nationwide mail-in voting. That's not happening by November.

We're talking about some states deciding on their own to do it. Some decided years ago to do it. The Constitution allows them to do administer federal elections.

So Trump undercutting the USPS is him interfering with power reserved for the states? That's not a cause for concern and couldn't "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome". Is it ok to cause a constitutional crisis by using the defense that you're trying to prevent one but when in reality you only care about yourself and only care about the constitution when it benefits you?

[UNI88]

What if millions of people are afraid to go to the polls on November 3 because of safety concerns with COVID19? If Trump wins will that "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome, if it is not the outcome they want."

And thousands or millions of ballots still being left uncounted a week after the election due to a USPS backlog.

Can they free up enough money by laying off 40-50% of the carriers and going to every other day delivery?

[∞∞∞]

November 3 is only election day, right? There's no actual timeline for when the winner has to be announced?

From my understanding, states can take as long as they need to count ballots (as long as it's before the EC votes).

[SDHornet]

As bad ad Biden is, the Democrats are energized for this election. They would vote for almost anyone over Trump. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt by saying almost anyone.

Well, they're doing their best to prove that. Who would've imagined in the time of the BLM protests and the End Racism movements and Defund the Police that the Democrats would actually roll out for their Presidential candidate an almost 80 year old white guy who put his kids in a white private school in opposition to desegregated busing that would've had his kids go to a much more diverse school and is also the same guy who, even when he still had all of his mental faculties, authored the crime bill in the 90's that was primarily responsible for incarcerating an entire generation of Black youths. And then on top of that the party picks a VP candidate who, as the top cop in her state, implemented a lot of what was in that crime bill, including sending to jail a host of Black youths for simple possession of marijuana, even while she went home and smoked some weed herself. And this is the ticket that will get 90% of the Black vote.

With Trump as President we already knew we were living in crazy times, but they just get crazier and crazier. I'm still hoping that the clouds break and we have some sanity when it comes around to 2024, but that's probably wishful thinking.

And therein lies the conundrum the DNC has put itself in.

[SDHornet]

+2. I pick up my mail about every 8-10 days. I get maybe 1-2 pieces of useful info and the rest never makes it into the house.

Mail keeps my recycling folks employed.

[SDHornet]

You’re becoming another Eeyore Dobie with all your gloom-and-doom stuff. Joe is right about the risks of mail-in voting in the absence of a broad consensus as to systemic integrity, reliability, and method uniformity. Are you really comfortable with a nationwide ballot-puke to every voting address of record, regardless of updates for death, moving, etc.?

What if millions of people are afraid to go to the polls on November 3 because of safety concerns with COVID19? If Trump wins will that "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome, if it is not the outcome they want." Joe's crisis is a real possibility if we change nothing too. If we can't have mail in voting, why can't we extend the time for voting to be more than one day? Solve the problem in a way that encourages voting and not fraud but isn't selfish and an example of piss poor leadership.

There is plenty of time to file for an absentee ballot. Absentee ballot is different than the forced "vote by mail" that is being floated. And I think there are states that have polls open multiple days. Using the China Virus as an excuse to usher in an un-vetted "vote by mail" scheme is a big stretch for those with a functioning brain.

[SDHornet]

We aren't talking about nationwide mail-in voting. That's not happening by November.

We're talking about some states deciding on their own to do it. Some decided years ago to do it. The Constitution allows them to do administer federal elections.

So Trump undercutting the USPS is him interfering with power reserved for the states? That's not a cause for concern and couldn't "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome". Is it ok to cause a constitutional crisis by using the defense that you're trying to prevent one but when in reality you only care about yourself and only care about the constitution when it benefits you?

Excellent points.

I'm also finding irony in the guy whose Trump Russia Collusion narrative blew up because of government incompetence and corruption suddenly relying on a massive government system (USPS) to deliver ballots on time and in a competent manner on a scale never experienced before. What could possibly go wrong?

[canyoncat]

Haven't read the whole thread, but I do not think the USPS can come close to handling this. 200+ million ballots sent out and then sent back? No way all the ballots make it in on time and counted. If polling is open to vote in person that is how I am voting. If you want to vote by mail, fine fill out an absentee form, or request a mail in ballot (if you can). This mass mailing in my opinion just can't work.

[SDHornet]

[UNI88]

So Trump undercutting the USPS is him interfering with power reserved for the states? That's not a cause for concern and couldn't "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome". Is it ok to cause a constitutional crisis by using the defense that you're trying to prevent one but when in reality you only care about yourself and only care about the constitution when it benefits you?

Excellent points.

I'm also finding irony in the guy whose Trump Russia Collusion narrative blew up because of government incompetence and corruption suddenly relying on a massive government system (USPS) to deliver ballots on time and in a competent manner on a scale never experienced before. What could possibly go wrong?

We're living in the Irony Age.

I share your concerns about USPS' ability to handle mail-in ballots but it should be up to the states to decide if they want to provide that option, not Trump or his administration. Whoever loses is going to claim that the election was rigged against them. The next 6+ months are going to be interesting.

[Skjellyfetti]

Haven't read the whole thread, but I do not think the USPS can come close to handling this. 200+ million ballots sent out and then sent back?

For the thousandth time, we are not going to have national mail-in ballots in November. A handful of states are. Some states have been doing it for some time.

[kalm]

Why does a state need the consent of two political parties to allow vote by mail? If it saves lives and can be done efficiently, then it becomes the problem of those opposing it.

Do the right thing.

I honestly think you have a comprehension problem. Read what I wrote. If you don't understand what I'm saying, too bad for you. I'm not going to repeat myself constantly for the slow ones here.

I understand what you wrote, I just disagree. We have a couple of months to get vote by mail correct. That’s the right thing to do in light of the pandemic. This is just politics and shoukd be called out for it.

[kalm]

Why does a state need the consent of two political parties to allow vote by mail? If it saves lives and can be done efficiently, then it becomes the problem of those opposing it.

Do the right thing.

You’re becoming another Eeyore Dobie with all your gloom-and-doom stuff. Joe is right about the risks of mail-in voting in the absence of a broad consensus as to systemic integrity, reliability, and method uniformity. Are you really comfortable with a nationwide ballot-puke to every voting address of record, regardless of updates for death, moving, etc.?

Similar concerns arise on a state by state basis for other reasons. Thanks for the Gil compliment. I like that guy.

[kalm]

What if millions of people are afraid to go to the polls on November 3 because of safety concerns with COVID19? If Trump wins will that "result in tens of millions of voters rejecting the outcome, if it is not the outcome they want." Joe's crisis is a real possibility if we change nothing too. If we can't have mail in voting, why can't we extend the time for voting to be more than one day? Solve the problem in a way that encourages voting and not fraud but isn't selfish and an example of piss poor leadership.

There is plenty of time to file for an absentee ballot. Absentee ballot is different than the forced "vote by mail" that is being floated. And I think there are states that have polls open multiple days. Using the China Virus as an excuse to usher in an un-vetted "vote by mail" scheme is a big stretch for those with a functioning brain.

FTR, I wasn’t arguing for a nationwide ballot.

[kalm]

Excellent points.

I'm also finding irony in the guy whose Trump Russia Collusion narrative blew up because of government incompetence and corruption suddenly relying on a massive government system (USPS) to deliver ballots on time and in a competent manner on a scale never experienced before. What could possibly go wrong?

We're living in the Irony Age.

I share your concerns about USPS' ability to handle mail-in ballots but it should be up to the states to decide if they want to provide that option, not Trump or his administration. Whoever loses is going to claim that the election was rigged against them. The next 6+ months are going to be interesting.

[Ivytalk]

You’re becoming another Eeyore Dobie with all your gloom-and-doom stuff. Joe is right about the risks of mail-in voting in the absence of a broad consensus as to systemic integrity, reliability, and method uniformity. Are you really comfortable with a nationwide ballot-puke to every voting address of record, regardless of updates for death, moving, etc.?

Similar concerns arise on a state by state basis for other reasons. Thanks for the Gil compliment. I like that guy.

If you think the Democrats won’t push for a 50-State mail-in option (in fact, they already are) and won’t complain if their effort is refused, you’re smoking a piss-poor brand of weed. It’s reflected in the brouhaha over USPS funding. But you know that, because you’re a smart guy.

[UNI88]

Similar concerns arise on a state by state basis for other reasons. Thanks for the Gil compliment. I like that guy.

If you think the Democrats won’t push for a 50-State mail-in option (in fact, they already are) and won’t complain if their effort is refused, you’re smoking a piss-poor brand of weed. It’s reflected in the brouhaha over USPS funding. But you know that, because you’re a smart guy.

Yes they will, for their own selfish reasons. And Trump will resist it for his own selfish reasons. Unfortunately, I'm not sure Adam Smith's invisible hand approach applies to government.

USPS probably does need a little help but it needs to get its sh!t together as well.