User Controls
What’s wrong with mail in ballots for the 2020 election?
-
2020-08-18 at 6:23 AM UTCJust to continue the discussion from before the nuke, so you chicken shits can't back out:
Originally posted by Speedy Parker The ballots would have to mailed by registered mail with a return receipt, and then monitored until they were filled out by a registered voter and returend to postal custody via regigired mail return reciept to an election official
No they wouldn't. They would only need to be sent in via registered mail, after which they already establish an unbroken chain of custody.
to even come close to establsihinh a chain of custody that would hold up at trial.
USPS registered mail is regularly used for evidence in trials.The key here is that it would only come close. As voting is confidential the monintor would not be able to account for who had the "evidence" or the circumstances for the evicdence bined handled. But the truth is none of that would be affordable or logistically possible for each and every ballot that is simply mass mailed as the DNC currently wished to do. Which means no chain of custody can possibly be established for mail in ballots.
We're not conducting a trial, we are conducting a vote. And USPS registered mail already establishes an unbroken chain of custody. And a chain of custody doesn't require someone to have eyeballs on it at all times, just to account for who had possession at every step of the process.So again would you be fine with that type of chain of custody for evidence if you were on trial?
It's literally already accepted in trials, so yes.As I have already stated, not one single person who argues in favor of mail in voting can or is willing to directly and honsely answer that simple question with a simple yes or no.
Your illiteracy and failure to read doesn't constitute no one answering. I've answered you already: yes, it's literally already accepted in trials.
But it's irrelevant: we aren't conducting a trial, we are conducting a vote. -
2020-08-18 at 1:27 PM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE Just to continue the discussion from before the nuke, so you chicken shits can't back out:
No they wouldn't. They would only need to be sent in via registered mail, after which they already establish an unbroken chain of custody.
USPS registered mail is regularly used for evidence in trials.
We're not conducting a trial, we are conducting a vote. And USPS registered mail already establishes an unbroken chain of custody. And a chain of custody doesn't require someone to have eyeballs on it at all times, just to account for who had possession at every step of the process.
It's literally already accepted in trials, so yes.
Your illiteracy and failure to read doesn't constitute no one answering. I've answered you already: yes, it's literally already accepted in trials.
But it's irrelevant: we aren't conducting a trial, we are conducting a vote.
Read up on chain of custody and get back to me. -
2020-08-18 at 3:51 PM UTC
-
2020-08-18 at 3:58 PM UTCYou'd need two mail men going to every door. Same as at the voting booths. There's never to be one person, or a partisan group, who handles the ballots.
-
2020-08-18 at 4:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Splam You'd need two mail men going to every door. Same as at the voting booths. There's never to be one person, or a partisan group, who handles the ballots.
You have to go to the post office to send registered mail. You can just station poll agents at USPS offices and it would already massively increase access to voting.
But it's unnecessary anyway. Regular mail in ballots work fine around the world. -
2020-08-18 at 4:43 PM UTCShould make it unanonymous then. If you send in your ballot by mail, you should be able to login to an online service and see what you voted to ensure nobody tampered with your vote.
Actually, it'd still be anonymous. Only you'd be able to see. Or is 256 bit encryption not secure enough? Other than that, no downsides to it. Actually, could use this system to vote through internet. Why not? Increase access? No lost mail?
If you send a hundred million ballots in the mail, they'll still be discovering lost envelopes and counting them months later in significant enough numbers that it could reasonably be expected to change the election outcome. -
2020-08-18 at 6:25 PM UTC
Originally posted by Splam Should make it unanonymous then. If you send in your ballot by mail, you should be able to login to an online service and see what you voted to ensure nobody tampered with your vote.
Actually, it'd still be anonymous. Only you'd be able to see. Or is 256 bit encryption not secure enough? Other than that, no downsides to it. Actually, could use this system to vote through internet. Why not? Increase access? No lost mail?
If you send a hundred million ballots in the mail, they'll still be discovering lost envelopes and counting them months later in significant enough numbers that it could reasonably be expected to change the election outcome.
Maybe at some later juncture. At the moment, paper voting works. And other countries deal with it fine. Just regular mail in voting is fine. -
2020-08-18 at 7:43 PM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE Facts don't care about your feelings.
USPS Registered mail establishes uninterrupted chain of custody from both ends and is used for transport of evidence in trials so… deal with being wrong.
except the US doesnt have as many trials a day as there are voters.
the manpower required to facilitate that many uninterrupted chain of custody simply isnt there.
its obvious to any non bangladeshi shítskin. -
2020-08-18 at 8:43 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny
except the US doesnt have as many trials a day as there are voters.
the manpower required to facilitate that many uninterrupted chain of custody simply isnt there.
its obvious to any non bangladeshi shítskin.
1. Vote by mail happens for like a month in advance of an election rather than on one day. Capacity isn't a problem.
2. You don't need any additional man power, as it is still just mail. The only difference being that it gets sent in a different container that is signed over and accounted for at every step of the transport process. -
2020-08-18 at 8:47 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock lovingly allowed lard-ass lanny the luxury of lapping the loins-leviathan while the little lad larps as a laotian ladyboy lapdancer.... (banned) irrelevant if what is in the envelope is already corrupted.
the USPS would just assure that the corrupted mailing would be delivered to the address listed on the label.
youre an idiot
Retard^
Voters can't "corrupt" their own ballot. If any tampering happens between the voter has submitting their envelope and it getting delivered, it would be immediately obvious.
USPS registered mail is already used for its uninterrupted chain of custody in US legal proceedings. Anyone trying to dispute its integrity is mentally handicapped and arguing against reality. If it's good enough for a court, it's good enough for a vote. -
2020-08-18 at 8:51 PM UTCIn any case, at no time should ballots ever be entrusted to a single person or people acting as a single entity.
-
2020-08-18 at 11:56 PM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE Facts don't care about your feelings.
USPS Registered mail establishes uninterrupted chain of custody from both ends and is used for transport of evidence in trials so… deal with being wrong.
Like I said the mail in voting process does not meet chain of custody requirements even with the use of registered mail. Read up on it first.
But than is immaterial as the dems just want to mass mail out ballots and wait for them to come back so they can count them. -
2020-08-19 at 12:24 AM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE 1. Vote by mail happens for like a month in advance of an election rather than on one day. Capacity isn't a problem.
you need witnesses to prove the balllots collected at the mailboxes really came from genuine voters.2. You don't need any additional man power, as it is still just mail. The only difference being that it gets sent in a different container that is signed over and accounted for at every step of the transport process.
all under the control and supervision of one entity, the post service. if the post service is corrupted then its really easy to cover up the rigging process. -
2020-08-19 at 1:09 AM UTC
-
2020-08-19 at 1:26 AM UTC
-
2020-08-19 at 1:30 AM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker Like I said the mail in voting process does not meet chain of custody requirements even with the use of registered mail. Read up on it first.
It doesn't need to. I just answered your shitty question: "mail-in evidence" is literally a thing.But than is immaterial as the dems just want to mass mail out ballots and wait for them to come back so they can count them.
And that's perfectly fine, because mail in voting works: it has worked here in America, it has worked around the world.
The only "problem" is that your throat is full from gargling Trump:s balls. -
2020-08-19 at 1:58 AM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker Mass mail is not secure. Address that as it is what the DNC wants. Not some fantasy in your mind of a simple two way regigistered mail system that doesn't meet standard legal chain of custody requirements.
It doesn't need to be two ways, and there are no "legal custody requirements" for voting, because it's not necessary. Large scale fraud on postal voting is almost impossible. -
2020-08-19 at 2:05 AM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny you need witnesses to prove the balllots collected at the mailboxes really came from genuine voters.
No you don't. Registered voters who specifically request a ballot get ballots mailed to them. It's trivial to track postal voting statistically.all under the control and supervision of one entity, the post service. if the post service is corrupted then its really easy to cover up the rigging process.
It's a federal agency, just like the Election Commission. -
2020-08-19 at 5:09 AM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE It doesn't need to. I just answered your shitty question: "mail-in evidence" is literally a thing.
Surely evidence has been lost I the mail too.
Originally posted by ORACLE It doesn't need to be two ways, and there are no "legal custody requirements" for voting, because it's not necessary. Large scale fraud on postal voting is almost impossible.
Almost impossible. It has to be 100% impossible for it to be accepted as a replacement for in person voting. Or at the very least not a downgrade. Not to say voting booths themselves likely deal with their own share of fraud. Minor exceptions can be made for people working or serving overseas. -
2020-08-19 at 5:11 AM UTCAmericans are too fat to walk to the voting booth anymore they need mail in ballots LMAOThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
