After speaking with friends in different states I've learned that in-person voting is 100% digital in some states such as Texas and California, while in the states deciding the election, they're still voting on paper ballots. Why isn't the in-person voting procedure standardized and audited? Why are states like Cali and Texas able to report in hours yet in other states like Georgia and Arizona we've got a warehouse full of volunteers (of whom it is impossible to vet for bad actors) counting the ballots that will decide the election? The only reason is the easier application of fraud. It is insanely absurd that we still don't have a handful of state's totals a day later while other states we have nearly instantly. It's insanely absurd that in-person voting procedure isn't standardized and audited. We all know why that is, and it needs to change. Honestly, I have no idea how to set that in motion or if it could even be done legally.
Comments (5)
sorted by:
Standardizing things nationally would require expanded federal control of elections. While under the current administration that might seem tempting, imagine if a Democrat-controlled federal agency had the power to, say, prevent your red state from requiring photo IDs or even permitting illegals and minors to vote.
While under the current system states like Pennsylvania and Michigan have corrupted processes ripe for fraud, most states still have functioning elections. Centralizing things would put all our eggs in one basket.
Great point. Standardizing procedure is the obvious choice in a perfect world, but reality isn't so forgiving.