That's precisely my point. They'll try to subvert things one way or another. Mail-in is now the easiest path as it's so widespread. Voting machines after that. If you were to sort those things out (as I hope you will), then this becomes more important. And just like that recent article on mail-in, it's probably inconsequential in a presidential election but is often used in local elections.
Though individuals voting more than once are definitely used to try to steal elections. Let's not forget bussing and how big a scandal that was as recently as the 2016 election. You can't even verify whether someone voted in their local county, how are you gonna verify whether they voted in several? Like other forms of fraud, people will say that "there's not a lot of evidence that it happens" but how the hell would you know? The only ones getting caught have to be idiots.
A very simple (and yes, ultimately inconsequential form of fraud compared to some of the other stuff you hear, but still a possibility): what is stopping anybody from mailing in a ballot, then voting in person? Does anyone, in any state, double check this? How could they, if you don't keep track of who voted in person? I have not seen any evidence that they could double check this, or do.
A very simple (and yes, ultimately inconsequential form of fraud compared to some of the other stuff you hear, but still a possibility): what is stopping anybody from mailing in a ballot, then voting in person? Does anyone, in any state, double check this? How could they, if you don't keep track of who voted in person? I have not seen any evidence that they could double check this, or do.
I've wondered the same. I think it depends on the state.
We need to convince the left that Trump will steal the election with vote-by-mail. Then they might switch course.
I'm sure it's a bit more complex but logistically, I can't think of any way you'd ensure this in most cases.
What we do here is we set Mail-in aside. They're only counted after the in-person election. When you vote in person, you add your signature next to your name for every ballot you accept (or your name is crossed out if you vote in another location). Either way, they know that you voted in person. Then they check the Mail-in against that.
Most American states (maybe all?) don't have a system of that kind. We have lists of eligible voters (based on the census I believe) so no registration is necessary. Since you don't keep track of that, you don't know who voted in person and can't double check the Mail-in. You could compare it to voter registrations in most regular elections but many states threw a wrench in that plan by sending ballots to everyone. And even aside for that, do any states actually mark down that you already voted in person? I haven't seen any evidence of that so far (but would love to be proven wrong). Without that, there would be no way to know that you voted in person and it defeats the entire point of what I've said so far.
Alternatively, you could put together a list of all people who voted by mail (as a friend of mine suggested), though this would require all mail-in ballots to arrive before election day (which is not going to be the case in any US state).
That's sort of what it comes down to, there's many different ways to pull off election fraud, some easier and more blatant than others. The mail-in scams and voting machines are things that everyone talks about. The issues I like to bring up are ones that nearly-nobody seems to be discussing for some reason.
Even when it comes to Voter ID, it helps mitigate some stuff but someone hell-set on subverting those systems could do it with or without Voter ID. Let's not kid ourselves, if there was a Federal Voter ID mandate, California would probably hand out free photo ID to everyone, including illegals. You need something to compare the IDs against, which would probably have to be a census that excludes illegals (here's hoping Trump has luck with that).
I just worry that many people are trying to push for Voter ID as an end-all, be-all solution to in-person fraud without realizing that Voter ID doesn't fully prevent many of the issues they're worried about.
That's precisely my point. They'll try to subvert things one way or another. Mail-in is now the easiest path as it's so widespread. Voting machines after that. If you were to sort those things out (as I hope you will), then this becomes more important. And just like that recent article on mail-in, it's probably inconsequential in a presidential election but is often used in local elections.
Though individuals voting more than once are definitely used to try to steal elections. Let's not forget bussing and how big a scandal that was as recently as the 2016 election. You can't even verify whether someone voted in their local county, how are you gonna verify whether they voted in several? Like other forms of fraud, people will say that "there's not a lot of evidence that it happens" but how the hell would you know? The only ones getting caught have to be idiots.
A very simple (and yes, ultimately inconsequential form of fraud compared to some of the other stuff you hear, but still a possibility): what is stopping anybody from mailing in a ballot, then voting in person? Does anyone, in any state, double check this? How could they, if you don't keep track of who voted in person? I have not seen any evidence that they could double check this, or do.
I've wondered the same. I think it depends on the state.
We need to convince the left that Trump will steal the election with vote-by-mail. Then they might switch course.
I'm sure it's a bit more complex but logistically, I can't think of any way you'd ensure this in most cases.
What we do here is we set Mail-in aside. They're only counted after the in-person election. When you vote in person, you add your signature next to your name for every ballot you accept (or your name is crossed out if you vote in another location). Either way, they know that you voted in person. Then they check the Mail-in against that.
Most American states (maybe all?) don't have a system of that kind. We have lists of eligible voters (based on the census I believe) so no registration is necessary. Since you don't keep track of that, you don't know who voted in person and can't double check the Mail-in. You could compare it to voter registrations in most regular elections but many states threw a wrench in that plan by sending ballots to everyone. And even aside for that, do any states actually mark down that you already voted in person? I haven't seen any evidence of that so far (but would love to be proven wrong). Without that, there would be no way to know that you voted in person and it defeats the entire point of what I've said so far.
Alternatively, you could put together a list of all people who voted by mail (as a friend of mine suggested), though this would require all mail-in ballots to arrive before election day (which is not going to be the case in any US state).
In FL I believe mail-in votes are being counted as they are received.
No way around fraud as I see it, if unsolicited ballots are being mailed out.
I don't know the answers to all these questions. I hope someone does.
That's sort of what it comes down to, there's many different ways to pull off election fraud, some easier and more blatant than others. The mail-in scams and voting machines are things that everyone talks about. The issues I like to bring up are ones that nearly-nobody seems to be discussing for some reason.
Even when it comes to Voter ID, it helps mitigate some stuff but someone hell-set on subverting those systems could do it with or without Voter ID. Let's not kid ourselves, if there was a Federal Voter ID mandate, California would probably hand out free photo ID to everyone, including illegals. You need something to compare the IDs against, which would probably have to be a census that excludes illegals (here's hoping Trump has luck with that).
I just worry that many people are trying to push for Voter ID as an end-all, be-all solution to in-person fraud without realizing that Voter ID doesn't fully prevent many of the issues they're worried about.