Disallowing mail-in ballots would disenfranchise overseas military personnel and many others, so that’s not really an option.
What’s a jungle ballot?
Legislative action would need 60 votes. Unless DEMs do away with the filibuster, I don’t see them getting anywhere close to the necessary votes. In regards to the filibuster, I’ve been predicting that would be the first domino to fall. I’m hoping I was wrong and that the remaining handful of moderate DEMs would prevent that from happening.
1 Like
No, the catalyst was unproven falsehoods about election procedures not being followed.
2 Likes
Trump made it clear even before the election that he would see his loss as a massive orchestrated effort by DEMs to steal the election. He set the stage early on and has followed that script religiously. I hold him alone responsible for the whole series of events leading to the tragic rioting yesterday.
2 Likes
It is unconstitutional to restrict free speech. No matter who does it.
What exactly are the democrats in congress going to do to restrict free speech?
Allan
Having a daughter in the military, I am aware of that. The problem is that in making an exception for the military, it opened the door to all other exceptions. The question is how to tighten this up. Can the bases conduct in person voting. (I suspect not without it being painful.) Can mail-in ballots be strictly limited?
Rather than an approach of making voting convenient, the better approach may be to focus on making voting secure. Something to think about and discuss.
Voting, including mail-in voting, is already both secure and convenient. It’s true when Republicans win and it’s true when Democrats win.
3 Likes
Despite the conspiracy theories, it seems this election has shown that mail-in ballots are safe.
1 Like
There were proven irregularities. My own assessment is that these irregularities were probably not enough to change the election results, slight emphasis on probably. Had these irregularities been quickly made known and condemned by all, the electorate would have been satisfied that votes are counted, falsified data is quickly found, eliminated, and prosecuted, and that every legitimate vote counted, all illegitimate votes discounted.
1 Like
Voting can be both secure and convenient. They are not exclusive terms.
Allan
Yes, there always are, but there is no evidence that they changed the outcome in any state.
I couldn’t disagree with this more. Donald Trump would never let his base be satisfied with a loss under any circumstances, no matter how fairly the election was conducted.
With good reason. Take a look at California. Democrats have long had their fingers in every means of election manipulation possible. Fair elections are not their bailiwick; winning elections by all means possible, yes. Take a look at the Kennedy election as well–and that was at a time the Democrat machine was much smaller than it is today.
1 Like
I agree they should not be. I have been saying for years if we can use computers for banking, taxes, medical info, etc., we should be working on a secure, convenient way to use our computers (and phones) to vote. However, irregularities did/do occur with the mail-in, and the possibility for more is there.
My point is what happened at the Capitol yesterday is a tempest in a small teacup. The more important issue is to demonstrate and prove any voting irregularities can be quickly pounced on and eliminated. The way to prove that is not to pronounce that no irregularities occurred and to announce all citizens must believe what government tells them.
Yes, I already noted this.
Not true. Pennsylvania did not follow their own election laws. This has already been established. Other allegations were unproven because serious eyewitness testimony was ignored.
2 Likes
Unfair. First of all, most of his base is looking at election processes and results. Second, the more alarming result is the fact that the incoming president and vice-president were both rejected in the nomination process, but that the Democrat machine got them into office anyway. And yes, part of that Democrat machine were those convinced to vote against President Trump. Shrug. This means those of us who truly like what President Trump accomplished are disappointed that the other half of the country did not–that the other half of the country cannot wait for government “care” to descend upon us from cradle to grave.
Agreed. Requesting absentee ballots has always worked in the past. One ballot per request. But they screwed that up.
1 Like
Yup. This!
If we are still talking about election fraud, might as well expect riot to happen again on Jan 20.
And there is proof that this changed the result in Pennsylvania? I would love to see that, and so would Trump’s lawyers.
Of course mail in ballots can be secured.
We’ve been securing them since the Civil War.
There is no difference between them and absentee ballots.
Hell Florida even recognized that and doesn’t distinguish between absentee and mail in by choice anymore.
