What does your question have to do with working to limit the use of mail-in ballot voting to a legitimate excuse-based need, considering the fact that the expansion of excuse-based mail-in ballot voting, to no-excuse mail-in ballot voting, has exacerbated the opportunities for vote stealing and government perpetrated election fraud?
JWK
If you insert the answer into your question then itâs no longer just a question but also a statement
What does you making a statement a question form suggest about you seeking anything but affirmation?
were there sudden jumps for R in wee hours after they ordered to stop counting across several states (at about the same time)?
were questionably (at best) constitutional changes made to late ballots, questionable signatures, etc at 11 hour?
how many more mail ballots were used in 2020 vs 2016?
how many more harvested ballots?
Presenting a pertinent material fact to consider is making a statement a question? My question was:
What does your question have to do with working to limit the use of mail-in ballot voting to a legitimate excuse-based need . . . ?
Yes itâs a pertinent fact (aka a statement) phrased as a question.
It has to do with you wanting affirmation not debate.
thats originalism.
there are others schools of thought.
that you dismiss outright.
we would still have segregated schools with your old fashioned thinking
Allan
States such as Georgia and Pennsylvania counted election day ballots before mail-in ballots. Trump never had the lead in Arizona due to this state having counted the mail-in ballots before election day ballots. FOX News called Arizona for Biden at about 11:20 EST that night.
Yep all the Woke Libs are thankful.
This seems pertinent to the discussion.
SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) â A conservative group has told a Georgia judge that it doesnât have evidence to support its claims of illegal ballot stuffing during the the 2020 general election and a runoff two months later.
Texas-based True the Vote filed complaints with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in 2021, including one in which it said it had obtained âa detailed account of coordinated efforts to collect and deposit ballots in drop boxes across metro Atlantaâ during the November 2020 election and a January 2021 runoff.
A Fulton County Superior Court judge in Atlanta signed an order last year requiring True the Vote to provide evidence it had collected, including the names of people who were sources of information, to state elections officials who were frustrated by the groupâs refusal to share evidence with investigators.
In their written response, attorneys for True the Vote said the group had no names or other documentary evidence to share.
Iâm shocked I tell you - SHOCKED!!
Ok not really 
Woke libs 
I can assure you I have never voted for the guy who has no problem terminating the constitution.
Not to mention that you would think a thinking man wouldnât cut off the end of a word when quoting - but I suppose I have seen stranger things here.
yep. they know what they are doing.
Nice to see Alex Soros using his 25 billion to prop up Brandon and to score the ultimate US political hottie not named Alexandria.
LoveâŚainât it wonderful.
What is pertinent to the conversation is, mail-in ballots have two fundamental security flaws which allow, and even invite, vote stealing and government orchestrated election fraud, and is the very subject you apparently are intent on deflecting from and obscuring, with your non sequitur comments.
The fundamental security flaws I make reference to are: (a) there is no practical way to scrutinize a mail-in ballot when counted, to verify that it was actually filled out, and the choices made thereon, were by a qualified voter who allegedly was issued the ballot, and (b), there is a loss of chain of custody from the time a mail-in ballot is received by a theoretically legitimate recipient of a mail-in ballot, to the time when that mail-in ballot is counted.
The above mentioned security flaws with mail-in ballots is why mail-in ballots should only be allowed for those who have a legitimate excuse-based need, e.g., see: PAâs Constitution (ARTICLE VII, ELECTIONS, § 14. Absentee Voting.
By limiting mail-in voting to a legitimate excuse-based need, the total number of mail-in ballots would be reduced to a fraction of what is now the case, and in so doing, even though the opportunity for vote stealing and mail-in ballot fraud would still exist, its effect on an election would be greatly reduced by the reduction in actual mail-in ballots allowed. Perhaps that is why so many democratic run countries have banned mail-in voting, LINK, and returned to paper ballots, strict voter ID and in-person voting as a rule.
Now, what say you with regard to the above?
JWK
The troubling truth about allowing no-excuse mail-in voting in one state is, when acts of corruption infect an electoral process in one jurisdiction âthey transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain.â Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)â.
There is nothing wrong with your assertion except that itâs based on plausibility of crime. Thatâs fine.
Your position is already known. We got it.
No. That is what is commanded by our Constitution which requires an adherence ". . . to the rules of the common law . . . ", the most fundamental rule under the ârules of the common lawâ is, expounding upon and carrying out the intentions and beliefs under which the Constitution was agreed upon. As unequivocally stated by our very own supreme court:
âThe whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it.â_____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)
JWK
Those who reject abiding by the text of our Constitution, and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agree to, as documented from historical records ___ its framing and ratification debates which give context to its text ___ wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to âinterpretâ the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.
So, are we in agreement that mail-in ballots, should only be allowed for those who have a legitimate excuse-based need?
I told ya before that I agree with the possibilities that you put forth. It is entirely possible and plausible that it may increase the likelihood of fraud etc especially when there is an increase in the number of people using it.
But i donât agree that it means it should be restricted necessarily. Other security measures could and should be put in place to reduce the likelihood of your assertion.
Hope that makes sense.
