Then perhaps a mostly secret ballot may be what is warranted. It can only be accessed by certain trusted officials and only for certain purposes. We probably want to keep the benefits of secret ballots while losing this obvious disadvantage.
Election 2020 Election 2020: It's (almost) over! (maybe...possibly...ahh who are we kidding, it's 2020!)
- Thread starter Emperor Tippy
- Start date
Then perhaps a mostly secret ballot may be what is warranted. It can only be accessed by certain trusted officials and only for certain purposes. We probably want to keep the benefits of secret ballots while losing this obvious disadvantage.
I'm not sure that compromise is possible, not without creating another failure point that can be taken advantage of.
I'd even be for using thumbprint ID's instead of signatures, as it is rather hard to fake those and actual faking of it would show up pretty fast because no two people have the same fingerprints.
Good luck getting trustworthy officials for such a role. And ensuring the government doesn't either abuse it (because let's face it at some point someone will do so) or accidentally leak it out to the public.
It seems like we need to bring back civic virtue and the sort of natural values that would let us have democracy and/or republic. If we have it so people can respect the choices of others for the most part, then we don't need strictly secret ballots, and if anyone tried to attack another for voting with their conscience or interest they'd be shouted down or defended against...
Bigking321
Well-known member
Fat chance of that...
Weren't they already making lists and threatening people that donated to trump?
Weren't they already making lists and threatening people that donated to trump?
Even if you could guarantee civic virtue for a few generations it wouldn't last forever. As time passes you'd eventually start to see it worn away at for some reason or another. You can't rely on something like that to keep people from abusing their position or power nor from attacking others from not voting the way they want them to. The events in the leadup to this election should be proof enough of that last one.
Doomsought
Well-known member
There is a very real risk of them using the combination of covid restrictions, trump hysteria and regaining the office of the president to turn the country over into a tyranny. They are not playing by the rules. In fact they are constantly changing the rules to make it impossible for us to win.
Lord Sovereign
The resident Britbong
They could try, but they have neither the will nor the competence to do it properly. Men of iron and steel are required to rule a tyranny. Do you see steel in any of these fools? All I see is milksops with more money than sense. They are not Caesars, no matter how hard they wish to be.
Likewise in my country, except 1) Instead of on a weekend, election day is a mandatory day off work, mandated by law, like a holiday. And 2) I don't even need to drive anywhere, they set up literally dozens of polling places per city, last elections there were 3 within 10 minutes walking distance of my home (you can only vote in a station you were designated though).
They take your ID, see if your name is on their list, verify your pic on the ID, and you're good to go with paper voting.
D
Deleted member 16
Guest
I would ask you to prove "mail in voting was pushed through to enable voter fraud", given the history of the five states which have universal vote by mail, and the reasons they gave for doing so, from reducing the cost of elections to improving accuracy in counting.
Voting by mail fails to increase turnout (This article dates from when WA counties were permitted to choose whether or not to vote by mail or vote by polling place; when it was made mandatory state-wide, only Pierce County had not yet made the switch. Are you saying the rural Eastern Washington counties made the switch to enable voter fraud?
Duke Nukem
Hail to the king baby
Doug Mastriano's closing remarks at the Hearing.
Duke Nukem
Hail to the king baby
Wow
No doubt it's another "mistake" like when they suspended ICE's account.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
Fingerprint identification is actually far less accurate that you have been led to believe by the media; the idea that "no two people have the same fingerprints" is just an assumption Francis Galton made in 1892 that has little to no evidence backing it up.
Duke Nukem
Hail to the king baby
Also issues with people who don't have fingerprints for whatever reason and scanners not being entirely reliable (and that's before they're used however many thousands of times on election day).
We have yet to find two identical or at least it is rare enough we have yet too.
That is a big thing though
Tbf I suspect that it's mostly for lack of trying. I can think of only one occasion in my entire life I ever got my fingerprints taken (for a card that was phased out literally a few months afterwards) and I doubt anyone other then the local government here ever got to see them. And I suspect the same holds true in other places and countries.
Doomsought
Well-known member
What would be more important is having a accurate voter counts. As I've said before, we should start with a fresh voter registration each year, based on tax records. It is easier to subtract only a few months worth of deaths and two years.
I worked in. Shaeriffs office. We had to take fingerprints and had every fingerprint ever on system for the county. No matches yet.
Also, FBI has yet to have any and they have the federal one. So.
Closer but still no proof