Verifiable, Orderly, & Timely Election Results (VOTER) Act

[SimplyMe]

Just wear that mask. You are absolutely safe I am told.

No, you are not; at least not by other than "right wing" sites that inaccurately straw man the science behind using masks. You've been told repeatedly on these forums, including from me, the science behind masks and why they help -- but how, particularly alone, masks alone are not "absolutely safe." I'd appreciate if you would quit bearing false witness on this site.

 

[LostMarbels]

If he provides no funding then it is really nothing more then grandstanding I would say. Any rush task like that would require a considerable amount of resources.

This needs to be nipped in the bud and shut down before it is allowed to snowball out of control.

 

[LostMarbels]

No, you are not; at least not by other than "right wing" sites that inaccurately straw man the science behind using masks. You've been told repeatedly on these forums, including from me, the science behind masks and why they help -- but how, particularly alone, masks alone are not "absolutely safe." I'd appreciate if you would quit bearing false witness on this site.

I don't know many on the right that even believe masks are effective, so yeah...

I disagree with you. That is not bearing false whiteness. I understand some may view independently critical thought as sin, but I still view it as just an opinion.

 

[Speedwell]

We also have a system in which nothing has changed except for the fact that Trump is in office. Now all of a sudden the system must be changed. Now all of a sudden after 200 years we must have mail-in voting on a mass scale. That didn't even happen in 2016. Four years of constant cries of 'at any cost' and we are supposed to believe this is some morality issue?

I do not know what to tell you... you can vote, you can refuse to vote, you can even attempt to make the mail in deadline. That is your decision. I honestly view it as people not getting their way on an issue they believe should be so. Truthful tho, everyone still has every opportunity to vote even as was done as recently as 2016.

You are not reading my posts. I have already voted according to the long-established laws of my state. You are supporting a proposal which may result in my legally cast vote not being counted. You are attempting to corrupt a Presidential election. You whine about how the Democrats might try it, but you are actually doing it.

 

[Speedwell]

No, it's not funny. According to the provisions of that bill, the ballot which I have turned in already according to the laws of my state will not be counted--even if the Board of elections manages to get through all of the absentee ballots in 24 hours.

 

[LostMarbels]

You are not reading my posts. I have already voted according to the long-established laws of my state. You are supporting a proposal which may result in my legally cast vote not being counted. You are attempting to corrupt a Presidential election. You whine about how the Democrats might try it, but you are actually doing it.

Ok.

I'm not fighting for your guy. People wanted to take the gloves off, well they are off. I intend to win. Every bit as much as the Democrats intend to remove him, and with as much fervor. After all that has happened in the last four years I do not even believe your stance (not you, your stance) has a leg to stand on in the regard you are presenting. It definitely does not have the moral high ground to judge me in defending what I hold dear from attack. I have no doubt those in office are in fact attempting to cheat in order to remove Trump from office. None. No doubt.

There is absolutely nothing illegal about allowing individuals to go to the polls and vote.

 

[LostMarbels]

No, it's not funny. According to the provisions of that bill, the ballot which I have turned in already according to the laws of my state will not be counted--even if the Board of elections manages to get through all of the absentee ballots in 24 hours.

Find out your states laws concerning provisional then. You have a month. If your vote is not counted then you sat on your hands. You can vote.

 

[SimplyMe]

I don't know many on the right that even believe masks are effective, so yeah...

I disagree with you. That is not bearing false whiteness. I understand some may view independently critical thought as sin, but I still view it as just an opinion.

Not bearing "false whiteness," interesting typo.

My "bearing false witness" is to the idea that masks make a person "absolutely safe." That has been explained to you to be false -- particularly if not everyone is wearing a mask. It has been compared to seat belts to you -- how seat belts aren't "absolutely safe." Instead, seat belts provide an added level of protection, when worn properly, combined with the other safety features of cars, but it is still possible to die, or have severe injuries while wearing a seat belt. But they provide enough protection that almost every state mandate wearing a seat belt.

Similarly, wearing a mask properly helps protect a person, particularly when combined with other strategies, from catching diseases -- including COVID. It does not eliminate the risk, though, particularly when others aren't wearing masks or when social distancing is not being practiced.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Scott's proposal is more than reasonable. Only weeks ago, letting votes received after the polls had closed be counted would have been considered progressive or a victory for democracy. But now, to limit that time AFTER the polls close gets called by the term that is used whenever anyone suggests that there should be SOME orderliness in our elections...SOME sort of fairness in the vote counting. I'm referring to charging "voter suppression."

What are you going on about? This post doesn't even make any sense.

What has changed with our electoral process?

The health risks associated with standing in line with a bunch of other people.

 

[LostMarbels]

The health risks associated with standing in line with a bunch of other people.

Sorry, not buying it. All too convenient.

 

[Belk]

This needs to be nipped in the bud and shut down before it is allowed to snowball out of control.

I agree, but in a different direction. I have seen no evidence of an issue that would require this action nor do they seem to be serious about it if there is not a fund to accomplish the task.

 

[LostMarbels]

Not bearing "false whiteness," interesting typo.

I have issues with typing.

 

[Hank77]

My state is vote by mail. There are ways around the post office, but that may not help the people that like waiting until the last minute to do their ballot and then just put it in the mail.

It is just a way to cut out those people, and also making the assumption that they are voting Democrat.

In my state ballots must be received by close of the polls on Election Day. I don't see any problem with that as long as the voter has their ballot in hand at least 2 weeks before Election Day. In my state ballots will be mailed to voters on Oct. 6th.

 

[LostMarbels]

I have seen no evidence of an issue that would require this action

But I have, and that is what people do not understand. It is as if I should sit down and be silent because others do not agree with me. I do not view it that way. Those others... are actually going to have to win. I'm not just going to go silently into the night.

 

[Speedwell]

Find out your states laws concerning provisional then. You have a month. If your vote is not counted then you sat on your hands. You can vote.

There's no "provision" for provisional ballots in this bill. And why should have have to go to the trouble when I have already voted legally according to the laws of my state? All because of a bill submitted by a scoundrel trying to corrupt the election, which would do nothing to stop absentee voter fraud. In fact, since the bill would invalidate a ballot already legally cast, it would constitute an ex post facto law which is specifically forbidden by the Constitution.

 

[Albion]

No, it's not funny. According to the provisions of that bill, the ballot which I have turned in already according to the laws of my state will not be counted--even if the Board of elections manages to get through all of the absentee ballots in 24 hours.

All that raving about 'corrupting' an election seemed funny enough, but let's look closer at what you are telling us now.

How would your vote, which you have already turned in, not count if the bill called for (as it does) mail-in ballots to be returned and received by the time polls close on Election Day? I haven not been successful in finding anything that would invalidate normal mail-in votes already cast.

 

[LostMarbels]

There's no "provision" for provisional ballots in this bill. And why should have have to go to the trouble when I have already voted legally according to the laws of my state? All because of a bill submitted by a scoundrel trying to corrupt the election, which would do nothing to stop absentee voter fraud. In fact, since the bill would invalidate a ballot already legally cast, it would constitute an ex post facto law which is specifically forbidden by the Constitution.

You are an American... you can vote. Find out your options. You are hyping this up for no reason. You got a month. Matter of fact... what state are you in? Let's look up your laws.

 

[Hank77]

This video may shed some light on the precautions taken.

 

[Speedwell]

You are an American... you can vote. Find out your options. You are hyping this up for no reason. You got a month. Matter of fact... what state are you in? Let's look up your laws.

None of your business and I already know the laws--I have researched it carefully. My ballot, already cast, is not signed. It is sealed in a signed envelope as required by state law. If this bill passes, my ballot is invalid and the state will have to get out new ballots with a provision for them to be signed all in time to meet the deadline established by the bill--two weeks away and the bill hasn't even passed yet. For all practical purposes that is impossible and I think you know it and are happy about it because you think mostly Democrats will have voted already. Or, I could arrange (if the bill allows for it, I'm not sure at this point) to take back the ballot and vote in person, an elderly man taking the risk of catching Covid, which I'm sure doesn't bother you either because you know I vote Left.

 

[wing2000]

The issue isn't just getting the ballot on time; it's also getting the ballot back to the counters in time. The obvious flaw in Scott's plan is that there's no way for voters to predict how long it will take the ballots to get back to the polls, so there's no way for them to know when to postmark the ballots. His plan is either insidious and disingenuous or absolutely moronic.

Plus:
In some states, ballot validation/counting can only start on election day. For states that do not have automated systems to verify signatures, etc, counting will take days, possibly weeks.