Voting

Limiting Mail-in Voting Won't Make Elections More Secure

But it would continue the politicization of the means of voting and make it harder to vote.

|

The contentious 2020 presidential election is finally behind us, but debates about it will continue in state legislatures for a while as Republican lawmakers look to roll back expanded mail-in voting rules implemented before and during the pandemic.

Already, at least 165 bills have been introduced in 33 state legislatures to restrict voting access, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a think tank housed at New York University Law School that advocates for democratic principles. About half of those would target mail-in voting, a widespread and established practice in America that nonetheless became a lightning rod for controversy during the past year as former President Donald Trump politicized it.

It's too soon to know whether there is adequate support for restricting mail-in voting in various states, but the bills already introduced will give lawmakers a wide range of options. One of the most common proposals, according to the Brennan Center's legislation tracker, would eliminate so-called "no-excuse voting," which allows anyone in the state to request an absentee ballot without having to provide a reason why they can't go to the polls. Other bills would restrict what excuses can be used to qualify for absentee ballots—removing concerns about getting sick from the list, for example—or would limit state officials' ability to send out absentee ballots without first getting a request for one.

If you want to understand how quickly attitudes toward mail-in voting have shifted, look no further than Pennsylvania. The state legislature passed a bipartisan bill in 2019 to expand mail-in voting, including a provision allowing no-excuse absentee balloting for the first time in the state's history. But after Trump and his supporters blamed mail-in voting for President Joe Biden's victory in the state—a claim easily disproved with some simple math—Republicans are now seeking to reverse that law.

The partisan inclination to change how elections operate after a single defeat—and keep in mind, lots of Republicans won in 2020 with expanded mail-in voting—is unfortunate, but not unexpected. Still, mail-in voting has been gradually expanding in America for years and that trend is likely to continue once the emotions triggered by the 2020 election fade.

Indeed, conservatives and Republicans would be wise not to restrict mail-in voting and should instead be focused on ensuring the process is secure. In a report published this week by the R Street Institute, a free market think tank, Steven Greenhut and Marc Hyden argue that reverting to excuse-only absentee balloting "would do nothing to combat fraud, and may instead suppress voter turnout."

Far from being a gateway to rampant fraud, when done correctly mail-in balloting is more secure than in-person voting. Even after an election in which 46 percent of votes were cast by mail—a huge increase that threatened to overwhelm election offices—there is nothing more than anecdotal evidence of problems with the process. In places where mail-in voting has been the norm for years, like Oregon, there is scant evidence of fraud.

Despite what critics claim, "no-excuse absentee voting still must undergo the same rigorous process to ensure ballots are legitimate, including ballot tracking measures and signature verification," write Hyden and Greenhut (a Reason columnist) in the new R Street study. "These safeguards are highly effective, too."

Leaving aside issues of voter fraud or election security, some Republican lawmakers might see a cynical reason to support attacks on mail-in voting since absentee ballots broke heavily toward Democrats last year.

But that's probably due to Trump's months-long campaign against mail-in voting rather than a systemic issue. Prior to last year, there was no indication that higher rates of mail-in voting advantaged one political party over the other. A 2020 Stanford University study that looked at absentee balloting since 1996 in California, Utah, and Washington concluded that "claims that vote by mail fundamentally advantages one party over the other appear overblown." And a Brennan Center analysis of voting patterns in seven swing states that offered no-excuse absentee balloting in 2016 found that the people most likely to vote by mail were white voters over the age of 65—a key Trump demographic.

And even amid his attacks on mail-in voting last year, Trump voted by mail in the Florida primary.

Rather than restricting a method of voting that is not inherently risky and that many Americans seem to prefer, lawmakers should prioritize election security with an eye toward the simple reality that mail-in voting isn't going to vanish and with an awareness that further politicizing the means of voting will be corrosive for the democratic system.

"Instead of seeking to ban tried-and-true methods of voting," Greenhut and Hyden write, "lawmakers should instead look to ensure that eligible voters have the utmost opportunity to safely exercise their voting rights."

NEXT: Donations ‘Requested’ by Newsom Exploded as His Emergency Powers Ballooned

Voting Elections Election 2020 State Governments Voter ID Pennsylvania

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

246 responses to “Limiting Mail-in Voting Won't Make Elections More Secure

  1. “Indeed, conservatives and Republicans would be wise not to restrict mail-in voting and should instead be focused on ensuring the process is secure.”

    Ensuring that the process is secure is precisely the type of restriction on mail-in voting that Republicans have been screaming about. Democrats, on the other hand, are perfectly fine with ensuring that the process is as insecure as possible.

    Chain of custody? Forget about it. Postmarks? Not needed. Signature verification? RACIST! Clean voter rolls? DISENFRANCHISEMENT! Proof of citizenship? XENOPHOBIC!

    You want secure mail-in voting? Do the exact opposite of what Democrats are suggesting.

    This whole article is horseshit.

    1. Pathetic. even by B-Team standards

    2. That’s not true. The democrats insisted on strict signiture validation for the green party in wisconson. If signatures didn’t match then it didn’t count. Luckily the (D) found enough signiture mismatches to kick the green party off the ballot

      1. They’re also insisting on strict signature validation for the California recall. It’s all part of Fortifying Our Democracy against the foolish desires of the voters.

        1. Typically in CA for initiatives, referendums & recalls only a sample of the signatures are verified. If the percentage of valid signatures in the sample multiplied by the total number of signatures is less than the minimum number of signatures required they reject the petition. That is why the backers of these always try to collect way more signatures than required. If the calculated number of signatures is close to the threshold it may require verifying every signature.

        2. Haha… I love satire.

      2. It was Georgia that claimed signature validation is racist (guess who made that claim). I find the objection to signature validation racist. It’s as if they’re saying black people are incapable of signing consistently. But we all know it’s a ploy to allow for cheating.

    3. It is only horseshit because you believe the lie that voter fraud is a real problem. It is not.

      1. Right.

        Voter fraud is a fake problem. All is peachy.

        Fuck off, retard.

        1. We know it is fake because Rs only want laws that make voting harder, and then reject accompanying measures to mitigate the voter suppression. For example, they always want more voter ID laws, yet block measures to make it free and easier to get an ID.

          1. Age requirements are voter suppression. Citizenship requirements are voter suppression. Residency requirements are voter suppression.

            Just say what you really want to say already. Quit dancing around it.

          2. Yeah, it’s so damn hard to get an ID.

            1. Identification is a vestige of white supremacy — so are names, surnames, middle names, dates of birth, math, science, right answers, wrong answers, and objectivity. Identification limits people’s right to exist as unconstrained, ethereal entities in the universe. I am what I am, and what I am is what I want to be.

              #ghosts4daVOTE

              1. You are what you are? You fool! We are what we are, we are multitudes. That’s why we can vote hundreds or thousands of times.

                1. Our votes are like particles in a quantum field. Here! There! Everywhere!

            2. It is if you live in a rural area where the DVM is only open a few days a month, or is located in an area where it is not easy to get to if you don’t have a car, or you work a job where you boss won’t let you take off time to go to the DMV during the day.

              1. The blacks live in cities on top of one another. And, many of them even work **at** the DMV.

                Stop pretending you give two shits about the convenience of some backwoods bumpkin.

              2. Everybody has ID, moron.

                1. 25% of black Americans do not have a govt-issued ID that is acceptable for voting. 8% of white Americans do not. The reasons why are also well-understood – from inability to be able to gather the underlying documents (eg birth certificates for blacks in the pre-1970 South are far more likely to not exist) to cost (see poll taxes) to time off work to etc.

                  If you do not understand that that discrepancy is at the root of attempting to suppress the vote – then I’ll bet your daddy and gramps were great fans of Jim Crow and poll taxes and the ways suppressing the vote worked then as well.

                  1. Sure, all the blacks lost their identification documents on the plantation, after the fire.

                    Get the fuck out.

                    1. You are southern aren’t you. No I believe that excuse was used for slaveowners after the Civil War. Apparently Sherman marched through every little shithole in the South burning their town hall and specifically all land/property records of Confederate sympathizers and their neighbors so that he couldn’t find them.

                      Every amateur white genealogist with roots in the South knows that excuse. That’s not the potential birth certificate that anyone cares about anymore.

                      Every amateur black genealogist with roots in the South knows a completely different excuse. And it still very much – with tweaks – applies to blacks over maybe age 40 or 50 or so.

                    2. Dem’ neeggers’ kaant read naw good.

                  2. 25% of black Americans do not have a govt-issued ID that is acceptable for voting. 8% of white Americans do not. The reasons why are also well-understood

                    Then why not focus on these aspects of voting to rectify the issues? With all of the money, including private corporate money, that went into ensuring this election procured the right result, could not some of that have gone into bringing the ID problem to light and working to resolve it? With all of the technology, ability to mobilize forces to capture balloting where is the force to stand up for these identity-less people in the world.
                    There are other reasons why this is not the focus that are just as clearly understood.

                    1. could not some of that have gone into bringing the ID problem to light and working to resolve it?

                      There is no ID problem here in the US in anything but ‘voting’. And the problem in ‘voting’ is purely one of partisan defining of what the problem supposedly is. Which in turn leads to the not-at-all surprising realization that the ‘voting ID’ problem is ‘too many people vote for the other guy and not enough vote for my guy’.

                      There are a lot of interesting ideas to solve actual ID problems in the real world. Many are blockchain based to eliminate the certainty of centralizing political attempts to control identity. Some kind of attempting to enshrine the UN Declaration that ‘Everyone has the right to be recognized as a person before the law’. None of which have a damn thing to do with voting in the US because that’s not an actual problem now until the R’s make it one.

                  3. Bullshit statistic.

              3. So let me get this straight. You believe there is NO voting fraud in the US, but you think there is this large population of US citizens that are eligible to vote but can’t because they have no ID and/or because big bad republicans? GTFOH!

                1. Yes. And it is true. The data supports it. Go search yourself and you will easily find it.

                  1. I just cannot believe the 25% number. That’s insane. Absurd. To believe that statistic, you’d have to ignore objective reality.
                    Especially since the number among my extended relations, all my colleagues and contacts is ZERO.

                    You can’t even live in most states if you aren’t able to drive. To get a full 25%, places like New York would have to have effectively zero IDs. That’s nonsensical

                  2. Yes. And it [no voting fraud] is true.

                    & Yes, you are retarded; or at least seriously delusional.

              4. How rural? I lived most of my life in a town of 2000 and it wasn’t tough to get to a DMV or worry about operating times. We also had plenty of people with no cars and that didn’t stop them either we are in the mountain btw…

              5. Please tell us where there is a DMV that is “only open a few days a month.”

                Having spent most of my life in rural areas, I have yet to see your claim borne out by actual fact.

                  1. So fix the problem by having the DMV stay open a few evenings and weekends.

                    This is a fake problem that smacks of the racism of low expectations.

                    1. The point is that those who control the hours of the DMV will not allow it. It fits the pattern of not allowing easy solutions to help more people vote legally.

                    2. Ah MG – so the tens of thousands of small towns throughout the US all got together to make it difficult for minorities to get IDs.

                      You’re delusional.

              6. or you work a job where you boss won’t let you take off time to go to the DMV during the day

                The boss that was legally required to check your ID before he hired you to make sure you didn’t have any child support withholding, were eligible to work in the United States, and weren’t using fraudulent documents?

                1. The list of acceptable voter ID is much more narrow then work verification documents.

                  1. Untrue

            3. I do not know a single black person who finds it overly challenging to get ID. Nor any other race.

              Why progs think “lessers” are so inept is just kinda baked into their worldview.

              1. It does not have to be “overly” challenging. “Somewhat” challenging is enough. “Slightly” challenging would probably work as well. “Not” challenging qualifies, too.

                Any impediment that has any tendency to make any hypothetical black person’s existence in any way dependent on anything outside of their immediate control is de facto racist.

                1. So requiring a black guy to pass a test to get a driver’s license is racist. Sure Jan.

                  1. According to MollyGodiva, probably.

          3. Molly thinks minorities are too stupid to get a free ID.

          4. They literally offered free ID cards in exchange for requiring ID to vote.

            But you’re such a racist piece of shit that you think the benighted niggers and spics are too stupid to get an ID card to vote, even though they need them for, say, obtaining welfare, or getting a job.

        2. Also they occasionally admit that is about voter suppression, there are plenty of examples available.

          1. And shreek will get you those examples at an indeterminate future date.

          2. Also they occasionally admit that is about voter suppression, there are plenty of examples available.

            Then providing a citation should be easy – please do so at your convenience.

        3. Disaffected, race-targeting, vote-suppressing clingers are among my favorite culture war casualties.

          Open wider, clingers . . . your betters will be shoving even more progress down your whining, impotent throats.

          You will comply.

          1. Faggot.

          2. LARPing faggots getting their biceps blown to smithereens after pussying out like a pathetic faggot when they watched their buddies get dropped right in front of them are my favorite culture war casualties. Fuck around and find out you pathetic, effete little bitch.

    4. Agreed. The whole article, filled with illogic and unsubstantiated claims, is utter bull crap. Reason at its worst.

      1. This article is an attempt to out-Sullum Sullum.

    5. The problem with signature verification with mail in ballots is the settings of the machines used. In Clark County NV in 2020 the Republican pole watchers complained that; because, the Democrat county clerk’s office set the machines rejection threshold 20% below that recommended by the manufacture; because, they rejection pile of ballots was so high that election workers couldn’t manually inspect signatures properly before deadlines. This was a big fraud issue because most mail in ballots were not requested by a voter. The registrars just sent an absentee ballot to every voter on the roles. There were stories in the papers of mail carriers leaving boxes of ballots at apartment buildings in boxes because, there weren’t mail boxes for the addressee. If you were a political operative with crook morals this was an irresistible temptation to help your candidate(s). There is very little disincentive to not cheat.

      1. The registrars just sent an absentee ballot to every voter on the roles. There were stories in the papers of mail carriers leaving boxes of ballots at apartment buildings in boxes because, there weren’t mail boxes for the addressee.

        Only applications should be mailed to every voter. Mailing ballots should be criminal fraud.

    6. Biden is the first extra-constitutionally elected President in the history of this country. WI, MI, GA, PA circumvented their state legislatures and violated their own state election laws in order to flood the ballot boxes with untraceable, unauditable no excuse mail in votes. Article 2, section 1, clause 2 of the US constitution is written in about as plain language as you can get. These states changed ballot eligibility standards as many as 5-7 days after polls closed in some instances. The people supporting no excuse mail in voting are hiding behind voter suppression hysteria. They claim victimization to hide their true desire to “burn the whole thing down,” and promote whatever woke,
      social justice, white people bad agenda of the day agenda they have. Unless these people admit that there was extensive and pervasive election corruption, physical and digital, that altered the results of the 2020 Presidential election there will be no unity in this Country. Ever.

    7. The commies at unreason go by the commie playbook. Lies and destruction of the institutions that make america great.

      Making american elections fraudulent allows for commies to intimidate wins from docile RINOs and make any noncommie who wins illegitimate.

      We need to go to one day for voting and everyone has to vote in person putting your finger in ink. Otherwise civil war 2.0 will resolve itself against the democrats.

      1. TIME admitted the election fraud and the commies at unreason are trying to deflect the truth into commie lies.

    8. It’s a Boehm article. They’re always shit. He’s a complete moron, and a shill for the democrats.

    9. That is what I have been saying all along. Because there is no chain of custody, a mail-in ballot would be inadmissible in a court of law. Yet they are sent to everyone on the voter rolls that lawsuits have keep from being purged for over a decade. And the signature validations are a joke. An acquaintance in Georgia said his daughter emailed a copy of her absentee ballot which he printed out and dropped into a ballot box. No “wet” signature on that ballot and I’ll bet it was accepted since she was voting Democrat.

  2. I cannot believe Boehm can spout such non-sense after seeing the 94% mail-in ballot favor.

    You do realize what sold State’s on the idea that mail-in ballots would be okay from the very beginning right? THE FACT THAT THEY REFLECTED In-Person voting tallies.

    And here is Boehm trying to re-enforce that delusion RIGHT IN THE FACE of contradictory evidence.

    1. Boehner is a nazisoviet propagandist, who is here to tell you not to believe your lying eyes, as he did before the election too.
      He is an active combatant waging war upon you and the rest of us, and shall be treated as such.

      1. Boehm deserves to have his writing career end. He should be cleaning up puke and shot somewhere while people constantly berate him. Preferably somewhere that puts him in physical danger on a regular basis.

    2. In most states they did. Pennsylvania was an extreme outlier. An unbiased international observer would certainly want to understand why.

    3. Agree completely.

    4. My wife and I contested almost 200 Georgia registered voters who turned in forwarding address changes out of georgia. They were still listed as registered voters the day before the general election. Some were innocents who never voted after moving out of Georgia. Some cities were bogus, so those person purposely listed false cities to vote in person and probably used other addresses to vote by mail.

      This is an example of election fraud and its being prosecuted by the GBI.

      The plan was to throw the bureaucrat useful idiots under the bus after the coup was complete.

      Its why america is in civil war 2.0

  3. Fvck off, Herr Goebbels

  4. Eliminate voting altogether. Institute representation by sortition. Same as jury duty. Congrats – you are now a legislative critter for the next year.

    1. I do find that idea somewhat appealing. Anything that limits politics is good in my book. Which also makes an absolute hereditary monarchy seem pretty appealing too.

      1. Sortition also eliminates gerrymandering no matter how gerrymandered the district lines.

      2. The era of the absolute monarchies still had tons of politicking

  5. This place is such a fucking joke.

    Keep the clown show rolling.

  6. I see the conspiracy theorists are out in force this rainy Thursday morning.

    1. The existence of conspiracy theorists is a conspiracy theory.

      1. Actually, there seems to be ample evidence that there are, indeed, conspiracy theorists. What is lacking evidence of, generally, is the existence of conspiracies.

        1. “[A]mple evidence that there are, indeed, conspiracy theorists.”

          Exactly what you would expect a deluded conspiracy theorist that believes in conspiracy theorists to believe …

        2. I dunno. We have a conspiracy theory that was thoroughly documented in the media and via an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller. But, weirdly, none of those people were denounced as conspiracy theorists.

          1. Stop spilling water on his robot brain.

          2. “Robert Mueller” Hmmm… political parroting?

        3. There is ample of evidence of voter fraud too dummy.

        4. There are a large number of actual conspiracies and always have been. The trick is figuring out which conspiracies are real and which ones are totally bogus.

          1. Yeppers.

            1. You literally just said moments earlier that there are no conspiracies, but OK.

              Those stupid conspiracy theorist niggers who thought the government was withholding treatment for syphilis were just deluded stupid niggers, amirite?

              1. “You literally just said moments earlier that there are no conspiracies, but OK.”

                I hate to disappoint you, but I never said that. The topic at hand had to do with the conspiracy theory re the vote-counting in the presidential race.

    2. I’ll just leave this here (as you brought up the conspiracy “theory”):
      https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

      1. Absolute mic drop…

    3. Indeed. Probably drawn out by all the conspiracies.

  7. Voting shouldn’t be made easier. It should be something that you have to care about enough to make some effort. If you genuinely can’t get to the poll because of disability or absence, that’s what absentee ballots are for. Otherwise, if you can’t be bothered to make a little effort to get to the poll, why should you vote?
    I do support moving elections to a weekend when most people don’t have to go to work.

    1. Minorities have to hustle over the weekends in their second and third and fourth jobs just to make ends meet! Your suggestion is yet another vestige of the same noxious white supremacy that yields xenophobic insurrections. Enough is enough.

      #letkidsvote

    2. The fact is that Republicans have chosen the idea of voter suppression over voter engagement. The goal is not to make voting safer but to make it harder and in doing so suppress the vote of your opponents. We are a democracy and we should be doing all we can to get people to vote. Look at the 2020 election more people voted, even in a difficult time. This tells us that when you make the vote accessible people will use their vote and that is good.

      If the concern is vote security then address that issue. But making it harder is just BS.

      1. Age requirements are voter suppression. Citizenship requirements are voter suppression. Residency requirements are voter suppression.

        Just say what you really want to say already. Quit dancing around it.

        1. Republicans are vestigial bigots who can’t be replaced — by their betters — soon enough?

          That’s easy to say.

          1. This isn’t Jeopardy, retard.

          2. You’re such a boomer. Fantasize it’s 1968 on your own time boomer.

          3. You won’t be replaced when we throw your rotten carcass not the landfill, with your fellow travelers.

      2. I question whether people using their vote is actually good if they are not engaged and interested and actually bother to find out something about the candidates beyond what your stupid friends post on Facebook.

        1. “I question whether people using their vote is actually good if they are not engaged and interested …”

          Good for whom? It’s definitely “good” for the politicians. Shit for the people, overall.

        2. Yeah, the idea the more voters & more votes automatically means a better outcome is ridiculously simplistic/childish.

          The US should absolutely encourage voter turnout, but also encourage voter engagement, for only informed voters can cast informed votes.

          But just saying more voters is better is just stupid.

      3. The fact is that Republicans have chosen the idea of voter suppression over voter engagement

        My idea of a good voter block would be both non-suppression and engagement. I think what some of the others are saying is the voting process should be as important as any other of the myriad regulatory processes we all have to endure. Such as driving, flying somewhere, buying liquor, registering for a firearm, being born, having a bank account, getting job. So why is only voter ID so suppressive? Because it happens on one day? Not true. Because you can’t vote other than in person? Not true.
        But the underlying flaw in your argument is basically – it is too hard for some people to find the time to get an ID to vote and that is thus suppression. Well, they seem to be able to find the time to have an ID to drive, fly, buy liquor etc. Are there actually people out there that are so rural and so contained that they do not have an ID for those things. Or – might the case be that you are advocating for voters to be able to vote in spite of not being a citizen, driver, known identity in the country?

        1. It’s all bullshit.

          The entire argument is a lie, but the point is to keep repeating it with the hope that, after it has been repeated enough, people will cease questioning the underlying premise of the argument. And if they keep questioning the premise of the article and shuck off their Pavlovian conditioning, call them a racist and shame them into silence.

      4. Any security measure, by definition, makes a practice harder, not easier.

        1. The question is are these laws making the election more secure or just harder for voters. You can make an election more secure with a minimal amount of disruption.

          ID for example, I have no problem with ID but if the point is to have a picture ID then why not allow Student IDs which often have a picture. Why because student are young and young people tend to vote Democratic so student IDs are not allowed.

          1. Some student IDs don’t have your birthday on them. There is no age verification. Not that that would have mattered in 2020. If the process for getting a student ID were the same as the process to get a driver license or state issued ID then I would be okay with it too. I don’t think Student IDs have a rigid enough verification process to pass muster. Typically they are done onsite by the university print center or something similar, not a state agency.

            1. The stated purpose of an photo ID is to provide visual check of the person voting and a student ID provides that information. What you and other commenters are now doing is adding additional requirements that can be done by the registration process. Therefore there is no reason not to allow student IDs.

              1. Did you actually read the comment? Age is a requirement and student IDs don’t show age. Moreover they are printed by universities that are not gov entities.

                1. Did you read my comments? Age is not important on the ID it is established at registration. As is location for voting. Many Universities and Colleges are affiliated with states or local governments and so would be government entities.

                  The stated purpose of a photo ID is to provide a visual check of the voter. If this is not the case then the actual purpose should be stated. Because it sounds to me like there is a request here to provide registration data (which the government should already have) each time you vote.

                  1. Age is not important on the ID it is established at registration.

                    No, it actually isn’t. Not in the vast majority of states. Because piece of shit cunts like you make sure it can’t be. I have registered to vote in 3 states. In only one was I required to show ID when I registered, and it was because I registered online.

                    Furthermore, a student ID does not establish residency, which believe it or not is actually a voting requirement, even though we no longer verify thanks to piece of shit cunts like you.

                    1. So let me go over this one more time slowly. They don’t check your age or your residency at the polls. Your name is in the poll book and if its not you can not vote with a standard ballot. The purpose of the ID at the polls is to show a name with the picture. A student ID or a number of other IDs will do that, there should not be a need for a DMV issued ID.

                      Now if your name is not in the poll book you have to register or use a provisional ballot. That will require more information but that is different from having an ID to vote.

          2. Student ID does not prove residency dummy.

            1. Or hell, even citizenship.

              1. You don’t show residency at the polling place, you do that when registering to vote. At the polling place your name is in the poll book or it is not. If it not there you don’t vote with a standard ballot.

            2. Duh. Right. SMForehead

          3. “then why not allow Student IDs which often have a picture.”

            Because schools could give two shits whose name is on the ID as long as the check clears. Also, those students should be voting where they LIVE and not where they go to school. Vastly different things.

            “Why because student are young and young people tend to vote Democratic so student IDs are not allowed.”

            If you wish to remain ignorant, then your comment makes sense. To those who aren’t ignorant, it is kinda laughable.

          4. Because college students from say, New York, going to college in say, Georgia, could vote in two places then.

            1. Which is precisely why shreek supports it, because he’s a piece of shit subhuman cunt. Like most left wing psychopaths, he is also a sick fucking pedophile who posts child pornography.

      5. Does engagement include registering and voting for people in nursing homes? Or just harassing them to vote for who you want?

        1. Harassing? They brought us cookies.

        2. If you are Cuomo, you just kill them off and vote how you think they would want you to.

      6. The goals are to make it harder to cheat and to make it harder for non-citizens to vote. Yet one party opposes those efforts.

        1. Funny how the racist like Molly and Kirkland all support that party. But they’re totally not the racist party they’ve always been. No sir.

      7. We are a democracy

        No, we aren’t. Since you can’t get that basic fact straight, it’s unsurprising that everything else you posted is also a mindless crock of shit that you copped from Democratic Underground. Die slow, cunt.

  8. Boehm picked his side. Another commie in drag.

    1. We can only hope his life is one of great suffering.

  9. Limiting Mail-in Voting Won’t Make Elections More Secure

    Limiting mail-in voting by itself won’t make elections more secure, but requiring more people to show ID and vote in person will make elections more secure. It will make voter fraud harder, and it will make it harder to stuff the ballot box with a large volume of votes.

    Legalizing marijuana won’t completely prevent children from getting their hands on it, but the more we move from the black market to out in public, the less likely those public sellers are to sell marijuana directly to children, which is a very different model from when I was going to high school–especially if the growers of yesteryear are growing for the legal market today.

    Just because a solution won’t solve all of a problem doesn’t mean it should be rejected on that basis. Locking your doors won’t stop every car thief, but locking your doors when you leave your car at the airport is a good idea anyway.

    1. I get the feeling you’re about to walk into a gun control counter argument for the usual suspects ….

      1. Yeah, yesterday, they were basically telling me that a bumpstock ban was NOT better than:

        Banning assault weapons
        Forcing registration of those that are already in circulation
        Stripping gun manufacturers of their liability protections
        Banning the sale of both guns and ammo online,
        AND instituting a gun national gun confiscation program.

        https://reason.com/2021/02/17/bidens-commonsense-gun-controls-make-little-sense/#comment-8767412

        Whys was a bumpstock ban just as bad as doing all of that?

        Because neither is perfectly libertarian, that’s why!

        There isn’t anything principled or libertarian about being consistently irrational.

        1. Derp!

          No, I was telling you voting for “lesser” evils ends with more evil, and has gotten us this messed up!

          I told you that if you want to vote for a “good”, then at the very least vote for someone who will shrink government (spend less).

          You are usually a reasonable person, but this is a total Straw man. Try again!

          1. “No, I was telling you voting for “lesser” evils ends with more evil, and has gotten us this messed up!”

            And how is this different from the perfect solution fallacy in regards to bumpstock bans and Biden’s war on guns?

            Because you like saying, “lesser of two evils” a lot doesn’t change the fact that perpetrating the perfect solution fallacy means you’re wrong.

            And . . . are you so reluctant to grok that Biden was NOT the lesser of two evils on gun rights for some reason? Why would you say voting for the lesser of two evils is what got us into this mess–when failing to vote for the lesser of two evils is what got us into this mess?

            Jesus Christ. You lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.

            1. Chronic wokeness does not respond to fluids. It’s a terminal condition I’m afraid.

              1. “Chronic wokeness”

                Never been described as that before. That’s potentially the least accurate term I’ve ever heard used.

                I’m guessing you both missed my post at 4:39 on 2/18/21 down below. You might be surprised!

            2. “And how is this different from the perfect solution fallacy in regards to bumpstock bans and Biden’s war on guns?”

              Because you’re only looking at one issue! On balance, government got bigger, and MUCH more was spent. You got what you asked for, it was bad, and you are still cheering it on!

              “perpetrating the perfect solution fallacy means you’re wrong”

              No, it means more people have to try smart, instead of doubling down on the stupid. If the majority did as I do, it would get better. The majority is doing as you do, and we are living in the result.

              “are you so reluctant to grok that Biden was NOT the lesser of two evils on gun rights for some reason?”

              I’m assuming you mean the greater. Yes, if we are only looking at the short term, he’s the greater evil. But, in Obama’s case, we can see that in the long term he was the lesser evil, in that now way, way more people own firearms.

              But, again, just because someone is “better” on one issue doesn’t mean I should vote for them. It’s like voting on who would win on the eastern front in WW2. Both options are awful!

              “failing to vote for the lesser of two evils is what got us into this mess?”

              No, look, the vast majority of people vote for candidate R is because they aren’t candidate D (because D scares them so very much). The people who vote for D do so for the same reason, but in reverse.

              How many people do you think actually voted FOR Biden, and not against Trump! Come on, man!

              But, by all means, keep doing the same stupid thing over and over and expecting different results. I’m sure it’ll work next election, right?

              1. But, in Obama’s case, we can see that in the long term he was the lesser evil, in that now way, way more people own firearms.

                Which are now going to be confiscated. Great job you Democratic party shilling piece of dried up dog shit. Hurrrrrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Democrats better because when they threaten to confiscate guns, create a national gun registry, institutionalize gun owners for owning guns, and explicitly create a form of vicarious liability heretofore unheard of in any English or American jurisprudence, more people buy guns!

                But, by all means, keep doing the same stupid thing over and over and expecting different results. I’m sure it’ll work next election, right?

                You mean like polishing Obama’s big black cock because you’re a pathetic self-loathing piece of shit effete white liberal and gun confiscation paradoxically leads to more gun rights? Come heavily armed and send bachelors, motherfucker.

                1. “Which are now going to be confiscated.”

                  Molon Labe.

                  “Great job you Democratic party shilling piece of dried up dog shit.”

                  Derp! I was telling you what happened! I haven’t voted D in my life!

                  “more people buy guns!”

                  You are correct.

                  “you’re a pathetic self-loathing piece of shit effete white liberal”

                  I’m an An-Cap, you fool! I’m not arguing for the Ds, just against an R! This is a libertarian site, why do I have to explain this!?!

    2. Umm no there is a huge black market for weed. Plus they can get vapes now which are more discreet.

      Plus you can just get the legal stuff and resell it. It is probably easier than when you were a teen and even in illegal states. Kids still smoke pot.

      It is much more profitable to sell black market weed.

      The incidence of voter fraud is something like O.OO03% according to a report issued by the Brennan Center at the NYU school of law.

      If you limit mail in ballots you will disenfranchise many more voters than that by orders of magnitude.

      This isn’t about fraud. Don’t kid yourself or misinform others.

      46% of voters did mail in or absentee ballots this time around and we know which groups did and who most of them voted for.

      1. Age requirements are voter suppression. Citizenship requirements are voter suppression. Residency requirements are voter suppression.

        Just say what you really want to say already. Quit dancing around it.

      2. “Umm no there is a huge black market for weed. Plus they can get vapes now which are more discreet.”

        Actually, licensed and legal retailers are far less likely to sell marijuana to minors than the black market, and pointing out that a black market still exists doesn’t do anything to undermine the point that the more the market is licensed and legalized, the less likely it is to sell marijuana to minors.

        Why didn’t you understand that the first time?

        Here, maybe you’ll understand it coming from someone else:

        “The Perfect Solution Fallacy (also known as the ‘Nirvana Fallacy‘) is a false dichotomy that occurs when an argument assumes that a perfect solution to a problem exists; and that a proposed solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it were implemented. In other words, that a course of action should be rejected because it is not perfect, even though it is the best option available.”

        https://yandoo.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/perfect-solution-fallacy/

        Because you don’t want the government to license marijuana retailers is not a good reason to pretend that legal and licensed retailers are just as likely to sell marijuana directly to minors as the black market behind the bleachers at your local high school. Honesty and logic require us to admit that even if licensing retailers isn’t perfectly libertarian, a legal market is a big improvement.

        And it’s the same thing with people voting in person rather than mailing in ballots. I don’t see any good reason to pretend that there wouldn’t be less and less opportunity for fraud if more and more people voted in person, had to show ID, or had to be biometrically chipped by law enforcement before they’re eligible to vote.

        If you’re against making people show ID or biometrically chipping people before they’re eligible to vote, then you need to make your argument against doing that in spite of the upsides. You don’t just get to pretend that there aren’t any upsides–unless you actually want to lose your credibility. Some people can’t tell the difference between selling their credibility short and being principled. I don’t have that problem.

        I’m also not ignorant of the perfect solution fallacy.

        1. But it doesn’t change the ability of minors to get pot. How did you get beer when you were 16? So it is not a good analogy for your point. It actually works against it.

          Booze or pot are tightly regulated. You could regulate it even more and still the illicit use by minors would go on as it always has. If you follow the analogy tightening rules for voting won’t do a darn thing about fraud. People who want to do that will still find a way as they always have.

          1. I found it much harder to get beer than pot when I was 16. I bet it’s still true. I think Ken’s point about not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is valid, though. And I don’t give a shit if teenagers smoke pot.

          2. “But it doesn’t change the ability of minors to get pot. How did you get beer when you were 16?”

            Yes it does change the availability of weed–when the primary distribution channels are no longer through the black market.

            Teenagers buying alcohol was largely through the black market. The black market is much less concerned about losing their valuable license–because they aren’t licensed. And selling to minors is by far the easiest way to lose your license.

            Oh, and even then, weed was easier for kids to get than alcohol–even at a boarding school in Virginia.

      3. The incidence of voter fraud is something like O.OO03% according to a report issued by the Brennan Center at the NYU school of law.

        “We recounted the votes 50 times without verifying any of the people who voted, with no chain of custody, with no limit on late ballots, with legalized ballot harvesting… we got the same result! What more do you want?!”

        Fuck off you stupid cunt.

        “Everywhere I look I see exactly what I’m looking for!”

      4. The incidence of voter fraud is something like O.OO03% according to a report issued by the Brennan Center at the NYU school of law.

        Without even reading the report I can tell you it’s wrong – the idea one can measure O.OO03% percentage of any illegal activity at all is utterly stupid.

  10. “or would limit state officials’ ability to send out absentee ballots without first getting a request for one.”

    Yeah, that one’s kind of important in keeping votes from getting manufactured.

    1. It is also an indispensable tool in the racists’ box of dirty disenfranchising tricks. Blacks are too stupid and ignorant to request a ballot. Expecting them to take the initiative is racist. Blacks must be able to vote with no impediments whatsoever, even if you have to fill out the ballot and deliver it for them.

      1. Maybe they are just smarter as a group and use the convenient mail in ballots. I probably would have but I kinda like the old fashioned way. It is more communal or maybe I just don’t get out enough.

        1. “Maybe they are just smarter as a group ….”

          Stop peddling conspiracy theories.

          1. Now that was funny

            1. Racist.

  11. Ok, now add mass “mail-in voting” and couple that with another strategy: “zero to little verification of the ballots once they arrive”.

    Also, simply “making it easier to vote” is not a strategy that should be pursued at “all costs”. Otherwise, we could just go to a state website, print ballots on our inkjet printer and send them in with no signature or verification. that would “make it easier to vote”, no?

    Or better yet, just put a poll on twitter. That would be the easiest process yet, no? I mean I know that Joe Biden would consider that racist because according to him (and the majority of Democrats I’ve ever talked to), minorities are too dumb to understand technology and other things that run on electricity.

    1. Except it wasn’t “mail in” voting, it was “mail out” voting. As in, we’ll mail out ballots to everyone on this list, and then count them when they come back. Signatures and postmarks just sort of complicate things.

    2. Otherwise, we could just go to a state website, print ballots on our inkjet printer and send them in with no signature or verification. that would “make it easier to vote”, no?

      That is exactly what Reason has been agitating for since the 1970s. While at the same time writing 40 articles a year about the futility of voting and encouraging people not to vote. You could be forgiven for thinking they were trying to discourage participation of conservative and libertarian voters and support Democratic efforts to win through massive voter fraud.

  12. force fraud coercion

    It’s only a matter of time before reason endorses them all

  13. Thanks for this article. There is nothing wrong with mail in voting. It was perfectly fine till Trump lost and only then did it become bad.

      1. Those either arrived late or were unsigned. That is a process error not fraud. Furthermore you just disproved your own point. The system worked.

        1. Try to keep up.

          Retard’s point was “there is nothing wrong with mail in voting.”

          “It was perfectly fine.”

          It was never perfectly fine.

          1. If you are going to be abusive I am done playing with you. I don’t play that game.

            And it is perfectly fine. Your link about California only proves that process errors are found and the system works. Ever mail something late or forget to sign something? So those votes just didn’t get counted.

            1. If you are going to be deliberately obtuse, you can fuck right off. No skin off my back. You’re in good company with the 50 centers.

              1. Guess Echospinner didn’t get sufficiently upset about an example where the process worked and there were no real problems with mail-in voting. So, you threw a tantrum.

                1. I thought people’s votes getting tossed for technicalities was voter suppression? So, which is it? Is it voter suppression, or the process working?

                  It cannot be both, and that’s why I told him to fuck off. And that’s why I’m going to tell you the same thing.

                  Fuck off.

              2. He’s got his head so far up the his woke arse he can’t hear you…

          1. Sure as the article states. NYC is a mess. They did not have an effective process in place. New York seems to always be a chaotic place.

            If you choose to vote by mail you are more likely have a risk that for process reasons it will be rejected. If you go to the polling place where there are these nice ladies and gentlemen to answer questions and help you there is less chance of that. It is your choice.

            None of that is fraud.

            1. You said mail in ballots had no issues dummy.

              1. Those weren’t TRUE Scotsmen, Jesse.

          2. 7 ballots c’mon. That is so below the margin of error that it near goes to zero. If I put anything in the mail I take a chance. UPS and FedEx screw up too.

            Libertarians favor choice and I have that with voting.

            You are never going to get a perfect system. I think it is accurate but there is room for improvement.

            1. Ahhh… the old since nobody cites jaywalking there is nobody who jaywalks defense.

            2. Yeah idiot, as you have already been explained to:


              Ken Shultz
              February.18.2021 at 2:41 pm

              “The Perfect Solution Fallacy (also known as the ‘Nirvana Fallacy‘) is a false dichotomy that occurs when an argument assumes that a perfect solution to a problem exists; and that a proposed solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it were implemented. In other words, that a course of action should be rejected because it is not perfect, even though it is the best option available.”

              https://yandoo.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/perfect-solution-fallacy/

          1. Allegation dating from November 7 and unproven.

            1. Lol. O
              It was proven and recognized by the courts. Wisconsin officials admitted it. Holy shit dude. Completely being dishonest aren’t you.

              1. Well it’s either that or confess his abject idiocy and mendacity. And since he’s a lying idiot, he’s certainly not going to do that.

          1. Again an allegation. Recounts confirmed a narrow Biden win in Georgia.

            Look I don’t have a dog in this fight. None of this shows evidence that the election was in any way stolen or that Trump actually won it.

            So my attempt at your challenge for what it is worth. It is all academic at this point. What concerns me more is the Republican Party finding a direction to put things together.

            1. You clearly do.
              Anything that benefits the left = true, anything that someone on the right says = false, and 2+2=5.
              Heil leftist totalitarianism!
              Light yourself on fire.

            2. Again. Not an allegation, actual evidence.

              Youre just fucking denying reality now.

            3. Recounts confirmed a narrow Biden win in Georgia.

              “We counted this deck of cards with 15 aces of spades, and it has 52 cards. This is a legitimate deck”

    1. It was not perfectly fine. It was largely agreed upon, and agreed by the left, that mass mail-in voting would be fraught with fraud.

      1. Echospinner’s definition of “perfectly fine” is everything the nazis did except targeting jews specifically.
        What he finds offensive is any resistance to leftist totalitarianism or disputes with their version of “truth”.

    2. One problem with mail in voting is that it is very difficult to tell if it is legit or not. So of course there is no evidence of extensive fraud.
      There is no way to tell at this point if that happened. So it’s kind of a disingenuous argument. A lot of the problem is that it is practically unauditable.
      And if sufficient scrutiny is applied to signature checks, it is likely that more ballots get tossed than from in person voting. If not, then it’s pretty easy to vote in someone else’s name.

  14. The entire “Voter Fraud” is fake. It is not about make more secure elections and it never has been. It is about making it harder for those to vote who are thought to vote against your party. And it is almost exclusively done by Rs (yes Ds sometimes). It is a straight up voter suppression tactic which has no place in our democracy.

    1. Age requirements are voter suppression. Citizenship requirements are voter suppression. Residency requirements are voter suppression.

      Just say what you really want to say already. Quit dancing around it.

      1. Age requirements can be voter suppression if older people are given greater privileges to vote then younger ones, as happened in Texas. Citizenship requirements can be voter suppression if the state makes it difficult or costly for one to prove citizenship. Residency requirements can be voter suppression if they are used to throw out ballots because one voted in the wrong precinct, even if the actual ballot is the same.

        1. We get it.

          Anybody, anywhere, should be able to vote. Too bad that Ricky Vaughn character is facing a tenner for posting memes about voting by text. I’m pretty sure that is your next brilliant suggestion.

          1. There is a play called “My Illustrious Wasteland”.
            It has a line “We voted online for online voting, and online voting won”.

    2. Heard you the first time on your other sock, shreek.

    3. The entire “Voter Fraud” is fake.

      What a mendacious, boldfaced liar you are. You wrote the equivalent of “voter fraud does not happen” with all sincerity. Unreal.

  15. I guess at least they finally stopped talking about finding ways around the electoral college.

    1. Nope. The EC is shit and needs to go.

      1. And then we need to restore the monarchy.

        1. The Trumpers tried that on Jan 6 and failed.

          1. Consult the dictionary, and then kill yourself.

          2. Tell that to Old King Joe as he signs another EO for the good of the little folk.

      2. The EC is shit and needs to go.

        You’re a fucking idiot. Seriously – read up on pure democracy and why it’s a bad thing.

  16. Unrelated question, but am looking for aserious response. Is there another libertarian website/forum that has fairly wide adoption outside of reason?
    In the last year Reason has consistently defended the left just when they have gone full totalitarian and bashes the right non stop. Reason is closer to being hard left than being libertarian these days. I don’t want to give them any traffic anymore. I’m literally only here for the comment section these days. Their articles are 90% shit now.

    1. I think your problem is making an assumption that Libertarian is the same as Republican. Reason has been pointing out the problems and as of late the Republicans have generated the most problems. What for example is libertarian about stripping away voter’s rights?

      1. Lol. Youre an open lefty who lives in an ultra blue city. You aren’t a libertarian nor moderate.

      2. Reason lost the libertarian plot when it came to Covid and Trump. It was shameful. I wouldn’t go so far as to call them hard left myself. I think most of the writers are still more or less libertarian.

      3. Thanks for taking my request for a serious response to heart instead of twisting the conversation elsewhere, jackass.

      4. What for example is libertarian about stripping away voter’s rights?

        Nothing – but requiring ID isn’t stripping away voters’ rights.

  17. Trump did not “vote by mail.” He voted via absentee ballot. I’ve voted by absentee ballot in almost every election since I was eligible, and there are MILES of daylight between requesting an absentee ballot to be sent to a specific address, and shotgunning millions of ballots to every address on the rolls.

    Voting is not that hard. It doesn’t need to be made “easier” at the expense of security.

    If poor people have to stand in long lines in order to vote in person, maybe that’s a civil rights issue for their own jurisdiction and not an excuse to make voting into a more of a fucking sham.

  18. Show up in person, prove you live in the precinct, dip you finger in the indelible ink, THEN vote.
    Or, if you prefer a simple process which has passed ‘constitutional muster’, just require a pistol permit to vote.

      1. Yeah, why would I have one of those? Constitutional carry MFers.

  19. “If you want to understand how quickly attitudes toward mail-in voting have shifted, look no further than Pennsylvania. The state legislature passed a bipartisan bill in 2019 to expand mail-in voting, including a provision allowing no-excuse absentee balloting for the first time in the state’s history. But after Trump and his supporters blamed mail-in voting for President Joe Biden’s victory in the state—a claim easily disproved with some simple math—Republicans are now seeking to reverse that law.”

    PA Act 77 of 2019, the law that supposedly “established” mail-in balloting, is UNCONSTITUTIONAL (state-wise) because it adds a method of voting that is NOT described in Article 7 of the PA Constitution. In person voting is described in Section 1 and specific-reason absentee balloting is described in Section 14.

    Any description of PA mail-in balloting that conflates mail-in balloting with absentee balloting is just plain WRONG. In fact, Act 77 has this definition: “z.6) The words “qualified mail-in elector” shall mean a qualified elector who is not a qualified absentee elector.”

    The PA Supreme Court NEVER RULED on whether Act77 is unconstitutional–they skirted this inconvenient truth by blithely throwing out the lawsuit on standing and laches. The logic of their rejections is directly out of Bizzarro-land. Not to mention that Act 77 had a time-bomb clause that required any challenge to take place within 180 days of passage–this time bomb clause is also UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    1. Simple math proves Biden won Pennsylvania??
      Check the overall vote share, then compare to the vote share on mail-in ballots.
      PA was a battleground state, roughly 50-50 overall. PA mail-in ballots went 65-35 to Biden.
      In other battleground states like FL and OH, mail-in ballots were very close to 50-50.
      In true blue states like CA, mail-in ballots were 65-35 for Biden. As were in-person votes.
      The PA mail-in vote share defies reason and logic and math.

  20. Jesus Christ, the whole purpose of the privacy of the voting booth is so that no one knows how you voted. Of course, with the ubiquity of the cell phone, that’s a bit of an outdated concept, but the reason you had privacy is to ensure that no one could be coercing you or enticing you to vote a certain way, they had no way of knowing how you actually voted. With mail-in voting? It’s easy to see how somebody filled out their ballot, you can be certain they voted the “right” way.

    1. You don’t even need them to fill out the ballot – you can do it for them.

      Think of how easy voting will be then!

  21. Just provide for all of us mail-in access to Boehm’s bank account.

    No ID needed. Just mail in requests for money.

    That seems secure enough to me.

  22. Limiting Mail-in Voting Won’t Make Elections More Secure
    But it would continue the politicization of the means of voting and make it harder to vote.

    1. But allowing mail-in voting *isn’t* continuing the politicization of the means of voting?

    2. Its not exactly hard to go to a polling station and vote.

    Far from being a gateway to rampant fraud, when done correctly mail-in balloting is more secure than in-person voting.

    This is written by a libertarian? Sure, and when socialism is done correctly it results in better life for everyone. When dictatorship is done correctly your nation prospers.

    We’re concerned about what happens WHEN ITS NOT FUCKING DONE CORRECTLY!

    Polls and limited absentee ballot usage are a good tradeoff between convenience and security.

    As I’ve said before, which you guys don’t seem to get, its not about how secure your election really is. Its about how much the people affected *trust* your election.

    We don’t trust shotgunning ballots out to out-of-date voter rolls and forgoing verification procedures. Period. And we never will, no matter how much you tell us that the people involved are, like, super-honest guys, totally.

    Because we’re concerned about what happens on the day when they’re not.

  23. WA state has signature validation on mail in ballots… and we still have Inslee as Governor. Oh yeah, sex education as taught here says pissing on your partner is acceptable.

    1. In general? I’d say you ought to ask first.

  24. The problem isn’t mail in voting generally. The problem is/was hasty, poorly planned implementations of mail in voting “because COVID”.

    1. But that did not happen. A lot of work went into making sure that mail-in voting was done properly. I worked the polls and I can tell you that we did extra training and a lot of work went into making sure everything was done properly. There were problems in the primaries but everything learned there went into making the November election secure and accurate. We, the election workers, knew this was important and that the results would be scrutinized. We worked very hard to insure results that people could trust. That some are upset that with the results does not change the fact that the results are accurate.

      1. You election workers couldn’t find your asses with two hands. You did the most fucked up terrible job in our history. You should be be too ashamed to admit you’re part of this travesty.

        1. “most fucked up terrible job”

          Except that no one has found a significant problems with the job we did. Yes, there were plenty of complaints but no actual evidence of problems. Just whining because “I wanted to be President again and they will not let me”.

          1. No they have not. That will not convince the true believers but the rest of us know it.

            1. There’s a good little nazi

            2. Funny, you “knew it” on November 7th despite repeated warnings from Democrats that it would take months for the results to come in and not to trust anyone declaring victory until after the new year. It’s almost like you’re a Democratic party shill regurgitating talking points from Democratic Underground or something.

          2. Nevermind the video footage of you pieces of shit trucking in ballots after polls closed, or counting after observers were sent home, or palming thumb drives full of ballot data, or the 3,000 affidavits of people who witnesses your bullshit.

            Third hand accounts of a telephone call for which a transcript existed were good enough to impeach the president, but when it comes to voting, don’t believe your lying eyes.

            Cool LARP btw. Not even the half-retarded Democrats in Detroit would actually hire you as a poll worker. That’s why you post here 14-18 hours per day earning your 50 cents from Media Matters. The only other job for which you are qualified is sucking cocks through a hole in the wall of the 7-11 bathroom.

            1. Great you have tons of evidence, but none of that was produced in court. During the February impeachment President Trump was invited to testify. He could have enter this all as evidence, but he did not. Why because none of the evidence actually exists. It OK to talk about in the comment section of Reason but not so good that anyone will enter it in the official record of a court case.

              Again plenty of whining, little of substance produced. The election was secure and accurate, plain and simple.

  25. same here SierraLima. I rarely read the trash published here, I go straight to the comments. It seems hard to find a “Libertarian” news outlet that isn’t sucking the nuts of leftists these days.

  26. “there is nothing more than anecdotal evidence of problems with the process”

    I mean, if you call the hundreds of sworn affidavits “anecdotal evidence”, then sure.

    In the meantime, I’ll leave this here. “Reason” won’t cover it:

    https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

    1. Oh, and I forgot the video evidence. But, whatever. I didn’t vote for Trump or Biden, so obviously I’m biased for Trump, right?

    2. “the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.”

      My God, sometimes it’s good to be an American.

      I don’t know if we’ve met, but I’m an American. We are liberals and business types, and we kill fascists.

      1. 1. I see Tony is cheering this on. On brand, I suppose.
        2. Tony, I would bet all my Bitcoin you’ve never killed a fascist, ever. I’d bet even a bit more that you don’t have the tools required to do it effectively (or you’re a total hypocrite).
        3. Given how you define “fascist” (which would almost certainly include me, an An-Cap), #2 is a good thing.

        1. They haven’t come to examine my papers yet. If I’m honest, I’d probably retreat to my Anne Frank hideout. I need to fix the latch on the secret door though.

          I mean I pay good tax money so that my country kills fascists for me. I don’t know what it means to be an American without that particular service.

          Fascists have tried to take over this country many times, and we’ve beaten them by being smarter. That’s why they systematically invaded our news media and schools, so things might be more precarious now.

          1. I completely agree that facists have invaded our news media and academia, facists such as the Democrat Party, AntiFa, BLM, etc, etc, etc.

          2. “They haven’t come to examine my papers yet”

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_

            “I mean I pay good tax money so that my country kills fascists for me.”

            As they are also fascists, did it ever occur to you that they were just killing their political enemies?

            “I don’t know what it means to be an American without that particular service.”

            It means you have to do the work yourself!

            “Fascists have tried to take over this country many times”

            They succeeded long ago, and are there. They wear Rs and Ds.

            “we’ve beaten them by being smarter”

            Tony, don’t think of yourself more highly than you ought.

            “That’s why they systematically invaded our news media and schools”

            The lack of self-awareness is astounding!

            Tony, define “fascist”. It’s a readily available definition, so this should be hard.

  27. “…when done correctly mail-in balloting is more secure than in-person voting…”

    Lots of things work better when done correctly….

    Changing the rules right before the election, loosening signature and postmark checking requirements, and shredding envelopes hardly seems like doing it correctly.

    And in-person voting could be made more secure than it is now, if one of the two major parties dropped their opposition to making it more secure. I forget which party that was…

  28. According to the OP: “Far from being a gateway to rampant fraud, when done correctly mail-in balloting is more secure than in-person voting.”

    That is beyond stupid. If mail in voting is done right, an individual would go in to his local gov office and apply for an absentee vote. He would have to show ID and sign as evidence he is who he says he is. This is the very same thing a person has to do when voting in person on election day, so mail in voting can be no better.
    But mail in voting can be worse due to chain of custody issues. And it could be much worse if the right procedures are not followed.

  29. I have no problem with mail in voting where if no disability you have to drop it off in person to an election station. Make satellite offices. Open until 9pm for 2 weeks. Keeps voter ID in play for integrity.

    1. You have to jump through multiple extra hoops to vote by mail already.

      Not that you should be able to place your disgusting hands on our most basic right because of a fictional voting security problem anyway.

      1. lol – Not that you should be able to place your disgusting hands on our most basic right because of a fictional voting security problem anyway.

        You mean like the Patriot Act?

  30. Until the government once again considers the mail secure enough for buying guns, it isn’t secure enough for voting.

  31. It really doesn’t matter anymore.
    They can, and will, do anything they want now.
    Honest votes are a thing of the past, and they’re bragging in your face about it.
    The left views you as their enemy in a total war.
    Your options are to fight back or submit.
    There is no getting out of this.

  32. in this day and age, you’d think everyone would be able to vote electronically. Say everyone over 18 get a debit-type card that is encrypted with their personal data, put it in any ATM machine in the country, enter your social security number and you’re instantly validated (and, a photo is taken at the ATM)…vote and … to sweeten the pot, the ATM machine gives you $5 for showing up and doing your civic duty. The debit card is then withheld by the machine and encrypted so it can’t be used again. Problem solved. next.

  33. https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1362555502924681216?s=19

    Real journalists in DC should watch this…..

    Pelosi hired a bigot to hunt MAGA.

  34. Aside from concerns of legitimacy and security in mail-in voting – which are legitimate, voting should NOT be easy. Voting should be hard – if you feel you have a damn good grasp of issues and want an intelligent, NOT a flippant, vote, then you will work hard and succeed to get your vote heard.

    As someone who takes voting seriously and does so with an effort to understand the issues, I find it highly insulting to let lazy ass SOB’s vote from their couch – many of whom can’t be bothered to do anything in life other than bitch, riot, loot and collect a welfare check.

    Hell, if I had a say, the one additional qualification one would need to vote, other than being a citizen, would be this: Unless you’re retired, if your income comes from government handouts, your ass can’t vote, simply because it’s a conflict of interest – If your ass lives off government handouts paid for by citizens who actually work and pay taxes, then you shouldn’t have a say that can get you more free stuff you don’t pay for.

    1. Fuck you. The right to vote comes automatically. It is not dependent on anyone’s motives. People are free to choose what they want to do with their own government. It is not your government, it is ours. If that’s not the case, then there is no law and there is no property and you can go fuck yourself.

      1. Your compulsive ignorance of the U.S. Constitution ( The Supreme Law and ‘The Peoples Law’ over their government ) is nothing short of deceitful blatant ignorance of the USA itself.

        You want a [WE] ‘gang’ government; you’re in the WRONG country!

  35. America is in the middle of civil war 2.0 thanks to democrats starting this civil war too. All to steal an election. And to enslave americans. To steal from americans…

    Democrats are piece of shit traitors and we all know it. Commies at unreason cover for them and are pieces of shit themselves.

    Luckily, Trump was the best and last president America will have until this civil war is sorted out. Poor el presidente biden and his banana republic with national guard to protect his joke government.

  36. Lawmakers don’t need to prioritize election security. It’s prioritized. There is no problem with voter fraud. That is a lie invented by politicians who want to steal people’s right to vote.

    The only threat to election security are “some Republican lawmakers [who] might see a cynical reason” to take people’s right to vote away like they think it’s 1750.

    Republicans only want to restrict mail voting because they lied to their followers about how it is untrustworthy. If politicians who want to steal your freedom choose to shoot themselves in the dick, you should let them.

    1. Lawmakers don’t need to prioritize election security. It’s prioritized. There is no problem with voter fraud. That is a lie invented by politicians who want to steal people’s right to vote.

      You’ve officially jumped the parody shark – you are a parody of a parody. Too funny.

  37. There was an established and effective absentee voting system in place. The changes for mail in voting were an invitation to problems.

Comments are closed.