Quote:
Originally Posted by eyecu2
What did I post that was superficial talking points that were not part of the idea that, this is another ruse from folks who believe that there is mischief afoot? I don't believe it, and despite the allegations of it from a whistleblower, the facts will need to be borne out to support the allegations. I do not believe that ballot harvesting is good ever. However, let me ask you this Lusty - "do you think it's better to encourage voters to vote, or to not vote?" When does offering a ride, a cookie, or any incentive become crossing the line of an incentive, to a harvest? To my understanding, the way you reptards believe the harvesting happens is via mail-in ballots and that someone goes out to the waybacks of where some of these mail ins happen, and simply gathers - (for compensation or exchange of goods/ services) the vote sheets; and then fills them in, or if they are already filled in, they eliminate / destroy the votes that are contrary to what they want. Do I believe that happens? Sadly yes, and I don't believe that its appropriate ever to harvest those votes. I would suggest however that mail in votes are a lot less subject to harvesting in that we currently legally consider something that comes from the post office to be concluded by the time stamp etc, so there is at least one safeguard in that process. It's a lot harder to just drop 1000 ballots off at the post office without suspicion if you are john q public, so there would likely be alarm bells going off. that would imply there are ppl with integrity in the office and elsewhere. Absentee ballots should be accepted by mail in my opinion. I think idea that the coercion of medium to large groups to get this organized and submitted is just ridiculous, but yet we do see cases where ppl are convicted of doing it at local, county, state levels. Perhaps there is another system outside of only a paper identifier to help everyone accept a vote. The biggest hurdle to red states making voting difficult, is that it will inherently dissenfranchise a voter who will just decide it's too difficult to vote and stay home instead of voting. I want everyone to vote, and to be able to have access to voting systems / where it's not punitive to those who are more rurally located. I hope that answers your question. I think somehow, you are asserting that I'm ok with ballot harvesting however, which is an outright no.
Here's a cool site for some links on who allows what when it comes to ballot returns:
https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_harve..._laws_by_state |
Hey eye, sorry I didn't respond sooner. I retract my accusation against you. Your comments above tell me you've at least given some thought to the obvious risks of removing all common-sense guardrails to voting, as dim-retards keep trying to do. Allowing unchecked ballot harvesting, issuing unsolicited mail-in ballots to everyone, and banning simple voter-ID requirements are not ok with me or with the majority of Americans.
Btw - does anyone remember the story about John F. Kennedy and the 1960 Democratic primary race in West Virginia? Hubert Humphrey was the main opponent. The Kennedy campaign was caught red-handed dispensing cash to local WVa officials who would, in turn, pay people to go to the polls and vote for JFK. When the story broke, JFK deftly defused the scandal by using humor. Here's what he told the media:
I just received the following wire from my generous daddy — "Dear Jack, Don't buy a single vote more than is necessary. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for a landslide."
Kennedy beat Humphrey in WVa - 61% to 39%.
Pretty funny - and true!
