3 ms·
I was expecting that response. The only solution, then, is to ban all mail in ballots. Right now California, for example, has optional mail-in voting. Wouldn
by sapote 9y ago
I was expecting that response. The only solution, then, is to ban all mail in ballots. Right now California, for example, has optional mail-in voting. Wouldn't you expect that anyone who can be coerced to vote some way could be coerced whether the mail-in voting is optional or mandatory?
- dragonwriter 9y agoI'm not arguing that mail in ballots don't have benefits that warranted the increase in coercion risk, I'm just arguing that mail in ballots cannot be viewed as a mitigation of coercion risk compared to the way US in-person polling stations are run since they exacerbate, rather than mitigate, that risk.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]