5 ms·

Has this happened with members of the military or in states that already allow vote-by-mail? If not, why not?

malandrew 6y ago
Probably not, but mainly due to scale. The number of people who vote remotely is so few that the amount of fraud you can get through without being detected makes it not worth the effort.
- runako 6y ago
  Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah conduct their elections entirely by mail. This covers perhaps 10+ million registered voters. At what level would you consider the scale sufficient for these effects to appear?
  - malandrew 6y ago
    Three of those four state are reliably blue. The real reward is for swing states.
    - wool_gather 6y ago
      (I assume you were picking OR, HI, WA, and CO, not UT.) EDIT: parent has been edited since I posted to say "Three of those four state are..." rather than "Four states that are..." Half of Colorado's Congressional delegation is Republican and Clinton won the state in 2016 only by a bare plurality (48% to 43%). (UT of course is quite solidly Republican.)
  - breischl 6y ago
    Colorado at least is _not_ entirely by mail. It's an option, and a good one, and I personally use it, but it's not mandatory. To my sibling comment - "reliably blue" lol. Only in the last 3 presidential elections, and the House & Senate are split evenly. https://www.270towin.com/states/Colorado https://www.270towin.com/states/Colorado https://www.270towin.com/elected-officials/colorado https://www.270towin.com/elected-officials/colorado
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - natch 6y ago
    It all depends on the cultural context. In a place where people fiercely guard and take pride in their right to a secret ballot (such as many parts of the US) it’s not likely to be a problem. In fledgling democracies it’s more likely. So it would be foolish to pin it down to a single level.
- breischl 6y ago
  Couldn't easily find numbers on vote-by-mail as a percentage of all votes, but this is suggestive that it's enough to swing most elections already. >In 2014 Colorado (72 percent) and Oregon (71 percent) led the nation in voter turnout of active registered voters – both states 20+ points above the national average of 48% Yet still doesn't seem to be happening. source: https://www.nonprofitvote.org/get-ballot-home-2-weeks-election-day/ https://www.nonprofitvote.org/get-ballot-home-2-weeks-electi...
natch 6y ago
It’s hard to know. And that’s pretty much the problem.
- karatestomp 6y ago
  Surely investigations or monitoring have been conducted, I'd expect, in some cases, by folks belonging to A Certain Party that tends to oppose making voting easier and so would have strong motivations to turn up problems and, particularly, actual voter fraud, then make those findings very well and widely known. Have the officials performing those complained of inadequate tools or transparency to spot voter fraud? I'd very much expect so, if it is hard to know and that's pretty much the problem. So perhaps they have.

Probably not, but mainly due to scale. The number of people who vote remotely is so few that the amount of fraud you can get through without being detected makes it not worth the effort.

runako 6y ago
Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah conduct their elections entirely by mail. This covers perhaps 10+ million registered voters. At what level would you consider the scale sufficient for these effects to appear?
- malandrew 6y ago
  Three of those four state are reliably blue. The real reward is for swing states.
  - wool_gather 6y ago
    (I assume you were picking OR, HI, WA, and CO, not UT.) EDIT: parent has been edited since I posted to say "Three of those four state are..." rather than "Four states that are..." Half of Colorado's Congressional delegation is Republican and Clinton won the state in 2016 only by a bare plurality (48% to 43%). (UT of course is quite solidly Republican.)
- breischl 6y ago
  Colorado at least is _not_ entirely by mail. It's an option, and a good one, and I personally use it, but it's not mandatory. To my sibling comment - "reliably blue" lol. Only in the last 3 presidential elections, and the House & Senate are split evenly. https://www.270towin.com/states/Colorado https://www.270towin.com/states/Colorado https://www.270towin.com/elected-officials/colorado https://www.270towin.com/elected-officials/colorado
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- natch 6y ago
  It all depends on the cultural context. In a place where people fiercely guard and take pride in their right to a secret ballot (such as many parts of the US) it’s not likely to be a problem. In fledgling democracies it’s more likely. So it would be foolish to pin it down to a single level.
breischl 6y ago
Couldn't easily find numbers on vote-by-mail as a percentage of all votes, but this is suggestive that it's enough to swing most elections already. >In 2014 Colorado (72 percent) and Oregon (71 percent) led the nation in voter turnout of active registered voters – both states 20+ points above the national average of 48% Yet still doesn't seem to be happening. source: https://www.nonprofitvote.org/get-ballot-home-2-weeks-election-day/ https://www.nonprofitvote.org/get-ballot-home-2-weeks-electi...

natch 6y ago

It’s hard to know. And that’s pretty much the problem.

karatestomp 6y ago
Surely investigations or monitoring have been conducted, I'd expect, in some cases, by folks belonging to A Certain Party that tends to oppose making voting easier and so would have strong motivations to turn up problems and, particularly, actual voter fraud, then make those findings very well and widely known. Have the officials performing those complained of inadequate tools or transparency to spot voter fraud? I'd very much expect so, if it is hard to know and that's pretty much the problem. So perhaps they have.