4 ms·
As others have noted, the statistics you listed are recklessly inaccurate. That said: even if they were accurate, we'd still need to examine how may signature
by codys 6y ago
As others have noted, the statistics you listed are recklessly inaccurate.
That said: even if they were accurate, we'd still need to examine how may signature match failures result in detecting actual fraudulent voting, and how many signature match failures don't (ie they are false positives that serve to disenfranchise voters).
It turns out that the vast majority (97%) of ballots rejected due to signature match issues are likely valid. IOW: we'd disenfranchise 32 people for every case of fraud occurring. I have personal doubts that the rate for fraud was even that high (3% of the % of ballots rejected for sig mismatch), as you'd expect some type of criminal charges resulting from it.
Even assuming the 3% of sig rejects number, because that's already a % of sig rejects, it comes out to 3% of 0.2% (the actual number of sig mismatch rejections). This is 0.006% of the total vote.
Additionally, signature match checking disproportionately rejects votes from specific groups, while accepting votes from other groups. In other words, having a signature check (or making it "stricter") allows tuning which demographics you accept votes from. Allowing this type of targeted disenfranchisement is not good
- dukeofdoom 6y agoBanks not accepting monopoly money also disenfranchises poor people. If banks did start accepting monopoly money, real money would become worth less. Having even a basic standard of verifiability and security is where the worth of money comes from. Also rights come with responsibilities. If you can't sing your signature in a consistent way, than maybe you should not vote by mail in ballot. Vote in person. Most up to date stats on the rejection rates that I found. 0.6% vs 6.4% in Georgia. https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2020:_Analysis_of_rejected_ballots https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2020:_Analysis_of_...
- codys 6y agoOthers have previously responded to you reposting this link with this commentary, noting that the numbers included there are the result of a tabulating error. Continuing to attempt to use it to push misinformation after being informed is not acceptable.
- dukeofdoom 6y agoBallot tabulation website has an update date of today. Fact check article is from November 20th. The election results have been finalized/certified. Therefore its reasonable to assume that the number of rejected ballots is now known. (How could it be otherwise. ) So I'm going to go with the Tabulation website over a fact check article from last month.
- codys 6y agoAs others have already told you, the article [1] specifically addresses the distinction here. The "6%" is total rejections, including those that are from, for example, ballots arriving late. Nothing is out of date about it. The total number of rejected ballots is not known because it isn't necessary to count rejected ballots to determine the election result (ie: they are simply not included in the count). Again, stop spreading misinformation. Continuing to do so would be malicious. [1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-georgia-rejected-ballots-fo/fact-check-georgia-rejected-ballots-did-not-go-from-4-to-almost-zero-in-2020-idUSKBN2832CM https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-georgia-rejecte...
- dukeofdoom 6y agoFact check article is BS. In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF TEXAS, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE OF STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND STATE OF WISCONSIN Page 5 aND 6. "Georgia argues that the “[r]ejection rates for signatures on absentee ballots remained largely unchanged” as between the 2018 and 2020 elections, referring the Court to Wood v. Raffensperger, No. 1:20- cv-04651-SDG, 2020 WL 6817513, at *10 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 20, 2020) (“Wood”). Georgia Br. 4. Georgia’s reliance on Wood is misplaced because the analysis therein related to rejection rates for absentee ballots—as opposed to the mail-in ballots analyzed by Dr. Cicchetti" "Indeed, in 2018, the rejection rate for mail-in ballots was actually 3.32% or more than twenty times higher than the rejection rate for the absentee ballots that Georgia incorrectly compares to dispute" https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163493/20201211095822921_TX-v-State-LeaveReply-2020-12-11.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163493/2020...