3 ms·
The envelope is retained. There was an audit performed on the signatures. They can count the number of envelopes vs the number of ballots. They can AND DID c
by VikingCoder 6y ago
The envelope is retained. There was an audit performed on the signatures. They can count the number of envelopes vs the number of ballots. They can AND DID contact people to see if they voted. And most importantly, they can ensure one person didn't vote twice.
Inventing a ballot, forging a signature, and making sure you didn't vote for someone else who would later vote themselves... 11,800 times?
I'm sorry, but you need to provide evidence for that happening. Or evidence of how it COULD happen.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/a-warning-on-georgias-signature-match-11609460042 https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/a-warn...
- disgrunt 6y agoSomeone tested this ironclad verification process and their signature was accepted eight times. [0] [0]: https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/opinion-columns/victor-joecks/victor-joecks-clark-county-election-officials-accepted-my-signature-on-8-ballot-envelopes-2182390/ https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/opinion-columns/victor...
- VikingCoder 6y ago1) that's a different process, not the process followed for the specific signature audit 2) even that casual process caught 11% of the fraud 3) where is evidence of ANY sizable signature fraud? Your article indicates we should have caught about 11% of it, even without the more strict signature audit. 4) you still haven't answered how you find 11,800 people whose signatures you can fake, and be sure they won't ALSO vote at a later date, which would be detected. We done yet? No? Prove it in court. Or just accept the outcome of this election, and get started trying to improve security for the next election.