4 ms·
>For example in '2000 Mules' they propose that democratically aligned charities like homeless shelters and elder care homes would gather ballots from their vuln
by the_snooze 4y ago
>For example in '2000 Mules' they propose that democratically aligned charities like homeless shelters and elder care homes would gather ballots from their vulnerable populations, fill them out for their preferred candidates, and then have mules distribute those ballots to publicly accessible ballot boxes 3 to 5 at a time.
In order for this to actually work, the nefarious operatives would need to forge people's signatures on those mail ballots. Otherwise, they'll fail the signature match at the elections returns center and the ballot will get tossed. Here's a good rundown of how that works, at least in California [1]. Do you have reason to believe that the signature check doesn't work?
Stepping back, rigging elections by stuffing mail ballots makes zero sense from a cost/benefit perspective. It requires massive amounts of effort to coordinate all those people so the plan proceeds undetected. A rational attacker would be better off taking an opposite approach: throwing away opponents' mail ballots. That requires far less effort. I'm skeptical of these mail ballot stuffing claims because it's an overly complex Rube-Goldberg-machine of a plot.
Other than throwing away opponents' mail ballots, is there a viable attack that could actually work?
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YJyQbckMDw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YJyQbckMDw
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jacobriis 4y agoIn 2020 in Pennsylvania the standard was that a signature existed not that it matched the voter rolls. The incentive not to closely scritinize signatures when mail in ballots in your county strongly favor your perfered candidate is clear. "If the Voter’s Declaration on the return envelope is signed and the county board is satisfied that the declaration is sufficient, the mail-in or absentee ballot should be approved for canvassing unless challenged in accordance with the Pennsylvania Election Code. The Pennsylvania Election Code does not authorize the county board of elections to set aside returned absentee or mail-in ballots based solely on signature analysis by the county board of elections." Source: https://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/OtherServicesEvents/Documents/Examination%20of%20Absentee%20and%20Mail-In%20Ballot%20Return%20Envelopes.pdf https://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/OtherServicesEvents/D...
- the_snooze 4y agoThanks for sharing this! That's absolutely concerning, and definitely opens up a possibility for monkey business if fraudsters can just scribble down anything in the signature field. Given the millions of mail ballots in Pennsylvania in 2020, I would expect someone noticing ballot theft at scale (i.e., "I never got my mail ballot but it says I already voted!"), but regardless this is something I would still want corrected if I were a Pennsylvanian. Is the standard still the same? The signature match is an important part of the mail ballot process, one that even California does.
- dukeofdoom 4y agoThe standard for a match is so low, its practically useless. https://youtu.be/v_liXxu0XL8 https://youtu.be/v_liXxu0XL8 He did an audit of the envelope images for the Maricopa county election board, and testified under oath.
- creato 4y agoIt is astonishing to me that anyone thinks signature matching is a good idea. It’s incredibly subjective, and I have no idea what my own signature from years ago looks like.
- camgunz 4y agoIt is mostly a stand-in for voter suppression. It's not useful otherwise.