4 ms·

Some do think so, but there is also a material difference in needing to be intimidated at the time of the vote being cast vs any point in the future as well.

godelski 10mo ago
I think the bigger concern is that mail in ballots lead to fake ballots being submitted. Though I've seen no convincing evidence of this happening at any meaningful scale and the arguments seem unconvincing since you don't get a ballot unless verified with a state ID and your ballot has a unique ID associated with your name, preventing a double spend. Personally, my concern is that with mail in ballots some nutjob that believes there's ballot stuffing can set fire to the ballotbox and even though they're caught it's a major inconvenience to get a replacement ballot and the websites that show your ballot is received take days to update. But I still love mail in voting. My state sends a candidate brochure with it and I can take my time to actually look up all those random candidates' policies. It takes me hours to actually fill out my ballot but that's a feature, not a bug (there's nothing preventing you from along party lines but frankly I'd be happier without parties)
- usefulcat 9mo ago
  > I can take my time to actually look up all those random candidates' policies But you can already do that, regardless of mail in voting or not?
  - godelski 9mo ago
    In the booth I've never had a voter guide and you're definitely discouraged from pulling out your phone. Not to mention the peer pressure. What asshole is going to stand in the booth for hours voting? I got to get to work! Sure, you can do all this at home but there's a clear convenience when having both in hand
- somenameforme 9mo ago
  In 2020 a number of states were sending out mail-in ballots to every single registered voter, even if they didn't request it. Those states were CA, CO, DC, HI, NJ, NV, OR, UT, VT, and WA. [1] [1] - https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-during-covid-19 https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voti...
  - habinero 9mo ago
    And that's completely fine, because each mail-in ballot is associated with one voter, and the system is designed to make fraud very obvious and difficult to scale. If thousands of people were told "you already voted" when they showed up, then that would be very very obvious. They also really do look at signatures and contact voters to cure ballots if they're unsure.
    - godelski 9mo ago
      Not to mention that you can catch double voting across state lines. It's not common that people do this but it does happen and people are really looking for it. Hell, the fact that so many people have been looking for massive voter fraud for about a decade now and haven't is pretty telling. People aren't good at keeping secrets and if it's being done at scale it would be uncovered or leaked. Accidents and stupid people happen, but that works both ways
    - somenameforme 9mo ago
      Mail-in ballots tend to be counted (and received) after in person ballots, so you don't need to worry about in-person conflict. If we go the other direction (mail-in ballot rejected because the person had already voted), it was indeed in the tens of thousands. In 2024 about 584k ballots were rejected. [1] 11% of those, more than 64k, were because the person had already voted. [1] - https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2024:_Analysis_of_rejected_ballots https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2024:_Analysis_of_...
  - direwolf20 9mo ago
    What's wrong with that?
Detrytus 9mo ago
For me the problem with mail-in votes is that they are (in many jurisdictions) allowed to come in long after the in-person voting is closed, and the preliminary results are annouced. So it creates the space for manipulations, where you count the in-person votes first, and, if the score is close, then a week after the election day half a million of mail-in votes mysteriously comes in and swings the vote one way or another.
- ab5tract 9mo ago
  The postmark must be on or before voting day. I cannot fathom how people have bought into this idea that they can be sent after the preliminary voting has happened.

godelski 10mo ago

I think the bigger concern is that mail in ballots lead to fake ballots being submitted. Though I've seen no convincing evidence of this happening at any meaningful scale and the arguments seem unconvincing since you don't get a ballot unless verified with a state ID and your ballot has a unique ID associated with your name, preventing a double spend. Personally, my concern is that with mail in ballots some nutjob that believes there's ballot stuffing can set fire to the ballotbox and even though they're caught it's a major inconvenience to get a replacement ballot and the websites that show your ballot is received take days to update. But I still love mail in voting. My state sends a candidate brochure with it and I can take my time to actually look up all those random candidates' policies. It takes me hours to actually fill out my ballot but that's a feature, not a bug (there's nothing preventing you from along party lines but frankly I'd be happier without parties)

usefulcat 9mo ago
> I can take my time to actually look up all those random candidates' policies But you can already do that, regardless of mail in voting or not?
- godelski 9mo ago
  In the booth I've never had a voter guide and you're definitely discouraged from pulling out your phone. Not to mention the peer pressure. What asshole is going to stand in the booth for hours voting? I got to get to work! Sure, you can do all this at home but there's a clear convenience when having both in hand
somenameforme 9mo ago
In 2020 a number of states were sending out mail-in ballots to every single registered voter, even if they didn't request it. Those states were CA, CO, DC, HI, NJ, NV, OR, UT, VT, and WA. [1] [1] - https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-during-covid-19 https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voti...
- habinero 9mo ago
  And that's completely fine, because each mail-in ballot is associated with one voter, and the system is designed to make fraud very obvious and difficult to scale. If thousands of people were told "you already voted" when they showed up, then that would be very very obvious. They also really do look at signatures and contact voters to cure ballots if they're unsure.
  - godelski 9mo ago
    Not to mention that you can catch double voting across state lines. It's not common that people do this but it does happen and people are really looking for it. Hell, the fact that so many people have been looking for massive voter fraud for about a decade now and haven't is pretty telling. People aren't good at keeping secrets and if it's being done at scale it would be uncovered or leaked. Accidents and stupid people happen, but that works both ways
  - somenameforme 9mo ago
    Mail-in ballots tend to be counted (and received) after in person ballots, so you don't need to worry about in-person conflict. If we go the other direction (mail-in ballot rejected because the person had already voted), it was indeed in the tens of thousands. In 2024 about 584k ballots were rejected. [1] 11% of those, more than 64k, were because the person had already voted. [1] - https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2024:_Analysis_of_rejected_ballots https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2024:_Analysis_of_...
- direwolf20 9mo ago
  What's wrong with that?

Detrytus 9mo ago

For me the problem with mail-in votes is that they are (in many jurisdictions) allowed to come in long after the in-person voting is closed, and the preliminary results are annouced. So it creates the space for manipulations, where you count the in-person votes first, and, if the score is close, then a week after the election day half a million of mail-in votes mysteriously comes in and swings the vote one way or another.

ab5tract 9mo ago
The postmark must be on or before voting day. I cannot fathom how people have bought into this idea that they can be sent after the preliminary voting has happened.