5 ms·

Nearly every country in the world restricts mail-in voting (context that is predictably omitted from the article [1]): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_voti

Nearly every country in the world restricts mail-in voting (context that is predictably omitted from the article [1]): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_voting [1] At least from the first six paragraphs that I was able to unpaywall.

goatlover 2mo ago
It's not the Federal government's job to run elections. That's up to states. It's in the Constitution. This is all a BS issue anyway because Trump doesn't want to lose control of Congress. It's blatantly obvious what he's doing. Nobody should fall for it.
nmeagent 2mo ago
What nearly every country in the world does or does not do has absolutely no bearing on this issue in the United States.
- like_any_other 2mo ago
  If we're going to claim restricting mail-in voting is an assault on democracy, it's very relevant that the great majority of countries we call democracies also do it.
  - cosmicgadget 2mo ago
    Step back from the voter disenfranchisement angle and consider how it's being done.
    - like_any_other 2mo ago
      Your words, posted after my democracy comment: "It's kind of genius - use the one federally-controlled element of voting to disenfranchise your opponents, doing it so late that the courts can't rule in time." - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 Are you going to issue a correction to that post, that actually it's not disenfranchisement at all, that restricted mail voting is perfectly democratic, and your only objection is that the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed?
      - cosmicgadget 2mo ago
        Lol, "are you going to issue a correction!?!" It's absolutely an attempt at disenfranchisement, the administration has been pretty clear about this. I asked you to also consider the other angle, it doesn't somehow invalidate the president's objective. > the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed? Tell me, what is the correct procedure for this, under the US Constitution?
        like_any_other 2mo ago
        I don't care about the correct procedure, I'm only interested in the disenfranchisement angle. So, how does "It's absolutely an attempt at disenfranchisement" square with the overwhelming majority of democracies also restricting mail-in voting? Is it only disenfranchisement when Trump does it?
        cosmicgadget 2mo ago
        Quite simply because that is both the intent and the effect. What other countries do is completely immaterial. > I don't care about the correct procedure You mean constitutional procedure. Which is something you out to pretend to care about while you're making your case for Trump.
        like_any_other 2mo ago
        I'm not making my case "for Trump", I'm making my case that restricting or banning voting by mail is neither disenfranchisement nor undemocratic. If you want to argue Trump is breaking the US constitution in enacting these changes, be my guest. But something is not democratic or not based on whether it abides by the US constitution. > What other countries do is completely immaterial. I disagree. I think it's very material that no or minimal criticism about voter disenfranchisement was levied at those other countries on this basis. In any case, following this change, voters in the US will be no more disenfranchised than voters in France, Iceland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine, Turkey, Israel, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Taiwan, Papua New Guinea, Madagascar, and every single country in South America (except Guyana and Suriname), where they have no voting by mail whatsoever.
  - mandeepj 2mo ago
    The great majority of countries do not announce tariffs from the office at whim and later roll them back, including many other moronic things.
- econ 2mo ago
  If you have a task you might want to notice how your 200 coworkers and/or competitors are doing it and how it works out. You might be able to figure it out superiorly on your own but it's still a waste of time and you won't even know you've done well. The us probably has wonderful data on the full spectrum of tools to manipulate elections.
Arnt 2mo ago
I come from one of the countries on that list, and from a quick glance mine is one of the more restrictive one. Yet I've voted by mail in ~10 elections and the restrictions haven't bothered me, ever, so based on a sample of one the restrictions have no practical effect. They didn't block me from voting, they didn't even inconvenience me. Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect, or are intended to have no practical effect?
- like_any_other 2mo ago
  > I come from one of the countries on that list Okay, let's be less vague then: Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Czechia, Slovakia, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Romania, Moldova, Mexico, and Egypt have mail voting only for citizens abroad. France, Iceland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine, Turkey, Israel, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Taiwan, Papua New Guinea, Madagascar, and every single country in South America (except Guyana and Suriname) have no mail voting whatsoever. As a glance at the map in the wiki article will reveal, this is not even half of the list. Are all of them disenfranchising their voters, and failing to live up to the promises of democracy, specifically because of the lack of mail voting? > Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect I think even if he bans voting by mail entirely, it would be consistent with the majority of democracies in the world, and would not reduce democracy in any way. In fact it would strengthen it, because one can have more trust in the legitimacy of each vote. I grant that this part is subjective, but the consistency with other democracies is fact.
  - econ 2mo ago
    What does seem unique is the obligation to pay income tax living abroad. It seems to make no sense to have a say if you aren't going to pay for anything. My Aunt moved to Australia 60 years ago. She should vote how my tax is spend? She had a very busy life, she should make time to watch dutch propaganda TV? She also doesn't like the idea of being counted as someone who didn't vote. We likewise have lots of immigrants who vote in their "home" country they don't live in or never did.
    - 2mo ago

goatlover 2mo ago

It's not the Federal government's job to run elections. That's up to states. It's in the Constitution. This is all a BS issue anyway because Trump doesn't want to lose control of Congress. It's blatantly obvious what he's doing. Nobody should fall for it.

nmeagent 2mo ago

What nearly every country in the world does or does not do has absolutely no bearing on this issue in the United States.

like_any_other 2mo ago
If we're going to claim restricting mail-in voting is an assault on democracy, it's very relevant that the great majority of countries we call democracies also do it.
- cosmicgadget 2mo ago
  Step back from the voter disenfranchisement angle and consider how it's being done.
  - like_any_other 2mo ago
    Your words, posted after my democracy comment: "It's kind of genius - use the one federally-controlled element of voting to disenfranchise your opponents, doing it so late that the courts can't rule in time." - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 Are you going to issue a correction to that post, that actually it's not disenfranchisement at all, that restricted mail voting is perfectly democratic, and your only objection is that the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed?
    - cosmicgadget 2mo ago
      Lol, "are you going to issue a correction!?!" It's absolutely an attempt at disenfranchisement, the administration has been pretty clear about this. I asked you to also consider the other angle, it doesn't somehow invalidate the president's objective. > the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed? Tell me, what is the correct procedure for this, under the US Constitution?
      - like_any_other 2mo ago
        I don't care about the correct procedure, I'm only interested in the disenfranchisement angle. So, how does "It's absolutely an attempt at disenfranchisement" square with the overwhelming majority of democracies also restricting mail-in voting? Is it only disenfranchisement when Trump does it?
        cosmicgadget 2mo ago
        Quite simply because that is both the intent and the effect. What other countries do is completely immaterial. > I don't care about the correct procedure You mean constitutional procedure. Which is something you out to pretend to care about while you're making your case for Trump.
        like_any_other 2mo ago
        I'm not making my case "for Trump", I'm making my case that restricting or banning voting by mail is neither disenfranchisement nor undemocratic. If you want to argue Trump is breaking the US constitution in enacting these changes, be my guest. But something is not democratic or not based on whether it abides by the US constitution. > What other countries do is completely immaterial. I disagree. I think it's very material that no or minimal criticism about voter disenfranchisement was levied at those other countries on this basis. In any case, following this change, voters in the US will be no more disenfranchised than voters in France, Iceland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine, Turkey, Israel, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Taiwan, Papua New Guinea, Madagascar, and every single country in South America (except Guyana and Suriname), where they have no voting by mail whatsoever.
- mandeepj 2mo ago
  The great majority of countries do not announce tariffs from the office at whim and later roll them back, including many other moronic things.
econ 2mo ago
If you have a task you might want to notice how your 200 coworkers and/or competitors are doing it and how it works out. You might be able to figure it out superiorly on your own but it's still a waste of time and you won't even know you've done well. The us probably has wonderful data on the full spectrum of tools to manipulate elections.

Arnt 2mo ago

I come from one of the countries on that list, and from a quick glance mine is one of the more restrictive one. Yet I've voted by mail in ~10 elections and the restrictions haven't bothered me, ever, so based on a sample of one the restrictions have no practical effect. They didn't block me from voting, they didn't even inconvenience me. Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect, or are intended to have no practical effect?

like_any_other 2mo ago
> I come from one of the countries on that list Okay, let's be less vague then: Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Czechia, Slovakia, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Romania, Moldova, Mexico, and Egypt have mail voting only for citizens abroad. France, Iceland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine, Turkey, Israel, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Taiwan, Papua New Guinea, Madagascar, and every single country in South America (except Guyana and Suriname) have no mail voting whatsoever. As a glance at the map in the wiki article will reveal, this is not even half of the list. Are all of them disenfranchising their voters, and failing to live up to the promises of democracy, specifically because of the lack of mail voting? > Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect I think even if he bans voting by mail entirely, it would be consistent with the majority of democracies in the world, and would not reduce democracy in any way. In fact it would strengthen it, because one can have more trust in the legitimacy of each vote. I grant that this part is subjective, but the consistency with other democracies is fact.
- econ 2mo ago
  What does seem unique is the obligation to pay income tax living abroad. It seems to make no sense to have a say if you aren't going to pay for anything. My Aunt moved to Australia 60 years ago. She should vote how my tax is spend? She had a very busy life, she should make time to watch dutch propaganda TV? She also doesn't like the idea of being counted as someone who didn't vote. We likewise have lots of immigrants who vote in their "home" country they don't live in or never did.
  - 2mo ago