Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ballot harvesting doubtless helped Democrats in California this cycle, but be careful what you wish for. When the floodgates are opened, both parties will try to swim. The party that doesn't will eventually go extinct anyway.
Any practice that enables 'mass production' efforts of vote collection should be looked at with a jaundiced eye.
When what's considered election fraud in North Carolina is completely legal in California.....
When what's considered election fraud in North Carolina is completely legal in California.....
You know it needs to go.
If done correctly it is a great way to get people involved. If the party (employee) is paying to destroy ballots, then it can't work and the party should be brought up on charges.
I've always thought that one of the biggest obstacles to vote fraud is just the sheer difficulty of organizing groups of people to show up at the polling place. It can be done, but would require a lot of legwork and a lot of people.
'All mail' voting reduces the difficulty, and ballot harvesting even more so. That's why I oppose both.
Most election cheating goes on at grass roots levels where hundreds of votes can be a big deal when running for alderman etc. sure, these can pile up to be occasionally meaningful in statewide or even national contests but that would be pretty rare.
I do not support ballot harvesting. So often it's nothing more than going through the nursing home and picking whom they vote for and then turning it all in.
If done correctly it is a great way to get people involved. If the party (employee) is paying to destroy ballots, then it can't work and the party should be brought up on charges.
The potential benefits don't outweigh the potential risks.
Like mail ballots it offers an opportunity for abuse. Perhaps easier to abuse on a small scale but harder to abuse than mail on a large scale.
And both mail and harvesting are much more abuse-able than ID.
So if concerned it would seem ID would be the last to go after you have figured out how to deal with harvesting and mail. And certainly way off of things like early voting.
I wonder if that is how it will come out? Don't think so.
This comment from an academic, presumably non-partisan, or at less so than most observers:
Quote:
“I think that it’s fair-minded to say that the fraud that we do see is associated with absentee ballots, because there are these points where an actor with ill intent can try to manipulate things,” said Paul Gronke, the director of the Early Voting Information Center at Reed College in Portland, Ore.
To be sure, fraud, either in mail-in or in-person voting, is rare. But Gronke expressed concern that the current allegations in North Carolina’s 9th District might prompt an overly aggressive response from lawmakers seeking to shore up the state’s voting procedures.
“I’m concerned that, with all the attention this has gotten, there could be a lot of overreaction,” Gronke said.
If a guy finds out that his mother-in-law is a candidate on the opposing party candidate, only then should destroying that ballot that is voting for her be legal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
