Federal Court Rules Pennsylvania Must Only Count Mail-In Ballots that are Signed and Dated (Iraq, soldiers)
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.
Didn't AZ have ballots that were signed and dated? The signature matchers did not really match them so it doesn't really matter in the long run. They will still cheat.
More good news for the 2024 Presidential election. It just got more difficult for the Democrats to rig things in Pennsylvania.
Just the News is the only outlet I can find that says anything about signatures being required, and I couldn’t find it in the ruling when I read it. Can you please point us to the page in the ruling?
Didn't AZ have ballots that were signed and dated? The signature matchers did not really match them so it doesn't really matter in the long run. They will still cheat.
AZ Voter here who did mail in ballot. Yes we did and when my signature did not match the Board of Elections contacted me to verify i voted. So this is not such a boondoggle you think it is. And this is from someone who voted Trump and Kari Lake. And as someone in AZ Lake lost because she spent all her time campaigning on National Platforms. Meanwhile for months before the election, on over air broadcast channel, which many here watch virtually every commercial break had 2 or 3 commercials attacking Lake with no opposing views and virtually no Lake commercials going after Hobbs. The Dems just vastly outspent Lake here and flooded the airwaves with Anti-lake propaganda while Lake spent her time on Tucker Carlson, Tim Pool and other more National platforms. Now thats the real question where do all these Dems continue to get so much more money for campaigning, it's hard to beat someone when they can spew propaganda out months on end and your side can't. Unfortunately too many hear the lie enough and believe. And the Dems are masters at the Unified Lie, they learned well from the Nazi's.
Again more than enough to definitely sway some races. Your system fails, when the WA State NAACP decides to sue saying that unsigned ballots were just as valid, after all, if blacks can't put a correct date, how can they be expected to sign their name correctly...Right?
No, the existence of a lawsuit is not evidence that the system fails. Rejected ballots are equivalent to an in-person voter forgetting to bring suitable identification. How often does that occur, I wonder? Probably fairly often. The mail-in ballot system has some definite benefits over in-person voting, and I'm quite comfortable with it.
No, the existence of a lawsuit is not evidence that the system fails. Rejected ballots are equivalent to an in-person voter forgetting to bring suitable identification. How often does that occur, I wonder? Probably fairly often. The mail-in ballot system has some definite benefits over in-person voting, and I'm quite comfortable with it.
Which has been deemed racist because black people don't know how to get an ID. And as you see the push is still on to accept ones that shouldn't be accepted.
In the "Great State of California". The only thing I need to do to "prove" my identity when I vote in person is to give them a name and address. I don't even have to sign anything.
You can say that requiring a signature on the mail in ballot is automatically more secure. But there are several other issues that are problematic. With a Mail-In ballot, you are "supposed" to sign it, but in general, the people "comparing" signatures aren't handwriting experts, and there are probably a lot that slip by. You also are able to vote "out of area" and could really be voting in multiple areas. And unlike in-person voting, there is no guarantee that the person voting may be "guided" as to who to vote for. Particularly troublesome are areas where mail-in ballots are sent automatically, which could lead to additional fraud.
Why did this that a fed court ruling? I thought that was already the law with mail in ballots. There are are a couple ways and reasons why ballots have been tossed out in the past, it's only in recent times that "every single vote needs to be counted regardless" became a thing. Only votes that meet the legally defined requirements should be counted, not what the politicians of the day decide. And they should be counted within a couple days of the election AT MOST if you allow mail ins. Ideally mail ballots would go by official post marked dates, anything else should be tossed including ballots found in closets, trunks of cars, forgotten drop off locations, etc. If we can't track it then it shouldn't count. I don't care if that means some votes aren't counted because they didn't sign it or whatever, it doesn't matter.
For thought here. I agree with the decision that mail-in votes need to be signed and dated. The courts ruled correctly here. In PA though only 10,000 voted fell into the invalid category. Even if all of them were for Biden and I strongly believe not everyone would have been that still leaves Biden as the winner of the election in PA. I have voted by mail three times in my life 1 general election and two primary elections. Mail-in ballots should be available for anyone eligible to vote that asks for it.
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.
