2 billion for voting by mail

[jimnyc]

I don't think so and I don't like this idea. I don't have the answers. But by mail and other remote ways with limited time is a recipe for folks wanting to cheat, and I bet some are planning on just that already. I don't trust it. And you can't say, just wait another year, doesn't work that way either. There must be a vote somehow. I would rather than just one day, make it like a 2 week event. Split it up big time, limited entry at a time, proper distancing and tons of cleaning in between. I would rather take my chances that way than trusting ANY of them with any remote type of election.

[pete311]

I just voted by mail for my local elections. Hell no I'm not going to a voting center. Staff is so short, who the hell wants to volunteer to work that.

[jimnyc]

I just voted by mail for my local elections. Hell no I'm not going to a voting center. Staff is so short, who the hell wants to volunteer to work that.

Oh, me neither, I get that! At least the regular way. And voting in caucuses is one thing for each side, but the general is another. You would trust the right implicitly? I don't trust EITHER side without being in person with officials maintaining some form of oversight.

[Kathianne]

I don't think so and I don't like this idea. I don't have the answers. But by mail and other remote ways with limited time is a recipe for folks wanting to cheat, and I bet some are planning on just that already. I don't trust it. And you can't say, just wait another year, doesn't work that way either. There must be a vote somehow. I would rather than just one day, make it like a 2 week event. Split it up big time, limited entry at a time, proper distancing and tons of cleaning in between. I would rather take my chances that way than trusting ANY of them with any remote type of election.
Without a doubt. Listen to Biden and Pelosi.

[Abbey Marie]

It really worries me too. Too much fraud is probable. Plus if Dems are for it, there’s a reason...

[STTAB]

There's no reason to not have remote voting via the internet. But I don't believe we could possibly have a system up and running by this up coming general election.

And there is of course the absolute fact that Dems are always on the lookout for ways to cheat.

If I can log into my bank account over my smart phone via my fingerprint to confirm my ID and be relatively certain that my account is secure, there is no reason we couldn't achieve the same with voting.

[Kathianne]

There's no reason to not have remote voting via the internet. But I don't believe we could possibly have a system up and running by this up coming general election.

And there is of course the absolute fact that Dems are always on the lookout for ways to cheat.

If I can log into my bank account over my smart phone via my fingerprint to confirm my ID and be relatively certain that my account is secure, there is no reason we couldn't achieve the same with voting.
I disagree.

I do think though that there should be a way to paper ballot vote, from car. Drop into a mailbox at premises.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

If you think people aren't scheming how to cheat, right now, then you're a very naive person.

Now who do you think is doing the vast majority of planning to cheat?

Don't be naive about that either.

Democrats have staged a full blown deep state coup on the president of the US to remove him, then impeached him over 4th hand gossip, and is hinting at more investigations as we speak even though the nation is gripped in the worst pandemic we've ever seen in modern history.

So don't think cheating on a little ole election is something democrats wouldn't do... pfft... these corrupt sons bitches never miss a chance to cheat.

[NightTrain]

Absolutely not.

There is simply no way to prevent a free-for-all engagement of voter fraud.

I don't know what the answer is... unless it's drive-through voting set up similar to the drive-through virus testing. But it still has to be in-person voting and verified the usual way.

[Kathianne]

Absolutely not.

There is simply no way to prevent a free-for-all engagement of voter fraud.

I don't know what the answer is... unless it's drive-through voting set up similar to the drive-through virus testing. But it still has to be in-person voting and verified the usual way.
We generalize in much the same ways. That is interesting. :)

[NightTrain]

We generalize in much the same ways. That is interesting. :)

Whoops! I missed your line about drive-through voting as I surfed on my phone. I need more coffee.

Sorry!

[Kathianne]

Whoops! I missed your line about drive-through voting as I surfed on my phone. I need more coffee.

Sorry!
Nothing to be sorry for. I do think it's interesting how the testing lines led both of us to generalize to application to voting.

[STTAB]

If you think people aren't scheming how to cheat, right now, then you're a very naive person.

Now who do you think is doing the vast majority of planning to cheat?

Don't be naive about that either.

Democrats have stage a full blown deep state coup on the president on the US, then impeached him over 4th hand gossip, and is hinting at more investigations as we speak even though the nation is gripped in the worst pandemic we've ever seen in modern history.

So don't think cheating on a little ole election is something democrats wouldn't do... pfft... these corrupt sons bitches never miss a chance to cheat.


Exactly right, they are going to do their utmost to cheat no matter what, so why not utilize technology? This isn't the 1950s, we need to stop thinking it is.

If everyone is voting from their smart phones, you would never again see a vehicle found 3 miles from a polling station with a trunk full of ballots three dys after the election, for example.

[STTAB]

Absolutely not.

There is simply no way to prevent a free-for-all engagement of voter fraud.

I don't know what the answer is... unless it's drive-through voting set up similar to the drive-through virus testing. But it still has to be in-person voting and verified the usual way.


Of course there is. Technology allows our damn smart phones to do a fingerprint scan or even a retina scan, hell DNA scans probably are not far behind. We could EASILY create a database in each state of fingerprints, you log on, if your fingerprint matches, you're in and the app directs you to the proper ballot, providing you are eligible to vote, and haven't already done so.

Yes, there would be SOME vulnerabilities, but at the same time many others would disappear.

[Kathianne]

Of course there is. Technology allows our damn smart phones to do a fingerprint scan or even a retina scan, hell DNA scans probably are not far behind. We could EASILY create a database in each state of fingerprints, you log on, if your fingerprint matches, you're in and the app directs you to the proper ballot, providing you are eligible to vote, and haven't already done so.

Yes, there would be SOME vulnerabilities, but at the same time many others would disappear.
Yep, like the Zoom problem with teaching or the hacking of financial information over and over again from banks, credit, etc. :rolleyes:

[jimnyc]

Of course there is. Technology allows our damn smart phones to do a fingerprint scan or even a retina scan, hell DNA scans probably are not far behind. We could EASILY create a database in each state of fingerprints, you log on, if your fingerprint matches, you're in and the app directs you to the proper ballot, providing you are eligible to vote, and haven't already done so.

Yes, there would be SOME vulnerabilities, but at the same time many others would disappear.

My problem with technology is so many variables. I have zero doubt they could come up with a brilliant app/website that is secure and maybe even ran by some oversight committee or whatever. Then you will have hackers and folks trying to figure out how to exploit and vote more, or other people. Hell, even with fingerprints, while that would make things perfect and exact - I still don't trust the left to not find a way to hack in some manner and cheat. And I'm sure folks on the right will try the same shit.

Now, thinking about the fingerprint scan, I can see how that may work better than any other option. But hell, think of the millions and millions they don't have prints on. How do they get those many prints from those folks, and by the election no less. Perhaps for future elections. But then you have to worry about your fingerprint being floating around out there. If ultimately that is ONLY yours and it's unique, in a manner it will be like a SS number. And then folks will steal and use and who knows what else.

I'm just picking off thoughts and ideas. I'm no expert here on what would work and what wouldn't. I just don't trust any of them to do it the right way. And I have extremely little doubt that they won't try.

[jimnyc]

Yep, like the Zoom problem with teaching or the hacking of financial information over and over again from banks, credit, etc. :rolleyes:

I think they do try and think they are successful, and then find out the bad seeds in the world can be pretty smart too. Credit cards were supposed to be safe. SS numbers. Bank accounts digital from paper and all that kinds of stuff. I think I am yet to see ANY of them that weren't in some manner "hacked" or abused by someone. Every credit card I own at one time or another has been hacked and I needed a new card because of it. Hacking is like a way of life now. Even governments hack one another. So if a foreign government can eventually hack a DNC for example, then they may be able to hack an election. Websites are hacked daily and abused.

Not saying it WILL happen but the odds are with it happening.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I think they do try and think they are successful, and then find out the bad seeds in the world can be pretty smart too. Credit cards were supposed to be safe. SS numbers. Bank accounts digital from paper and all that kinds of stuff. I think I am yet to see ANY of them that weren't in some manner "hacked" or abused by someone. Every credit card I own at one time or another has been hacked and I needed a new card because of it. Hacking is like a way of life now. Even governments hack one another. So if a foreign government can eventually hack a DNC for example, then they may be able to hack an election. Websites are hacked daily and abused.

Not saying it WILL happen but the odds are with it happening.
If there is a human component to security, it can be hacked, because people are always the weak link.

[jimnyc]

Another thought about remote voting via an app or website.

Anyone ever go to a site and it not load? Or it be VERRRRRRRRRRY slow, and then when you hit "enter" after doing something it once again won't load, or you get an error? And then you have "total failure".

What did we get, about 120 million votes in the last election? Think about that many hitting an app/website.

Google, all knowing and all visiting Google for their information and searches - Google has close to 1.6 million visitors for google.com. And incredibly high number for a website. But 1.6 million and 120 million are far apart. The LARGEST of them all is monster sized Youtube gets approximately about 54 million per day, so they 'may' be able to handle it.

So imagine, WHO is going to host this app/site? And understand that is a FORTUNE when no income for it, to handle that load.

And they will need some serious prep and testing. 403's, apps hanging, denied access when it won't load online, forms not submitting correctly and up to the horror of an election day and total failure downtime and cannot get fixed. I can think of an endless stream of reasons to say HELL NO.

From a tech point of view, this can easily be done. It will take many server warehouses loaded around the country and all tied together and seamless. Hundreds of millions if not into the billions for hardware to support such an infrastructure. Kinda like Google does it around the nation with monster warehouses. And not just the logistics of all of that, but then security comes into those warehouses, both the warehouses themselves and then a large investment into security software, and protection out the wazoo of whatever software they use. You get the point.

And would you dare ever outsource it, to have someone like Google/Yahoo/Youtube/Microsoft to host it in any manner? Hell no.

[jimnyc]

If there is a human component to security, it can be hacked, because people are always the weak link.

It would require a very large stream of people involved in making the hardware aspect of this work, and access to the servers. And everyone, mostly everyone, has a political stance. The mixture isn't good.

[Kathianne]

Another thought about remote voting via an app or website.

Anyone ever go to a site and it not load? Or it be VERRRRRRRRRRY slow, and then when you hit "enter" after doing something it once again won't load, or you get an error? And then you have "total failure".

What did we get, about 120 million votes in the last election? Think about that many hitting an app/website.

Google, all knowing and all visiting Google for their information and searches - Google has close to 1.6 million visitors for google.com. And incredibly high number for a website. But 1.6 million and 120 million are far apart. The LARGEST of them all is monster sized Youtube gets approximately about 54 million per day, so they 'may' be able to handle it.

So imagine, WHO is going to host this app/site? And understand that is a FORTUNE when no income for it, to handle that load.

And they will need some serious prep and testing. 403's, apps hanging, denied access when it won't load online, forms not submitting correctly and up to the horror of an election day and total failure downtime and cannot get fixed. I can think of an endless stream of reasons to say HELL NO.

From a tech point of view, this can easily be done. It will take many server warehouses loaded around the country and all tied together and seamless. Hundreds of millions if not into the billions for hardware to support such an infrastructure. Kinda like Google does it around the nation with monster warehouses. And not just the logistics of all of that, but then security comes into those warehouses, both the warehouses themselves and then a large investment into security software, and protection out the wazoo of whatever software they use. You get the point.

And would you dare ever outsource it, to have someone like Google/Yahoo/Youtube/Microsoft to host it in any manner? Hell no.

Look at Iowa. :rolleyes: We still don't know how that went.

[NightTrain]

Of course there is. Technology allows our damn smart phones to do a fingerprint scan or even a retina scan, hell DNA scans probably are not far behind. We could EASILY create a database in each state of fingerprints, you log on, if your fingerprint matches, you're in and the app directs you to the proper ballot, providing you are eligible to vote, and haven't already done so.

Yes, there would be SOME vulnerabilities, but at the same time many others would disappear.

Considering the howls of rage simply for requiring an ID, trying to get everyone to provide government with their retina scans and fingerprints is a non-starter.

Your participation would be less than 20%... probably far less than that.

I'm not paranoid by any stretch, and I'm not comfortable with giving the State of Alaska or the Feds that information about me. It's a bridge too far, and one hell of a slope at the end of it.

[Abbey Marie]

Whomever wins by this method, the losing side will howl voter fraud at an unheard of level. Probably with good reason, but I can imagine chaos ensuing.

[jimnyc]

Considering the howls of rage simply for requiring an ID, trying to get everyone to provide government with their retina scans and fingerprints is a non-starter.

Your participation would be less than 20%... probably far less than that.

I'm not paranoid by any stretch, and I'm not comfortable with giving the State of Alaska or the Feds that information about me. It's a bridge too far, and one hell of a slope at the end of it.

Not to mention, unless convicted of a crime - can anyone force you to hand over your fingerprint? And once again unless convicted of a crime, I really would prefer no one had my print, and they don't! Same with my 'ol eyeballs.

Shit, then again, I tried using the retina scan on my phone, didn't like it and disabled. I also tried the fingerprint to unlock, used it for a few days, didn't like it and disable it. You know what that means? Effing Google likely has both on me already. :( :(

[Kathianne]

Not to mention, unless convicted of a crime - can anyone force you to hand over your fingerprint? And once again unless convicted of a crime, I really would prefer no one had my print, and they don't! Same with my 'ol eyeballs.

Shit, then again, I tried using the retina scan on my phone, didn't like it and disabled. I also tried the fingerprint to unlock, used it for a few days, didn't like it and disable it. You know what that means? Effing Google likely has both on me already. :( :(
Actually if you are arrested, you can be fingerprinted. I've been fingerprinted for national ID bank for teaching.

[jimnyc]

Actually if you are arrested, you can be fingerprinted. I've been fingerprinted for national ID bank for teaching.

True true, should have stated it better. Not sure why I said conviction. Even an arrest, with a good lawyer you may get lucky and not have it happen, can force a warrant to be gotten. So it's not straight forward, but absolutely, they will collect them whenever you get booked, even without a conviction of course.

And yep, forgot about folks getting bonded for certain jobs, and others just requiring it for some important jobs. So I guess more than I thought are already out there. But would still be many many millions not out there.

[Abbey Marie]

I’ve been fingerprinted 4 times, PA Bar, NJ Bar, Manhattan DA’s office internship, and a job at our School District. I’m easier to find than a weed in a garden.