HR 1 urgently needs to pass through filibuster

[MrSquished]

First off, there is a difference between chain of custody absentee mail in voting, and shotgun mail in voting ballots going to everyone. If you want historical issues for voter fraud through such mail in voting in America one such example is regarding Abe Lincoln. Go read the history of it. Even Wapo did a story on it recently. This doesn't take into account other countries that have had historical issues with voter fraud through mail in voting. One should also read the original framer's works on this very subject and why they were very against anything by absentee voting for soldiers in the field for mail in voting.

You are going to compare mail in voting in 1776 to mail in voting now? What are you smoking cause I'd like to get that high.

 

[ivwshane]

Lol!

Show me the fraud!

Well if you go back to the mid 1800’s...


Dude, just go back to parlor where I’m sure you look like a freaken genius. Or go ahead and give the forum more laughs by narrowing down increasingly exactly what kind of fraud you are talking about until it becomes even more meaningless.

 

[thilanliyan]

physical size of the legislation.

MAKE AMERICA (BE ABLE TO) READ AGAIN!!

 

[woolfe9998]

Heritage Foundation tracked voter fraud in all elections at the federal, state and local level back to 1982. They included every case where a prosecutor found an irregularity to be "actionable," whether or not there was a conviction. They say they found 1310 instances of what they claim is "proven" voter fraud, though evidently only about 40 were cases of actual double voting.

They claim this is only a "sampling" of voter fraud not because they didn't look at every election and every court action, but because it doesn't include those who didn't get caught. Go ahead and add a zero, or for that matter, two zeroes, to their total then do some thinking about what that means out of literally billions of votes.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

This is what the nation's leading conservative think tank found.

Show us the fraud or STFU.

 

[HumblePie]

You are going to compare mail in voting in 1776 to mail in voting now? What are you smoking cause I'd like to get that high.

Because mail in voting at it's root is so different these days versus the past by your statements? Whether it was in the past or now, it was putting a ballot in an envelope and sending it through mail to somewhere to be counted. That literally hasn't changed since mail has been around.

 

[dank69]

Because mail in voting at it's root is so different these days versus the past by your statements? Whether it was in the past or now, it was putting a ballot in an envelope and sending it through mail to somewhere to be counted. That literally hasn't changed since mail has been around.

Except for planes, trains, automobiles and a helpful new smart machine capable of analyzing mountains of data for duplicates or inconsistencies.

 

[ivwshane]

Because mail in voting at it's root is so different these days versus the past by your statements? Whether it was in the past or now, it was putting a ballot in an envelope and sending it through mail to somewhere to be counted. That literally hasn't changed since mail has been around.

Yes literally nothing has changed since Mail has been around. Post offices were abundant back then as were cameras and other security measures. LITERALLY nothing has changed.
Mail in voting has been such an issue since our founding that many state and federal legislators sought to outright ban mail in votes because of all the corruption. Humble pie will be along any minute to post the plethora of evidence to back all this up.

 

[hal2kilo]

Here's a simple test for you all. If HR1 passes do you think Trump would bother running for president again?

 

[dank69]

Here's a simple test for you all. If HR1 passes do you think Trump would bother running for president again?

I think if he actually tried to run for President again, Melania would have him eliminated, regardless of HR-1 or anything else. I don't think he actually wants to run again anyway. He is just grifting as usual.

 

[JD50]

Because mail in voting at it's root is so different these days versus the past by your statements? Whether it was in the past or now, it was putting a ballot in an envelope and sending it through mail to somewhere to be counted. That literally hasn't changed since mail has been around.

This is just incredible. You have absolutely outdone yourself this time.

 

[ivwshane]

This is just incredible. You have absolutely outdone yourself this time.

Waits for three pages of replies from him where he explains the word root and how he was only talking about envelopes./eye roll

 

[brycejones]

Here's a simple test for you all. If HR1 passes do you think Trump would bother running for president again?

Nope

 

[Jhhnn]

First off, there is a difference between chain of custody absentee mail in voting, and shotgun mail in voting ballots going to everyone. If you want historical issues for voter fraud through such mail in voting in America one such example is regarding Abe Lincoln. Go read the history of it. Even Wapo did a story on it recently. This doesn't take into account other countries that have had historical issues with voter fraud through mail in voting. One should also read the original framer's works on this very subject and why they were very against anything by absentee voting for soldiers in the field for mail in voting.

Every registered voter in CO is automatically sent a mail in ballot. We also have drop boxes all over the place. The handling of mail in ballots today in no way resembles the 1864 situation you misrepresent egregiously-

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/08/22/mail-in-voting-civil-war-election-conspiracy-lincoln/

 

[soundforbjt]

Because mail in voting at it's root is so different these days versus the past by your statements? Whether it was in the past or now, it was putting a ballot in an envelope and sending it through mail to somewhere to be counted. That literally hasn't changed since mail has been around.

But every aspect of what happens after that action has changed dramatically.
Republicans: making laws for problems that don’t exist and damn proud of it.

 

[HumblePie]

But every aspect of what happens after that action has changed dramatically.

That may be true, but the problems for potential fraud are not only based on after that action.

 

[TheVrolok]

Heritage Foundation tracked voter fraud in all elections at the federal, state and local level back to 1982. They included every case where a prosecutor found an irregularity to be "actionable," whether or not there was a conviction. They say they found 1310 instances of what they claim is "proven" voter fraud, though evidently only about 40 were cases of actual double voting.

They claim this is only a "sampling" of voter fraud not because they didn't look at every election and every court action, but because it doesn't include those who didn't get caught. Go ahead and add a zero, or for that matter, two zeroes, to their total then do some thinking about what that means out of literally billions of votes.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

This is what the nation's leading conservative think tank found.

Show us the fraud or STFU.

It's weird how the party of small government decides it desperately needs tons of new federal legislation in very specific areas where there is no significant evidence of a problem. Huh. Wonder why.

"Because it COULD happen!"... lol, funny come from the "anti nanny state" crowd.

 

[Jhhnn]

That may be true, but the problems for potential fraud are not only based on after that action.

So dishonest. If "potential" problems are real problems, you should be able to show how they've manifested themselves in the 5 states that vote by mail. Have at it.

 

[NWRMidnight]

That may be true, but the problems for potential fraud are not only based on after that action.

There is a potential of fraud no matter the vehicle used for voting, be it in person voting or mail in voting. If your argument is based on potential fraud happening, then your argument would disqualify every voting option available today including in person voting.

 

[HomerJS]

That may be true, but the problems for potential fraud are not only based on after that action.

Potential fraud? Show me the massive fraud in states like Oregon who have been exclusively mail since 1998? Meanwhile I bet you don't give 2 shits about Republicans disenfranchising minority voters. I'm not talking potential I mean actual. North Carolina they were found guilty in court racially gerrymandering.

Mail-in voting lessons from Oregon, the state with the longest history of voting by mail

Oregon’s experience shows that mail-in voting can be safe and secure, providing accurate and reliable results the public can be confident in.

theconversation.com

Let's have an honest discussion with one of your objections to HR-1.

 

[weblooker2021]

Would HR1 survive court challenge? We're talking about union voting for president, can federal government regulate union rules on voting?

 

[HomerJS]

Would HR1 survive court challenge? We're talking about union voting for president, can federal government regulate union rules on voting?

Explain

 

[woolfe9998]

Would HR1 survive court challenge? We're talking about union voting for president, can federal government regulate union rules on voting?

I haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about.

 

[weblooker2021]

Explain

Each state makes their own rules/law on how their citizens vote. Each state picks the president, so i am asking if federal government can actually set rules on how each state makes up their own voting law?

 

[HomerJS]

Each state makes their own rules/law on how their citizens vote. Each state picks the president, so i am asking if federal government can actually set rules on how each state makes up their own voting law?

States can run their elections but Congress can override. It's in the Constitution. That's why we no longer have poll taxes. Feds are there to prevent states from violating people's rights.

 

[fskimospy]

Each state makes their own rules/law on how their citizens vote. Each state picks the president, so i am asking if federal government can actually set rules on how each state makes up their own voting law?

Article I, Section 4, Clause 1: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.