What,

Interesting about Colorado. According to what I found, CO adopted Universal Mail-in ballots in 2014.

Listed below is the percent difference by election year of rep and dem for the last 10 presidential elections.

1988 7.8% Rep win
1992 4.3% Dem win
1996 1.4% Rep win
2000 8.4% Rep win
2004 4.7% Rep win
2008 9.0% Dem win
2012 5.4% Dem win

First time the voters had the option to vote using universal mail-in ballot or vote usual way.
2016 4.9% Dem win
2020 13.5% Dem win
2024 11.0% Dem win

I did some closer analysis of the numbers and it's interesting why the last 2 elections the % dem won by are inconsistent with the 8 previous elections. Has nothing to do with mail-in ballots, I believe, which have been consistent since universal mail-in ballots started being used.

When I feel like writing more I'll explain how I approached it.

Speak,

"You could avoid all fraud if you just made it impossible for people to vote."

And have Trump remain President until Vance takes over.

And Vance would select his successor.

Dan

My single most concern would be mass loss of uncounted ballots or a massive case

Of deliberate fraud.

Small time cheating is wrong but not my biggest concern.

It would a problem if someone successfully destroyed a large number of ballots or if they were destroyed in an accident.

Prepare for the worst scenario.

Dan

My single most concern would be mass loss of uncounted ballots or a massive case

Of deliberate fraud.

Small time cheating is wrong but not my biggest concern.

It would a problem if someone successfully destroyed a large number of ballots or if they were destroyed in an accident.

Prepare for the worst scenario.

Speak,

I don't ever Speak from a partisan perspective regarding voting.

I hear only dems carry on about it here.

Snoofy,

"democrats and election experts have been saying all along - Hand counting ballots is a bad idea."

Reading the article, it said Republicans claimed they didn't trust the voting machines so they wanted to hand out.

They backed off that because they would go beyond the 24 hour requirement to be finished.

Personally, I believe scanners are a great way to vote. Voting machines are less trusted due to reported cases of peopke claiming they selected someone on the touchscreen, but another name was marked as chosen.

Voting software is different from a scanner and I'm not nearly as comfortable with those.

Snoofy,

"How does that secure voting by mail?"

Absentee ballots aren't fool proof but they are a way for people out of the country, for example, to vote.

Dan,

"And don't get me started on the idea scores of thousands of mailed ballots being STOLEN!"

Still up to your old tricks.

I've always used the potential for being "lost", for some reason. I avoid discussing the possibility of fraud, though it definitely exists.

But you bring up a good point. They could be stolen.

Laura,

"He doesn't have any ingredients. Not one iota."

Humans are main ingredient.

Dan,

"it's MORE LIKELY folks would come forward. ZERO CAME FORWARD."

Who exactly are you expecting to come forward?

Someone involved in ballot harvesting has no incentive to report themselves.

And someone who mailed a ballot but is not recorded as voting wouldn't know unless they actively checked, and most people don't.

Absentee ballots are a necessity for voters who qualify, and standards exist for that reason. Historically, their impact has been limited precisely because their numbers were small.

Absentee ballots are unavoidable but other mailed in ballots are a disaster waiting to happen in the future.

Presential elections are just too important to use a voting method that is far more labor intensive, open to judgement calls, and not as reliable and fool proof as in person scanned on the spot. Early voting gives more opportunities to vote when lines are shorter or more convenient for the voter.

Dan,

"Are mailed-in ballots and in-person ballots both considered accurate?"

We'll just assume that 100% of the ballots that arrive were not the result of ballot harvesting or misidentified or someone who should not be voting.

Now...we have the little issue of which ballots are missing for one reason or another.

After the election, will someone notify the people who didn't show having voted to verify the accuracy of the system? No. That would be the only way to see how many ballots are missing that someone mailed.

The required checks and balances for a manual system just goes on and on coving all the bases and potential areas for errors.

Or show up to vote, they check off your name in the computer, hand you a ballot, you fill it out, feed it into a scanner and get your your sticker for your shirt saying "you voted".

Early voting takes care of any claims people are being suppressed to not vote. Apply for an absentee ballot if you quality.

Why make voting more complicated and less reliable and more risky if you don't have to?

I say this over and over and it just doesn't sink in with people determined to believe the lie that mail-in ballots are fine.

"opting instead to contract with the county elections department to administer the election using voting equipment."

Makes sense to me.

Let computers do what they're good at.

Feed accurate data to it, and you can reliably generate all sorts of trusted statistics and graphs.

One,

According to AI, the building is government and security offices but was originally intended to be a mall.

What is your point of asking?

Snoofy,

Actually, the last that I knew, unless it's changed, they changed our routing to an out of state sorting center.

As to the rest of your last 2 posts....

Wow!

Et,

The USPS does not route mail "by county".

Where I live, a letter sent to someone in my city, is routed out of state and then comes back, possibly by air.

A mail ballot's journey starts where the voter is, not where the county election office sits.

Also, people being how they are frequently procrastinate close to election day. In the event a truck crashed with a load of ballots and caught fire, there would be no practical way to determine which ballots were lost or whose votes disappeared close to election day. Many will vote last minute. There would be no time for remediation. The Constitution is definite about when presidential elections will be held. No delays.

Would you load boxes of uncounted cash in a truck on the assumption it will arrive and be counted correctly?

That would be considered reckless. Yet ballots, our votes in a democracy, are treated this casually.

The failure for many is not respecting ballots, our right to vote and the utmost importance of an accurate and valid election.

A higher risk method of transporting uncounted ballots is fine for some. Not for me.

Personally, I respect America and want to see the most reliable method of voting be used which is in person voting (early is a fair solution) where ballots are scanned as you leave the voting center.

As an after thought...other reasons to rely on scanned as you leave ballots instead of mailed-in ballots, as a primary form of voting.

1. Less labor per ballot - scaled back labor requires fewer human checks.

2. Fewer controls - verification checks and balances are reduced with on site scanning.

3. Less extensively trained labor - temporary staff, burn-out from focusing for hours, rotating staff risk of humor errors.

4. More automation - speed replaces a people requirement making judgment calls.

5. No risk due to batch handling where loss or errors can't be reliably traced or recovered in many instances.

This isn't politics.

It's risk management.

Lamp,

"For starters, please explain why those ballots are on a plane."

Bulk transportation methods are needed because beaming hasn't been perfected.

Et,

Expert opinions are only that...opinions.

Until states that run universal mail-in ballots are forced to do closer analysis from a recount that includes accuracy and validity, all you've got is opinions.

Lamp,

"disagreeing with something that looks irrational."

You disagree that losing hundreds of thousands of uncounted ballots in a plane crash could happen or that it could be a disaster if it did?

You understand we're voting for the President of the United States and not your local PTA.

Ballots must be treated with the same degree of accuracy as cash.

Your lack of concern is alarming.

Apparently you consider the accuracy of turning on your lights as more important than a Presidential election.

Your screwed up priorities are irrational.

Redial,

Scrapping the bottom even worse.

No point in taking anyone's questions serious now.

Just wanting to find exceptions and nitpic instead of seeing my point that is a legitimate question.
.

Redial,

I think I explained my concern being more and more states going this route.

You're choosing to not see my point.

Redial,

"If they came from overseas you are never going to stop that process."

Those would likely be absentee ballots. Not much can do about that.

I'm done. This thread is scrapping the bottom.

Redial,

Where is immaterial.

They took off from there to arrive here to be counted.

They didn't arrive.

What does it matter where they were from?

Lamp,

Think about this.

What happens if an aircraft carrying hundreds of thousands of uncounted mail-in ballots crashes two weeks before Election Day?

The election cannot be delayed under the Constitution. There's no clear legal way to prove which ballots were lost.

Audits and recounts don't help, because you can't recount ballots that never arrive.

That's the concern. It's not one state or another.

It's the systemic risk created when elections depend on mass pre-election ballot distribution that cannot be paused or repaired in time if something goes wrong.

But you're the eternal optimist and have decided this could never happen.

I see things differently and believe we need to be prepared for worst case scenarios.

Lamp,

Since you want to discuss Utah, I'd trust their election results before any Democrat controlled state.