There are two central lies employed by vote suppressionists:

An additional barrier to voting won't be an additional barrier to voting.

And yes, that's as idiotic as it seems.

If we take actions we know will suppress 10,000 votes, and folks get wind of our scheme and show up in greater numbers, that means we didn't suppress ANY votes!

(Narrator: Yes, yes you did. Your plan's overall failure doesn't mean you didn't suppress votes.)

"I already discounted your Heritiage Foundation information"

REALLY??? How and where? I think you're lying, again.

But it's typical for you: Once again, you pretend to know more than the experts themselves...AND ALL WITHOUT A SHRED OF PROOF.

"Chain of custody is the biggest difference"

Yep. Cullers.

Meanwhile, math morons pretend tens of thousands of folks could get their ballots purloined...

...and ZERO victims would come forward.

"the Carter-Baker report warned: "Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.""

And if anyone has perused the Heritage Foundation's website, you'll know they're worried about CULLERS, not individual voters.

The plurality of vote fraud is done by Canvassers, Cullers, and Campaigns. You know...the kind VOTER ID wouldn't change.

Meanwhile, VA averages one voter fraud conviction PER DECADE. And BillJohnson wants to prevent THOSE TWO VOTES...even if it's at the expense of THOUSANDS of legal voters.

"No they aren't."

Only in reasons for being granted, NOT for handling procedures.

They even admit as much:
Key distinction:
Absentee voting is often conditional. Mail-in voting is usually open to all eligible voters.

You're a fuggin' moron, posting the article without actually reading it.

"not until you actually read my posts"

I've read your posts.

There's NO PROOF in any of them.

Theories with no proof, after a century and a half, are wishful lies.

" you apparently were never including the very part of the process that makes absentee voting and universal mail voting distinctly different in the first place which is how the ballots are issued and sent out."

What a riot.

You can't even find proof when using Universal Mail-In Ballot systems which have existed for decades, in places like Oregon and Utah, and in the case of the armed services, SIXTEEN DECADES.

Your theory fails, everywhere. Even in UMB situations, you offer ZERO PROOF.

" Then we can talk about it again."

Not until you have proof of your theories and are willing to explain why it's okay to suppress more votes in your home state in one cycle than voter fraud you'd find there in 4000 years.

" At this point, this conversation has become pointless."

The facts remain: you have ZERO proof for your pretend concerns, and can't explain why you want to suppress more votes than you'd preserve.

You're a vote suppressionist with no evidence, and no valid reason to keep legal voters from casting their legal votes.

"I did not move the goalposts."

That's a lie. You inserted "universal". That's not what I stated.

" There have always been two types of mailed ballots in this conversation as far as I'm concerned"

I don't give a schitttt how concerned you pretend to be. Your statement is a lie.

Mail-in ballots ARE Absentee ballots. Duh.

"I think you're focusing too narrowly on one part of the process and missing the bigger picture."

I think you can't find any good reason to suppress more votes than you'd protect, so you lie about the efficacy of ballots.

Telling, of course, you've refused to admit it would take 4,400 YEARS to find the amount of voter fraud in your home state of Virginia you'd suppress in ONE ELECTION CYCLE.

And that with an unreachable 99.99% accuracy.

You're not trying to protect the vote, you're trying to make sure "certain" people have to jump through worthless hoops before legally casting their legal vote.

And, for the 300th time, if you have any proof of universal mailing ballot shenanigans, link to them

And if you don't have proof, after being asked 300 times, have the class to admit as much.

The fact of the matter remains: nearly 6 years after the 2020 election, you have absolutely zero cases to prove your cockamamie theories.

If folks had their ballots taken from them by housemates, they would've come forward. IN DROVES. That's human nature, logic, and macrostatistics.

You lose on all three topics.

" Absentee voting and universal mail-in voting are distinctly different systems in how ballots are issued, sent out, tracked, and handled through the process."

Why'd you move the goalposts, dumfuq? You don't get to add "universal" at will.

I made a clear statement, and now you're misrepresenting what I posted by changing the parameters.

Either retract your lie, or explain the difference in handling an absentee ballot versus a mail-in ballot ... because there is NONE.

BOTH are issued, serialized, watermarked, tracked, and more.

You're misrepresenting the truth.

But not all mail-in ballots are absentee ballots."

Stupid non-distinction.

If the ballot is mailed in, the voter is ABSENT from the polling precinct on Election Day.

ZERO DIFFERENCE IN HANDLING.

" Human error has always been part of my objection to mail-in ballots. What Trump is proposing is more closer to absentee ballot handling which has more checks and balances."

Absolute nonsense.

Mail in ballots ARE absentee ballots. Every one of them is watermarked, serialized, and tracked. The armed services have been using mail-in ballots for over a century and a half. Oregon has been doing it for 30 years.

If your theory was correct, we'd have thousands of complaints and questionable instances. Where are they? WHERE ARE THEY??

The real problem is, ANY steps taken to add another barrier will doubtless cause a magnitude more votes suppressed, than illegal votes thwarted.

As has been shown, even with a 99.99% accuracy rate (impossible, I know) it would take 4,400 YEARS for voter fraud in your home state of VA to equal the LEGAL VOTES suppressed in ONE ELECTION CYCLE.

You're not trying to protect the vote. You're trying to suppress "certain " legal voters you'd rather not vote.

"I think he's below-average intelligence."

Agreed.

He can't even understand who actually pays tariffs.

You'd think when he DIDN'T have to pay back "Gyna" he'd learn.

Instead, even his closest advisors won't correct him.

Also, from your link:
Authors suggest this increase may reflect demographic changes such as rising maternal age, increased rates of risk factors such as obesity, and disruption to hospitals and maternity services due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

I'm not disagreeing with your main point, just some of the specifics around it.

"Doubled. More than twice as many."

Again, you're mixing equations. Double IN THE POORER AREAS, v. the wealthier areas.

Meanwhile, increases of 3% to 4%, NOT 100%.

" Doesn't look like access to abortion is helping in England to reduce ectopic pregnancy related deaths."

That's two DIFFERENT equations. And no reference to historical trends.

"yes, you're getting paid to stand in line if you're working normal hours that day,"

Not if the line is four hours.

And again, the majority of voters don't get PTO to vote.

^Pillen

Damned auto-correct.

(And my editing skills)

Pillar will be frog-marched ... .

... on the 12th of never.

In my 40 years running a tax business, I had the best way ever to keep employees:

Pay them twice the going rate.

Not only were they easy to retain, they required no retraining, and one actually used her UPTO to cover my second week of April.

My proudest moment was when someone tried to pirate her from me, and the moment they told her the pay ... she laughed in their faces.

The real change happened after WWII.

GIs got packets with crackers, jelly, chocolate, cigarettes, peanut butter, etc.

The resourceful soldiers combined the pb and the j between the crackers.

Once home, they switched out crackers for Wonder Bread ... and a classic was born.

"Maintaining a trade deficit is the economic equivalent of Them winning."

Congrats!

It's not many who can flunk an Econ 101 mid-term with a single statement.