" If there are no limits on when ballots are due"

But there are.

No American court, ever, has demanded an unlimited window to count.

SuperSlurper can't post without misrepresenting the facts.

"Trump has said he would not use a nuclear weapon against Iran"

Trump also said we'd be getting a $5000 DOGE check, his 2016 campaign never met with Russians, Haitians were eating dogs and cats in Ohio, and he had no idea who paid Stormy Daniels.

Keep Slurping!

Serious question: How many legal votes would you be willing to suppress if it would guarantee avoiding TWO INSTANCES of voter fraud?

I've noticed ZERO slurpers have the guts to give a direct answer to my direct question.

"Russia Russia Russia""

The FBI was surveilling Russians, and members of Team Trump kept showing up, all during a time when Team Trump was lying to Americans about meeting with Russians.

The FBI was clearly aware of the serial lies.

Meanwhile, had Obama been meeting with surveilled Chinese while lying about it, Republicans' heads would've exploded if the FBI decided NOT to investigate.

"and probably affected what 1000 votes, 2000?"

Where is the accusation those folks voted? It's nowhere in the link you posted.

Are you posting without actually reading the link, AGAIN???

"Brenda Lee Brown Armstrong, of Marina del Rey, California, 64, also known as "Anika," is charged with one felony count of paying another person to register to vote"

"Systemic fraud exists in the American system, its the only logical conclusion."

Your examples were Canvassers, folks unaffected by stricter voter ID rules.

"there was a 4 year investigation into Russia Russia Russia"

And the Rubio Report admitted Team Trump had over 100 meetings with Russia during 2016, all the while lying to Americans by claiming ZERO meetings. Republicans, led by Marco Rubio, concluded it was a "grave security threat".

Meanwhile, the FBI was surveilling Kislyak, and Jeff Sessions walked into the room. Morons want to pretend the FBI should've stopped at that point. Some are still carrying water, denying something Republicans ADMITTED.

"What exactly have I suggested that could be described as "cheating"?

Knowingly suppressing more votes in "certain" areas with reduced precincts (hours+ lines) in those areas, and lies about the efficacy of ballots.

When was the last time you had to wait 2+ hours in line to vote?

My last presidential vote took 11 minutes, including 4 to get from my car door to the booth and back, and 7 to wait in line and cast the actual ballot.

"Then the very second Nithya Raman got 1 vote over Pratt... THEY CALLED IT"

Bald-faced lie.

"Why not make elections as safe and secure as possible?"

We should. But we should also be realistic.

And it's the height of stupidity to believe thwarting two illegal votes at the expense of 2000 legal voters is good policy.

"of course that will be until when they are ALL counted"

What a riot.

Your answer is only to count until YOU'RE ahead...then stop. You even dissed LEGAL votes cast in a LEGAL manner.

Sounds like a sore loser's sour grapes.

"I'm also talking about the possibility of systemic fraud at the state level"

While ignoring THE CERTAINTY of suppressing legal votes.

Serious question: How many legal votes would you be willing to suppress if it would guarantee avoiding TWO INSTANCES of voter fraud?

"Do you wait until people die before you administer vaccines?"

Of course not. But we don't develop vaccines against Unicorn invasions, either.

Every "solution" you propose suppresses more legal votes than thwarts illegal ones.

Not surprisingly, the plurality of the fraud committed WOULDN'T BE AFFECTED AT ALL by stricter Voter ID.

" Systemic fraud is allowing ballots without dates to be counted"

Now you've moved the goalposts to the few ballots mailed ON TIME, but not delivered for 2-3 days.

It used to be a postmark by the post office was proof. But some president (guess who?) Got the post office to stop putting dates when they receive the vote.

And courts have held that a certain amount of days (three, usually) to accept ballots is okay.

" Why? Do you wait until banks are robbed to lock the vaults?"

Of course not.

But under the guise of "protecting " the vote, you'd disenfranchise 100x the votes you'd thwart.

There's not a single person who's given a one single good reason why 1000 voters should be suppressed so two illegal votes don't get cast.

" I'm also talking about the possibility of systemic fraud at the state level"

IOW, Counters. One of the " three Cs" responsible for the plurality of vote fraud.

Yet ANOTHER aspect which wouldn't be affected by enhanced voter ID.

" Traditional absentee voting is necessary for people who need it."

Need it? Based on whose determination, yours?

Fact is, every legal voter should be allowed to choose how they cast their legal vote. Including ones who simply want the guarantee BEFORE ELECTION DAY their vote has been received and counted.

The real problem is the rates haven't matched the increases.

When I was a kid, the highest paid American made a few million dollars. Johnny Carson's top pay was $5 million a year. The amount over the cap rate was maybe 10-15 times the starting point for that highest level.

Now, someone could make 1000 times the cap to get IN to the bracket, without their rate going up.

Someone making $500MM a year pays the same marginal rate as someone making $500K.

" you deserve to be taxed that much."

Let's keep in mind, the person paying the largest percentage of in federal taxes isn't the millionaire or the billionaire. It's the W-2 worker making $184,500.

Eb and his bride's joint income would only have to be ~$340,000 to face a $60K bill for federal income taxes.

BillJ,
The situation you describe in #45 assumes voters get their mailed ballots stolen regularly.

If that actually happened, you'd have thousands of folks coming out of the woodwork complaining of victimhood, especially since votes can be tracked and confirmed by the voters. Those who got cheated would be screaming it from the rooftops.

Instead, you have NONE.

Anyone with a room temperature IQ would realize that is statistically impossible.

" In my view, that should improve the integrity of the election results"

Your state has TWO voter fraud convictions in the last 19 years, plus 8 cases of (easily caught) felons voting.

That's an average of one conviction every two years. How much more integrity do you want???

Any attempts to "improve the integrity" will certainly suppress more legal votes than thwart illegal ones.

I'd ask why you're willing to suppress 1000x the legal votes you'd protect, but I think we all know by now.

" That's the analogy I'm making."

Your analogy is meaningless. Mail-in ballots are handled the exact same way as absentee ballots.

The ONLY difference is some states have conditions for voting absentee.

THAT'S IT.

And, as we've seen from another current thread, lies about cheating are the main driver for voter fraud. The most common reason given by someone convicted of voter fraud is I was convinced the other side was doing it.

It's the fault of liars without proof.

" An admission they're cheating and will absolutely steal the election."

The most common reason for voter fraud, when a reason is given, is I was convinced the other side was doing it.

IOW, the blame lands squarely on the back of folks who lie about the efficacy of ballots.

" claim Biden's handlers had no decision making power in the process"

He certainly didn't regarding Trump releasing 5,000 Taliban, and getting nothing for America in return. Most of those 5,000 returned to the battlefield, making the withdrawal more difficult.

Why did you leave out that salient part?