Well Duh - Mail in Voting Attack Backfires?

[Kbg]

Too funny...initial voting analysis is indicating Trump’s attacks against mail in voting is...ready for it?...suppressing Republican voter turnout.

Trump warned by campaign officials of significant early voter decline and challenge now likely raised by much longer lines which will require significant voter determination.

Critical thinking 401: Always try to imagine 2nd and 3rd order effects when making a decision.

[I Shrugged]

I think they are simply voting in person. Whether early or on Nov 3.

[WiseOne]

I think KBG's point is that Republicans waiting for polls to open are facing long lines, and this might cause some not to vote. Yes that's possible. The enthusiasm level of Trump voters is important to keep in mind though. And the fact that an in person vote is bound to be worth more than a mail-in ballot. 20% more if you go by the experience with the primaries.

Also the long line phenomenon might be a bit overrated. NYC just opened early voting, it's a weekend, and the weather is nice, so yeah, long lines. In Georgia and other states that have already opened, have you noted the sudden lack of articles about long lines after the first weekend of early voting?

[glennds]

Too funny...initial voting analysis is indicating Trump’s attacks against mail in voting is...ready for it?...suppressing Republican voter turnout.

Trump warned by campaign officials of significant early voter decline and challenge now likely raised by much longer lines which will require significant voter determination.

Critical thinking 401: Always try to imagine 2nd and 3rd order effects when making a decision.

Unless the strategy is to make every attempt to redirect Trump voters to in-person voting in advance of an eventual challenge to the validity of all mail-in votes because of widespread fraud.
If the fraud cannot be surgically identified, then throw out all the early mail-in votes. What does that leave? Just the in-person votes which are now re-directed in favor of Trump.
I'm not saying it will happen, but for the most part, the ranting about mail-in voting being rife with fraud is otherwise mostly inexplicable. Let's wait and see what arguments come forth after election night, and then you can bring this post up and see if my prediction theory was on the mark.

In my (red) state, the system allows you to track the status of your mail-in ballot at all times (i.e. date mailed to me, date received back, date counted). The only additional security I can think of would be to physically accompany the ballot up to and maybe even beyond the point where it is counted.

[Kbg]

I’m not that concerned about recounting. Most states have a “closeness” factor and if neither side is within that factor there isn’t a recount. If it is, then we can all patiently wait for a good recount which will be just fine. Hopefully Florida has evolved past a clown act for their process.

[vnatale]

I forget which state I was hearing described but in this particular state they deal with all the ballots as they receive them. By election night the only votes that have not been counted are the ones that were received that day. Seemed like an excellent system to me.

Vinny

[WiseOne]

In my (red) state, the system allows you to track the status of your mail-in ballot at all times (i.e. date mailed to me, date received back, date counted).

That sounds like an excellent system. Does this notification system let you send in another ballot if yours gets lost, or if you made a mistake causing it to be invalidated?

Neither NY or NJ has such a system in place. There have been no changes to either since the primary in NYC, where 20% of mail-in ballots sent to voters were never counted. However, who would follow through with using this system to make sure their ballot is counted? I can't quite imagine the people living in urban ghettos with limited tech sophistication and English language skills & city housing projects - i.e. the majority of the Democratic voter base - would do that. I also suspect many of them requested ballots but never mailed them back, for whatever reason.

[Xan]

I forget which state I was hearing described but in this particular state they deal with all the ballots as they receive them. By election night the only votes that have not been counted are the ones that were received that day. Seemed like an excellent system to me.

Vinny

I'm not sure that's so great. I think in a hypothetical ideal world, an election would be as close to a singular event as possible. Basically, everybody who has registered would be asked at the same moment who they pick. That way there's no possible influence of how the vote is going on the other voters.

The closest we can realistically get to that is to put all the early votes in a locked box and not look at them until the polls close. Basically the opposite of what you describe.

I do also think it's a problem for polls to close early on the east coast and later on the west coast, and people on the west coast know what's happening as results are announced. Not sure what to do about it though.

[glennds]

I forget which state I was hearing described but in this particular state they deal with all the ballots as they receive them. By election night the only votes that have not been counted are the ones that were received that day. Seemed like an excellent system to me.

Vinny

I'm not sure that's so great. I think in a hypothetical ideal world, an election would be as close to a singular event as possible. Basically, everybody who has registered would be asked at the same moment who they pick. That way there's no possible influence of how the vote is going on the other voters.

The closest we can realistically get to that is to put all the early votes in a locked box and not look at them until the polls close. Basically the opposite of what you describe.

I do also think it's a problem for polls to close early on the east coast and later on the west coast, and people on the west coast know what's happening as results are announced. Not sure what to do about it though.

Why do you feel this way? Is it that you think that voters are influenced by knowing how others have cast their votes? If yes, is it that people are inclined to join the majority as it is trending? I could see that being the case, partly because we're wired to herd thinking but I think it would mostly affect only those truly undecided voters. But maybe it's a variation on the FOMO fallacy that causes stock melt-ups.

Apart from the west coast/east coast thing, I was under the impression that states doing early counting were just counting early, but not reporting the results. If that is not the case, then yes, I think it gets messy to be counting and reporting little by little over days and weeks.

[vnatale]

I forget which state I was hearing described but in this particular state they deal with all the ballots as they receive them. By election night the only votes that have not been counted are the ones that were received that day. Seemed like an excellent system to me.

Vinny

I'm not sure that's so great. I think in a hypothetical ideal world, an election would be as close to a singular event as possible. Basically, everybody who has registered would be asked at the same moment who they pick. That way there's no possible influence of how the vote is going on the other voters.

The closest we can realistically get to that is to put all the early votes in a locked box and not look at them until the polls close. Basically the opposite of what you describe.

I do also think it's a problem for polls to close early on the east coast and later on the west coast, and people on the west coast know what's happening as results are announced. Not sure what to do about it though.

How does early voting influence other voters? None of the votes are released, only the number of early voters.

Your last paragraph problem? I thought that this problem was recognized and rectified decades ago? The networks now do not call any elections until all the voting stations on the West Coast have closed?

Vinny

[Xan]

I forget which state I was hearing described but in this particular state they deal with all the ballots as they receive them. By election night the only votes that have not been counted are the ones that were received that day. Seemed like an excellent system to me.

Vinny

I'm not sure that's so great. I think in a hypothetical ideal world, an election would be as close to a singular event as possible. Basically, everybody who has registered would be asked at the same moment who they pick. That way there's no possible influence of how the vote is going on the other voters.

The closest we can realistically get to that is to put all the early votes in a locked box and not look at them until the polls close. Basically the opposite of what you describe.

I do also think it's a problem for polls to close early on the east coast and later on the west coast, and people on the west coast know what's happening as results are announced. Not sure what to do about it though.

How does early voting influence other voters? None of the votes are released, only the number of early voters.

Your last paragraph problem? I thought that this problem was recognized and rectified decades ago? The networks now do not call any elections until all the voting stations on the West Coast have closed?

Vinny

The improvement was that they now wait for all polls in a state to close before reporting results from that state. They certainly don't wait for Hawaii to close before they announce Maine. But really I think they should.

The issue in 2000 was that a bit of Florida (a very conservative bit, as it happens) is in the Central time zone, and the networks started announcing results after polls closed in the east. Big mess.

[Xan]

Why do you feel this way? Is it that you think that voters are influenced by knowing how others have cast their votes? If yes, is it that people are inclined to join the majority as it is trending? I could see that being the case, partly because we're wired to herd thinking but I think it would mostly affect only those truly undecided voters. But maybe it's a variation on the FOMO fallacy that causes stock melt-ups.

Yes. Just for example, voters in Iowa might vote differently in the Senate race if they know the outcome of Senate races in Georgia, North Carolina, and Maine. Ernst keeping her seat could be the difference between a red and blue Senate, and if that outcome is already known, then it certainly could affect people's voting.

Apart from the west coast/east coast thing, I was under the impression that states doing early counting were just counting early, but not reporting the results. If that is not the case, then yes, I think it gets messy to be counting and reporting little by little over days and weeks.

I don't think they're reporting the counts, no. But they do report party affiliation of the people who have voted so far. And counting them makes a harmful early release/leak of information possible. Why do it.

[glennds]

In my (red) state, the system allows you to track the status of your mail-in ballot at all times (i.e. date mailed to me, date received back, date counted).

That sounds like an excellent system. Does this notification system let you send in another ballot if yours gets lost, or if you made a mistake causing it to be invalidated?

Well that's an excellent question. I don't know the answer. I went into the portal this morning and what I get is a status screen that shows me my ballot sent date, ballot returned date, and status as "accepted". I returned my ballot not by mail but by hand deposit into one of the drop boxes that have been set up the by County elections board. Many of them are in municipal city halls. In my case the box was right next to the security desk and one person at a time could approach with a line identified by social distancing decals.

To your question, if there had been a problem with my ballot, I'm not sure what the screen would have said, or if I would have been notified in some way. My guess is that it would have been on me to follow up.
If you're interested you can see the self explanatory portal screen here: https://my.arizona.vote/AbsenteeTracker.aspx
It really doesn't seem that complicated.

Neither NY or NJ has such a system in place. There have been no changes to either since the primary in NYC, where 20% of mail-in ballots sent to voters were never counted. However, who would follow through with using this system to make sure their ballot is counted? I can't quite imagine the people living in urban ghettos with limited tech sophistication and English language skills & city housing projects - i.e. the majority of the Democratic voter base - would do that. I also suspect many of them requested ballots but never mailed them back, for whatever reason.

Yes, the system is a good one but as you point out, only as good as the user's ability to use it. If the Democrat voter base is handicapped in one way or another, then I'm not sure how or even if they can be helped by any system.

The Governor here in AZ and his predecessors have been big proponents of the vote-by-mail system. The poor guy had no idea that Trump would eventually allege widespread fraud among voting by mail. In fact it was funny to watch when Trump was in AZ how he got off on a tirade about mail voting being absolutely rife with fraud and the crime of the century, and the Governor stood next to him clearing his throat and looking at his watch and then pretending he was talking to someone in the crowd.

[vnatale]

In my (red) state, the system allows you to track the status of your mail-in ballot at all times (i.e. date mailed to me, date received back, date counted).

That sounds like an excellent system. Does this notification system let you send in another ballot if yours gets lost, or if you made a mistake causing it to be invalidated?

Well that's an excellent question. I don't know the answer. I went into the portal this morning and what I get is a status screen that shows me my ballot sent date, ballot returned date, and status as "accepted". I returned my ballot not by mail but by hand deposit into one of the drop boxes that have been set up the by County elections board. Many of them are in municipal city halls. In my case the box was right next to the security desk and one person at a time could approach with a line identified by social distancing decals.

To your question, if there had been a problem with my ballot, I'm not sure what the screen would have said, or if I would have been notified in some way. My guess is that it would have been on me to follow up.
If you're interested you can see the self explanatory portal screen here: https://my.arizona.vote/AbsenteeTracker.aspx
It really doesn't seem that complicated.

Neither NY or NJ has such a system in place. There have been no changes to either since the primary in NYC, where 20% of mail-in ballots sent to voters were never counted. However, who would follow through with using this system to make sure their ballot is counted? I can't quite imagine the people living in urban ghettos with limited tech sophistication and English language skills & city housing projects - i.e. the majority of the Democratic voter base - would do that. I also suspect many of them requested ballots but never mailed them back, for whatever reason.

Yes, the system is a good one but as you point out, only as good as the user's ability to use it. If the Democrat voter base is handicapped in one way or another, then I'm not sure how or even if they can be helped by any system.

The Governor here in AZ and his predecessors have been big proponents of the vote-by-mail system. The poor guy had no idea that Trump would eventually allege widespread fraud among voting by mail. In fact it was funny to watch when Trump was in AZ how he got off on a tirade about mail voting being absolutely rife with fraud and the crime of the century, and the Governor stood next to him clearing his throat and looking at his watch and then pretending he was talking to someone in the crowd.

Was it Arizona I was hearing about how they start counting all the votes as they come in so that on Election Day the only ones not yet counted are the ones that had arrived that day?

Vinny

[glennds]

And counting them makes a harmful early release/leak of information possible. Why do it.

To relieve the load of trying to tabulate in-person AND mail-in votes all in one day under pressure to deliver a prompt outcome result? Also to have the time to double check and verify counts? Consider how many counties some states have.

Coming from a person who measures twice and cuts once.

Now that I'm thinking about the mechanics, it's quite a task of coordination.

[glennds]

Was it Arizona I was hearing about how they start counting all the votes as they come in so that on Election Day the only ones not yet counted are the ones that had arrived that day?

Vinny

I don't know, but I did read that the Trump campaign is suing the State of Nevada to block early counting there, where they were planning to do just as you describe.

[Kbg]

All,

Thanks for keeping this a high level good discussion on voting approaches. My .02.

In today's age, I think going to the polls physically is shall we say, antiquated. I believe as a general rule, voting should be easy and for registered voters only. I agree with both sides about their main voting points...Rs are correct, we should have a system that is fraud resistant or proof. D's are correct, voting should be easy not a chore.

Online voting with blockchain seems to me to be an excellent approach with old school voting for those who want it.

[glennds]

In my (red) state, the system allows you to track the status of your mail-in ballot at all times (i.e. date mailed to me, date received back, date counted).

That sounds like an excellent system. Does this notification system let you send in another ballot if yours gets lost, or if you made a mistake causing it to be invalidated?

I have been voting by mail in IL for years. I signed up initially online with an email address, and now Cook County sends me an email when the ballot is mailed to me, and another when they confirm receiving it. What happens once they receive it, I have no control over.

In answer to WiseOne's question, an Arizona voter on another forum indicated that there was a problem with her ballot and she was notified by text and email and given an opportunity to call in to a number provided on the alert and correct whatever issue there was. I assume there was some exchange of info to authenticate her identity, and her ballot was eventually put through. This reminded me that you can log into the voter system and in the same way you can update your address, you can opt in for text and email notifications. I have also heard in the background they compare your ballot signature to the signature in your driver's license file with the State.
The surprising thing about all this is that I would not call Arizona leading edge when it comes to tech, but they do seem to have the voting process dialed in pretty well. There have been no media reports or social media allegations of issues or dysfunction.

[WiseOne]

Online voting with some kind of ID check to ensure one vote per legally registered voter. Sounds great. I would worry though about software bugs, crashes with data loss, and hackers from anywhere in the world.

Sometimes old school technology really is the best.

[vnatale]

I heard today that Washington state has been doing mail-in voting for ten years. Most people like it. Participation went up somewhat.

Vinny

[glennds]

All,

Thanks for keeping this a high level good discussion on voting approaches. My .02.

In today's age, I think going to the polls physically is shall we say, antiquated. I believe as a general rule, voting should be easy and for registered voters only. I agree with both sides about their main voting points...Rs are correct, we should have a system that is fraud resistant or proof. D's are correct, voting should be easy not a chore.

Online voting with blockchain seems to me to be an excellent approach with old school voting for those who want it.

I agree with what you're saying about old school voting being kind of antiquated in today's age. Sometimes I wonder if the counter arguments about fear of hacking and data theft/loss are considering that according to the IRS 90% of taxpayers file electronically. Talk about sensitive data. Besides your SS# and other identifiers, every bank and brokerage account is listed in the schedules. If that data were hacked and used opportunistically, think of the catastrophe it could be for a person.

Yet you never hear any uproar about fear of data hacking with Federal tax filings. At least not nearly the noise we hear about voting. Why?
Tax filing has not been politicized in the same way as voting so even though the risks are much greater, at least on an individual level, they are not manifested in our consciousness in the same way. It speaks to the power of politicians' ability to manipulate public thinking about what is important and what is not (or what is real and what is not).

But back to your point, the amount of business that is transacted electronically is enormous. You would think it would be absolutely doable to develop safe and secure technology driven voting systems that would satisfy all but the most paranoid. I would also add, the idea of 50 states all utilizing their own systems for voting seems very inefficient. I understand the Constitutional structure of state voting independence, but as a logistical matter, it would seem that a robust system could be utilized by all states who would in turn run their own elections off this backbone.

[vnatale]

All,

Thanks for keeping this a high level good discussion on voting approaches. My .02.

In today's age, I think going to the polls physically is shall we say, antiquated. I believe as a general rule, voting should be easy and for registered voters only. I agree with both sides about their main voting points...Rs are correct, we should have a system that is fraud resistant or proof. D's are correct, voting should be easy not a chore.

Online voting with blockchain seems to me to be an excellent approach with old school voting for those who want it.

I agree with what you're saying about old school voting being kind of antiquated in today's age. Sometimes I wonder if the counter arguments about fear of hacking and data theft/loss are considering that according to the IRS 90% of taxpayers file electronically. Talk about sensitive data. Besides your SS# and other identifiers, every bank and brokerage account is listed in the schedules. If that data were hacked, think of the catastrophe it could be for a person.

Yet you never hear any uproar about fear of data hacking with Federal tax filings. At least not nearly the noise we hear about voting. Why?
Tax filing has not been politicized in the same way as voting so even though the risks are much greater, at least on an individual level, they are not in manifested in our consciousness in the same way. It speaks to the power of politicians' ability to manipulate public thinking about what is important and what is not (or what is real and what is not).

But back to your point, the amount of business that is transacted electronically is enormous. You would think it would be absolutely doable to develop safe and secure technology driven voting systems that would satisfy all but the most paranoid. I would also add, the idea of 50 states all utilizing their own systems for voting seems very inefficient. I understand the Constitutional structure of state voting independence, but as a logistical matter, it would seem that a robust system could be utilized by all states who would in turn run their own elections off this backbone.

All EXCELLENT points!

Vinny

[Tortoise]

+1

Excellent summary, glennds.

[Kbg]

Security: That's where blockchain technology comes in. You can use it for both identification and encryption purposes...I think if someone takes the time to review what this technology is and what it does you will likely agree that it is as secure as in-person voting.

[Kriegsspiel]

There might be something to that.