The whole system must be flawed if this is a thing to be discussed.....faith in the vote must be pretty low.
Each state controls their own voting and can use different systems although many have unified the methods like with optical scanning. Plenty of areas are
very good at what they do. For example, while highlighted greatly during COVID, some states have had mail-in voting for decades with no problems. On the other hand some voting precincts are a mess every single election. When they add a voting method, the first election they use it they tend to be completely disorganized. In a national election everyone has an interest in any problem in any voting precinct across the country. Thus just for the poorly performing exceptions trust is low and tempers can explode. The problems do not reflect the whole but are the squeaky wheel. You will never hear about the plentiful operations that go smoothly.
In Texas the drive-thru voting was setup in tents. The Trump administration sued and the judge agreed that the state law commands that voting must happen in a building. The judge made it clear that a "tent" is not a "building". The judge however took no action on a technicality that the challenge was too late. Could you create any more ambiguity than this did generate if you personally tried your hardest?
Unethical people are extremely familiar with this tactic. I can give you other examples such as plagiarism in the music industry, where a party intentionally and knowingly violates the law because the repercussions of getting caught are acceptable. In this case they set up an obviously illegal (obvious to anyone who read the state law before setting it up) voting mechanism knowing that one would have to challenge it in court and fight to stop it, but there would likely be no repercussions otherwise.
So while you would think that the voting system would be snow angel pure white, the fact is that people involved sometimes push it to egregious limits until they get caught.
We had a good number of precincts where Mitt Romney (R) did not get a single vote in 2012. Feel free to search the web you will actually find articles from many in our media writing that "dumb republicans do not understand why this happened, that people in the precincts just loved Obama so much."
If you spent any time in science or studying statistics you would know that situation is impossible, that having even one precinct without a single mistake on a vote is impossible, and blatantly corrupt. So not only does this happen, but plenty in the media, who are supposed to question corrupt government, actually
support it.
Bad behavior continues on in a handful of cities, generally cities that have been corrupt for a half a century and continue to get more run down. I am in a different area from
@c10 but see similar things to what he outlined.
The cases we have, you can practically predict them and pick them out on a map. It is "well-known" who is going to act bad. Control varies widely between the state, county, and local levels. I personally think that state and county officials by nature are quite transparent. But many cities consist of giant, sticky blobs of lifetime officials surrounded by their smelly, gooey nepotism machine. As long as they are there, they can generate these problems every single election. In each election one just hopes that said areas are not pivotal.
I certainly hope so...the fate of a nation hangs in the balance of honest, reliable voting
That is good and I think "reliability" is the biggest issue right now. But we have the worst-case scenario with many states that are being determined on a razor's edge and are thus automatically eligible for a recount. With the highest vote totals in history, that is painful and expensive and can drag on. As I write this Georgia has a separation of 1,097 votes. This is well within the error margin of most laboratory experiments. With no bad intent whatsoever, recounts could swing back and forth. That is bad for everyone who has a stake in this.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
