[tylerhou]

I think it's reasonable to wonder if mail-in ballots are susceptible to fraud, but there is not a lot of evidence that such fraud is widespread. In particular, Trump's tweet is completely off base with what election experts already know about voter fraud.

> Now we're expecting that states will radically alter their voting system, in 5 months, and that it won't be vulnerable to interference?

Are mail in ballots for everyone really a "radical alteration" of their voting system? Local governments already have the capacity to send and receive thousands of pieces of mail, and the method of counting ballots is the exact same.

[nickff]

I am not sure whether there has ever been mail-in voter fraud, but it seems like the relevant agencies actively or passively avoid collection of data which might demonstrate or disprove such fraud. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[blhack]

>Are mail in ballots for everyone really a "radical alteration" of their voting system? Local governments already have the capacity to send and receive thousands of pieces of mail, and the method of counting ballots is the exact same.

How would you set up this system if you were tasked with it?

[SauciestGNU]

Every state already has absentee voting. I would expect that the system will follow the same procedures as already exist for absentee voting, hiring more clerk and postal staff as necessary.

[tylerhou]

The same as normal ballot counting, except instead of receiving in person ballots, volunteers count mail in ballots.

Sending mail and receiving mail is already a solved problem. The post office handles nearly half a billion pieces of mail each day, and 200 million pieces of first class mail.