[javagram]

If that happened regularly and widely it would be quite obvious because 40-50% of eligible voters vote. So there could be as much as a 40% chance that the person whose ballot you forged also tried to vote and is either turned away or submits a provisional ballot or complaint.

This would create a record that could then be used to examine the signature on the ballot and charge the person with voter fraud.

Note: not many states have changed their laws on vote by mail this year, so theoretical VBM fraud could have been done by submitting fraudulent ballot applications in most past elections too. The main difference this year is more voters are expected to use the no-excuse absentee ballot that was already available to them in other years.

[yostrovs]

This being a hacker forum, would such security measures as you believe in and propose be acceptable in any computing application? In finance? Medicine? Anything really?

[javagram]

This is how the system has worked, oftentimes for decades past.

No, they would not be considered acceptable in a computing application. But in computing, it’s considered acceptable to discriminate against users for the sake of security.

I’m unaware of any major democracy that uses computerized voting with a username, password, and 2FA to replace the traditional ballot box, for obvious UX reasons. (Never mind that computerized results might actually be easier to forge than paper ballots).

Regardless of what is “acceptable” it is a fact that widespread voter fraud using the mechanisms proposed would be detectable.

[yostrovs]

That's what the ID cards are used for, and have been for decades... Including for voting all over the world.

[javagram]

That’s never how voting has worked in the USA though. The entire idea of even having an ID card is relatively modern.

We’ve had voting for centuries, and done it without ID requirements.

Not sure how ID requirements would work in the several states that have done all-mail-in ballots for decades successfully.

[treeman79]

Fraction of an percentage is all that is needed much of the time.

A few hindered ballots from a [left/right] leaning district going missing can be enough.

Don’t even need to have individual fraud, just some stats on how likely one area is to vote then “wrong” way.

Hell nursing homes or others could easily swing lots of votes by a single staff.

I’ve dealt with plenty of high officials that have negative documents go missing. It’s just routine for many.