[travisathougies]

I don't understand the us v them mentality. I have lots of right wing friends and family and many of them have been against electronic voting from the beginning. For example, in my home state of oregon, many right wingers are against vote by mail and have been since oregon became the first state to go fully vote by mail. These issues are not so binary as you're making them out to be, and I think everyone would do well to put aside partisan differences to come together on issues where they can agree.

[tastyfreeze]

Us v them has been drilled into the populace for decades to divide based on tribal allegiances. The best thing you can do to break down tribal walls is to talk to "the other side" and find solutions that are acceptable for everybody.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

I'll agree, our elections are shit. They're designed that way so that interested and connected individuals can manipulate them. The most successful ways of doing so are the time honored traditions of gerrymandering and voter suppression. My problem with a lot of popular right-wing complaints are that they are rarely directed at those things, they're directed at things like vote by mail which helps alleviate the latter while, as far as I can tell, not being significantly worse than voting in person for security. Voter ID sounds like a decent idea, but the solution to getting everyone their ID is to make people skip work to go to the DMV and close DMVs in areas with too many "unfavorable" voters.

But I agree, we should put aside partisan bullshit and come up with some meaningful improvements, but that will never happen as long as we have politicians who insist on trying to rig everything their way. We should be pushing for an end to gerrymandering, a way to count votes that makes it reasonable for every eligible voter to vote, assures to a reasonable degree that only eligible voters can vote, and that the count is accurate. Let me know when there's a conservative idea that actually does those things and I'll be behind it.

[travisathougies]

> vote by mail which helps alleviate the latter while, as far as I can tell, not being significantly worse than voting in person for security.

How anyone could state this with any particular confidence is beyond me. The truth is, when someone votes by mail, you have no idea who filled in the ballot. How could anyone possibly collect metrics? No one can possibly say what's going on, unless you trust the populace at large, which not everyone does. Many countries have systems for dealing with this. In many countries, they ink your finger to indicate you voted. Why not just do that at physical polling stations.

Honestly, mail-in ballots are very difficult for me. They get mailed to you, and by the time I finally have a chance to sit down, I often have to go searching for where it went / whether my toddler put it somewhere. On the other hand, when I voted in person, I would just go to the polling booth in the morning and be done. Super easy. I don't understand the desire for pure vote by mail.

One year, I didn't even receive my ballot, and it was difficult to get a replacement. Whereas, when I lived in CA, it didn't matter. You show up to the polling station (which is conspicuously noted), and just vote.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

> How anyone could state this with any particular confidence is beyond me. The truth is, when someone votes by mail, you have no idea who filled in the ballot.

How do you know who filled in the ballot at the polling place? All I would need is to show up and know someone else's name and address and I could vote for them. Vote by mail isn't any worse than that and is possibly better because there's a stronger confidence that whoever filled it out actually lives at that address. As I recall from my own mail-in ballot, it is also signed by myself and a witness.

> Honestly, mail-in ballots are very difficult for me. They get mailed to you, and by the time I finally have a chance to sit down, I often have to go searching for where it went / whether my toddler put it somewhere. On the other hand, when I voted in person, I would just go to the polling booth in the morning and be done.

The poling place is open on exactly one day, and you have to wait in line for your turn. Have to go to work that day? Well, tough shit. For some people this is simple, but for quite a lot of people in overcrowded polling places and inflexible working conditions it is not. The option of a mail in ballot provides a convenience for people less privileged with the ability to make it to a polling place during a sub-24 hour window.

Notice I said option. If filling out a ballot is difficult for you, you can still do it by showing up in person.

> One year, I didn't even receive my ballot, and it was difficult to get a replacement.

Perfect is the enemy of good.

[travisathougies]

> How do you know who filled in the ballot at the polling place? All I would need is to show up and know someone else's name and address and I could vote for them

Presumably by some kind of voter identification? Like the way most countries do it.

> The poling place is open on exactly one day, and you have to wait in line for your turn. Have to go to work that day? Well, tough shit. For some people this is simple, but for quite a lot of people in overcrowded polling places and inflexible working conditions it is not. The option of a mail in ballot provides a convenience for people less privileged with the ability to make it to a polling place during a sub-24 hour window.

I guess I don't get it. The polling places open at a ridiculously early hour and end at 8. You could have multi-day polling too, that's fine. I don't understand why this is so hard in this country.

> Notice I said option. If filling out a ballot is difficult for you, you can still do it by showing up in person.

No I can't because I live in Oregon, which despite being a high tax state, is unable to conduct even the most basic election.

> Perfect is the enemy of good.

It's not when we have an easy answer to this problem -- have a physical place to vote. I've voted absentee in California, and one year, my ballot got lost there. Do you know what I did? I went to a polling location. In Oregon, because it was COVID, there was no place to get a ballot. EIther you use the byzantine system set up by the state which was too complicated, or tough shit. That's not acceptable. Why aren't these 'voter suppression' tactics used in liberal states not up to questioning? Why is only the motivations of one party suspect? I don't think it is easier to vote in Oregon than any other state, despite what everyone here wants you to believe.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

> Presumably by some kind of voter identification? Like the way most countries do it.

Ok, sure, just find a way to implement that which doesn't allow it to be abused disenfranchise voters, which is what typically happens here in the states.

> You could have multi-day polling too, that's fine. I don't understand why this is so hard in this country.

Yep, you could. No politician suggests this for some reason.

> No I can't because I live in Oregon, which despite being a high tax state, is unable to conduct even the most basic election.

Sounds like your problem is less with the concept of mail-in ballots and more with the fact that your state can't handle running a polling location.

> It's not when we have an easy answer to this problem -- have a physical place to vote.

For all the reasons I already outlined, it is not actually an easy answer.

> Why aren't these 'voter suppression' tactics used in liberal states not up to questioning?

They are. If no one is talking about it then they should make a bigger stink about it.