> Postal Service mail ballot system has catastrophic problems
Yes. That's the point. The administration doesn't care about fixing whatever hypothetical mail ballot fraud may or may not exist; they are doing this to inject chaos into the election results, giving them cover to claim any result they want or even to just throw out the results entirely. Catastrophic problems are the means to that end.
good thing it's completely illegal for the federal government to interfere with state voting proceedure
> For instance, the Postal Service has what the whistleblower claims is a "zero percent failure rate."
> Mail workers would scan a sample of a batch of mail ballots — about 400 out of a batch of 10,000 or more — to verify it matches what is in the federal mail ballot portal.
> Under the policy, if even one barcode on a single ballot in the batch doesn't scan properly or the information does not match, the entire batch would be rejected and returned to state election officials so the problem ballot could be addressed, and then the verification process would have to be started again.
This is not the job of the postal service, but of the government. There is zero reason to outsource verification, and the postal service ought to vehemently reject this attempt to shift responsibility. Though I guess they won't, seeing as they are gleichgeschaltet.
Assuming they check 400 out of 10k, and assuming someone would want to cause any meaningful discrepancies >= 1% of the ballots, meaning 100 problematic ballots per 10k batch.
This system would catch it 98,3% of the time. Pretty good, I'd say.
> One third of all Americans cast their ballots by mail
Sounds like BS. Or if it isn't, it's alarming.
Most voting should be in person, on election day. Absentee ballots for those who cannot do that, as we have done for decades. Early voting, unchecked mail-in voting, are all additional avenues for fraud or simply problems such as lost or damaged ballots or delayed processing.
No, Election Day is not a paid holiday, or even a recognized holiday. Public schools are generally out (at least the ones used as voting precints) but folks have work, and typically most "in person" votes are cast after 5pm (after folks traditionally leave work).
Mail in voting has been something that the elderly, infirmed, workers, and folks in the military have done for decades. It's remarkably secure and quite auditable. The issue the right has with it is that the folks that vote by mail (the military notwithstanding) are typically democrats.
It is not a paid holiday. It isn't an unpaid holiday either. And if you work a minimum wage job, you probably need to work as many hours as you can. And if you don't show up to work on Tuesday, don't bother showing up on Wednesday because you don't have that job anymore.
This is absolutely discriminatory against the poor. That's why the republicans fight for these types of restrictions and democrats fight against them.
We have a designated Election Day. It is (as you correctly imply) not a federal holiday. My own perspective is that that is indeed clearly discriminatory, and that some people like it that way.
So these rules by the Federal government were implemented to stop mail in voting from being abused as it has been for some time. The US Postal Inspections Service was being heavily abused by the government in times past in ways that were blatantly illegal. Hardly a peep was had about that, but everyone being up in arms about this tells me that the same people who were abusing the US Postal Inspections Service are probably upset that they won't be able to abuse mail in ballots the same way as they were that service.
> Postal Service mail ballot system has catastrophic problems
Yes. That's the point. The administration doesn't care about fixing whatever hypothetical mail ballot fraud may or may not exist; they are doing this to inject chaos into the election results, giving them cover to claim any result they want or even to just throw out the results entirely. Catastrophic problems are the means to that end.
Upon what do you base that?
Provide reputable sources, we can discuss it.
One can observe and accuse based on that observation. What 'sources' do you expect to see?
They’d said as much explicitly and implicitly with their actions.
You mean where the sitting president said they were going to try to rig the midterms?
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/trum...
good thing it's completely illegal for the federal government to interfere with state voting proceedure
> For instance, the Postal Service has what the whistleblower claims is a "zero percent failure rate."
> Mail workers would scan a sample of a batch of mail ballots — about 400 out of a batch of 10,000 or more — to verify it matches what is in the federal mail ballot portal.
> Under the policy, if even one barcode on a single ballot in the batch doesn't scan properly or the information does not match, the entire batch would be rejected and returned to state election officials so the problem ballot could be addressed, and then the verification process would have to be started again.
This is not the job of the postal service, but of the government. There is zero reason to outsource verification, and the postal service ought to vehemently reject this attempt to shift responsibility. Though I guess they won't, seeing as they are gleichgeschaltet.
> good thing it's completely illegal for the federal government to interfere with state voting proceedure
Oh yeah that'll stop them.
Assuming they check 400 out of 10k, and assuming someone would want to cause any meaningful discrepancies >= 1% of the ballots, meaning 100 problematic ballots per 10k batch.
This system would catch it 98,3% of the time. Pretty good, I'd say.
It's still funny thinking that there's people out there in 2026 who think that "it's illegal" will stop the Trump administration.
They don't care if it's illegal. They'll do it anyway and trust in the tainted result being a fait accompli that the courts can't (or won't) resolve.
That sample is wrong for statistics, 4% is literally not significant. It's also too much for sample controls
No one ever accused this administration of being competent.
maybe so, but it is very vocal about they are the most modest
> One third of all Americans cast their ballots by mail
Sounds like BS. Or if it isn't, it's alarming.
Most voting should be in person, on election day. Absentee ballots for those who cannot do that, as we have done for decades. Early voting, unchecked mail-in voting, are all additional avenues for fraud or simply problems such as lost or damaged ballots or delayed processing.
I'm not American, but if I'm not mistaken, you don't have election day off like in other countries, right?
If so, how is that not clearly discriminatory for those who can't afford the time to go.
No, Election Day is not a paid holiday, or even a recognized holiday. Public schools are generally out (at least the ones used as voting precints) but folks have work, and typically most "in person" votes are cast after 5pm (after folks traditionally leave work).
Mail in voting has been something that the elderly, infirmed, workers, and folks in the military have done for decades. It's remarkably secure and quite auditable. The issue the right has with it is that the folks that vote by mail (the military notwithstanding) are typically democrats.
Everywhere I've lived has early voting too. I usually vote a few days before election day because it's not so busy.
It is not a paid holiday. It isn't an unpaid holiday either. And if you work a minimum wage job, you probably need to work as many hours as you can. And if you don't show up to work on Tuesday, don't bother showing up on Wednesday because you don't have that job anymore.
This is absolutely discriminatory against the poor. That's why the republicans fight for these types of restrictions and democrats fight against them.
We have a designated Election Day. It is (as you correctly imply) not a federal holiday. My own perspective is that that is indeed clearly discriminatory, and that some people like it that way.
How much fraud is proven to be occurring due to mail-in ballots?
Then voting needs to be a national holiday with plenty of polling locations.
Perhaps every state should just have one very well-monitored polling place.
So these rules by the Federal government were implemented to stop mail in voting from being abused as it has been for some time. The US Postal Inspections Service was being heavily abused by the government in times past in ways that were blatantly illegal. Hardly a peep was had about that, but everyone being up in arms about this tells me that the same people who were abusing the US Postal Inspections Service are probably upset that they won't be able to abuse mail in ballots the same way as they were that service.