Democrats losing all credibility in denial of overwhelming evidence..

[Dill]

(03-29-2024, 08:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If the US is supposedly the "world leader" in terms "leader of the free world", then why would the Democratic party want to bring in voting by mail when most of the developed nations in the world have forbidden it?  This is a situation where the possible negative circumstances are too numerous to say "show me one", but the overwhelming decisions of other developed nations should tell the story.  They all forbid mail voting for a reason, and I suspect that reason to be it allows for fraud.

Now, it's interesting that you chose earlier to only address my issue that voter ID should be a requirement, yet you never said a peep about purging the voter rolls of inactive voters.

Couple things, then--

1. Voting by mail is no biggie.  https://www.witf.org/2022/12/09/what-other-countries-offer-no-excuse-mail-in-voting-2/
Mail in voter is fraud just another manufactured problem. If nations have forbidden mail in voting because of fraud problems, then that will be part of the historical record somewhere. And it will be covered and analyzed by organizations like this: https://www.electoralintegrityproject.com/what-we-do.

GB, Canada, Switzerland--seems to be a thing in solid democracies with hundreds of years of tradition. Plus Germany and Poland. That tells a story for sure. No problem. In many countries, registration is done automatically, but not the U.S.  Different countries have different circumstances. Wide distances and frequent travel have been a factor in the history of U.S. mail in voting (which began with the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War). It always surged in war time, when politicians wanted soldiers votes.  The (historically) sudden juxtaposition with unproven fraud and 2020 seems a bit too timely.

2. Purging voter roles: there needs to be a balance of harm with such policies--
is more harm prevented than created if a SINGLE COUNTY purges a thousand eligible voters because of two "dead" voters in the ENTIRE STATE one year?

I suspect the people pushing "purge" policies know very well what the balance is in their state, and what percentage of what voter demographic will most likely be shaved off. Just another of the many "innovations" we have seen over the last three decades in the name of "election integrity." 

Eligible voters are being swept up in conservative activists' efforts to purge voter rolls
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/eligible-voters-swept-up-conservative-activists-purge-voter-rolls/
In Seven States, Removing Voters from the Rolls Just Got Easier
https://www.democracydocket.com/analysis/in-seven-states-removing-voters-from-the-rolls-just-got-easier/
"Use It or Lose It": The Problem of Purges from the Registration Rolls of Voters Who Don't Vote Regularly
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/voting-rights/-use-it-or-lose-it---the-problem-of-purges-from-the-registration0/
With the 2020 elections looming, there are mounting concerns about the techniques some states may use to try to tailor the electorate and achieve their preferred political outcomes. One such technique is purging voters from the rolls for flimsy reasons. State election officials do, of course, have the obligation to try to keep voter registration records up to date by canceling registrations of people who have died, are imprisoned, have moved to another state, or become legally incompetent. But a minority of states go further and engage in a practice that ought to be seen as glaringly unconstitutional—purging people from the rolls solely because they have skipped voting in several consecutive elections and they have not responded to a letter asking them to confirm where they live. 

This practice results in the deletion of hundreds of thousands of registrants each year. Very often, those people get energized to vote in a given election but find when they show up at the polls that they are no longer registered and cannot cast a ballot.