If it is a PITA that's okay.
Of course. Because blocking people who might vote for Democrats is the real goal. As have many Republicans acknowledged. Even bragged about.
But no one I've ever heard of has done a study that would turn it up.
Right. Ok, how would you structure a study to get the answers you want?
It is blatantly obvious that SOME fraud occurs.
How so? And how much? It doesn't make sense to try to influence an election that way. The risks are high and you need a bunch of people to pull it off. And the more people involved, the more likely someone will talk. If you want to influence an election, the best bets are to use absentee ballots, those can be batched in large numbers with little risk, influence the count, or just make bypass the count with falsified figures.
But there are places where a person can walk in a polling place without ID of any kind and cast a vote, with the assurance someone will check it later. Yet, somehow, have the vote totaled within hours. That is absurd.
If it operated as you state, that would be absurd. But if it is to be checked later, that is called a "provisional ballot". Which aren't part of the immediate tally. In the vast majority of cases, those ballots are never checked nor tallied. Because there usually aren't enough to change the results, so they get dumped. |
