Delaying the US election by allowing votes to cast/received AFTER election day is a bad idea. Everyone seems to agree. (more in CW)
Delaying the US election by allowing votes to cast/received AFTER election day is a bad idea. Everyone seems to agree. (more in CW)
@mathlover Agreed on the constitutionality of changing the official date of the election.
If an absentee/mailed ballot isn't received and counted by election day, should it still be counted? And if so, how different would that be than Trump's "delaying the election"?
I also wonder how we'd have confidence in state's rules around mail ins... I don't know if they align today... maybe some states allow late voting by mail (ie., count every ballot even if it was dropped in the mail a week after the election, or in the trunk of a car and miraculously discovered after the election).
There's certainly some questions worth answering when changing the whole system of voting.
Delaying the US election by allowing votes to cast/received AFTER election day is a bad idea. Everyone seems to agree. (more in CW)
@mathlover
Yes, I agree... I think accepting late votes in person or in mail presents legal problems. If course with mail in ballots, the voter doesn't control when the ballot is in,which is one of many concerns.
Here in Colorado we have mail in voting, so every name /address on file gets a ballot, whether the person is alive or lives there, and there's nothing to stop porch pirates from becoming ballot pirates and stealing someone's vote.
I always vote in person or hand-deliver my ballot. This way I still know my vote was in on time and cast by me.
Delaying the US election by allowing votes to cast/received AFTER election day is a bad idea. Everyone seems to agree. (more in CW)
@SecondJon Allowing late ballots to be counted might be a good idea, though I suspect probably won't legally be an option. It would differ from Trump's proposed delay, since counting would probably begin at the normal time, but before all the votes arrived.