ADVERTISEMENT

Rejected Mail Ballots Are Showing Racial Disparities

The radical Rs can't stand for equal and fair voting for black people.
“the rejections were a result of signatures that were missing or did not match those on file.”

God forbid we have any basic rules for voting and making a vote count. Do basic rules that apply to white voters not apply to black voters? Should we accept votes not signed by people or that don’t match those on file? You complain about fairness, but don’t seem to want any standards to apply to what would consist of a valid vote. How does not having any rules or standards help fair elections. Follow the damn directions just like everyone is supposed to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crafty Beaver
Strange? The mail in ballots themselves provide no distinction between what race the voter was who sent in the ballot.

Appears to me to just be a result of lack of education specifically the ability to write.

Sucks to be stupid it appears.

Every American citizen should have the right to vote, even you. Is there some provision that stupid people are not allowed the right to vote? You never disappoint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I don’t have a link, but over the past several years a journalist named Greg Palast has done tons of investigation of alleged voter suppression and among many other things, he has discussed the existence of statistical analyses that identify names that are highly predictive of race. For example I believe an American with the surname Washington is 95% likely to be black. There is a ton of potential for nefarious use of this information. I’m not sure how much of the use of such analyses is documented vs speculation, but it’s out there.
And addresses. These were the exact things being discussed when they were changing these voting standards. It's pretty easy to select a neighborhood, know if its black, and use this as an audited area to start rejecting ballots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMNSHO
Huey knew that black people were going to have difficulty signing their names? Sounds kind of racist, actually...
Dumb response. All ballots can be rejected through audits. All voters can have weird signature matches. The point is to target black voters for these audits and start tossing them. Supporting this practice is the real racism.
 
Dumb response. All ballots can be rejected through audits. All voters can have weird signature matches. The point is to target black voters for these audits and start tossing them. Supporting this practice is the real racism.
Most secure of all time he says...
 
Dumb response. All ballots can be rejected through audits. All voters can have weird signature matches. The point is to target black voters for these audits and start tossing them. Supporting this practice is the real racism.

Which didn't happen here, but I'm sure you have some point.
 
Every American citizen should have the right to vote, even you. Is there some provision that stupid people are not allowed the right to vote? You never disappoint.
Yes, even stupid people should be able to vote. They should still be expected to follow basic rules, however. If you can’t follow basic rules, you miss out on basic rights. Hell, you have to sign a check in order for it to be valid. People are all about arguing to make the process of voting easier, but that doesn’t mean you make it a free for all where no rules apply.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
"Looking for signs of bias, the state examined thousands of accepted and rejected signatures more closely, but the auditors largely agreed with the decisions that county election workers made and found nothing in the way the ballots were reviewed that would explain the disparity."

Huh.
TL;DR - Audit finds election workers correctly accepted/rejected ballots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crafty Beaver
I don’t have a link, but over the past several years a journalist named Greg Palast has done tons of investigation of alleged voter suppression and among many other things, he has discussed the existence of statistical analyses that identify names that are highly predictive of race. For example I believe an American with the surname Washington is 95% likely to be black. There is a ton of potential for nefarious use of this information. I’m not sure how much of the use of such analyses is documented vs speculation, but it’s out there.
Wow, so a Democrat-controlled state was doing this in which Biden won 58%-39%. Can’t imagine what Republican-controlled states are doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
Which didn't happen here, but I'm sure you have some point.
Did you even read the article?

"The audit also found that rejection rates varied by county, a difference the auditors said could reflect varying degrees of strictness in matching signatures."
 
Dumb response. All ballots can be rejected through audits. All voters can have weird signature matches. The point is to target black voters for these audits and start tossing them. Supporting this practice is the real racism.
Yet they found nothing to say that’s what happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: globalhawk
See my above post.
Show me where it said they specifically targeted black voters or ballots from predominantly black areas? I see where it’s says ballots with no signatures or signatures that don’t match. You’re making assumptions to fit your narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
Show me where it said they specifically targeted black voters or ballots from predominantly black areas?
"The analysis — which was requested by state lawmakers — also shows that where a person lives was the most significant factor to whether their election ballot was rejected.

 
"Looking for signs of bias, the state examined thousands of accepted and rejected signatures more closely, but the auditors largely agreed with the decisions that county election workers made and found nothing in the way the ballots were reviewed that would explain the disparity."

Huh.
That ^^ won't get any clicks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
So like a National ID card? Federally issued that everyone has to carry? Sounds great!

The problem with using a Federal ID is that unless it shows a current correct address how do poll workers know if you’re a current legal resident of the city/county/state where you’re attempting to vote?
 
The problem with using a Federal ID is that unless it shows a current correct address how do poll workers know if you’re a current legal resident of the city/county/state where you’re attempting to vote?
How does any voter ID handle that?
 
Did you even read the article?

"The audit also found that rejection rates varied by county, a difference the auditors said could reflect varying degrees of strictness in matching signatures."
Did you read the passage just before that?

Auditors found nearly 29,000 ballots that were rejected for various signature problems in the 2020 general election — either the signature was missing or it did not match what was on file. Looking for signs of bias, the state examined thousands of accepted and rejected signatures more closely, but the auditors largely agreed with the decisions that county election workers made and found nothing in the way the ballots were reviewed that would explain the disparity.”

The auditors tried to find bias but instead ended up largely agreeing with the decisions made by county election workers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old_wrestling_fan
Even though black people are seeing a far higher rejection rate?
Correlation does not equal causation.

Why are the signatures not matching in some cases? (Note that the review found that the poll workers in effect did a good job.)

Perhaps the signatures were not from the voter?
 
The problem with using a Federal ID is that unless it shows a current correct address how do poll workers know if you’re a current legal resident of the city/county/state where you’re attempting to vote?
In Iowa you must show up to a specific location determined by your current residence within the state/city/etc. It shouldn't be something poll workers need to address, at least in Iowa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
That’s right…and only certain states prevent “convicted felons” from voting mom…. But that means not ALL Americans can vote. My point.
Okay. “Convicted Felons” such as murderers, rapists, armed robbers. In Florida they do have an ability for many felons to regain voting rights, but those convicted of murder lose that right permanently.
 
"The analysis — which was requested by state lawmakers — also shows that where a person lives was the most significant factor to whether their election ballot was rejected.

The audit found “few discernible patterns that helped explain differences in rejection rates” and no evidence of bias in the acceptance or rejection of ballots. In a review of 7,200 ballots cast with software that analyses voter signatures, the audit concluded “that 98.7% of county decisions were appropriate.”
 
"The analysis — which was requested by state lawmakers — also shows that where a person lives was the most significant factor to whether their election ballot was rejected.

It appears we have now progressed into the circular logic portion of the broadcast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT