Court to Massachusetts Republicans trying to block mail-in voting: You lose

Charlie Baker is politically to the left of 1996 Bill Clinton, maybe even 2000 Al Gore. He has more in common with 2008 Obama than he does Trump or anyone else running on a GOP ticket.

You'd think the national party would notice. Much like Manchin has figured out how to get elected as a democrat in WV, Baker has found the secret sauce for MA.

I don't understand why Mass GOP would rather be eliminated from the state than have plausibly viable candidates. But the same could be said about Democrats in red states.

... actually means something concrete or useful. Try explaining your proposed solution again without using that word.

False.

Even the right wing Heritage Foundation blows up the “both sides” myth.

The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank, maintains a public database of ballot-fraud cases. A review of the database reveals an astonishing fact: In every listed indictment and conviction for voter fraud or other malfeasance in connection with the 2020 presidential general election [1,173 cases] when the culprit’s political affiliation is known he or she turns out to be a Republican or “unabashed conservative.”

https://www.thebulwark.com/the-pattern-of-gop-voter-fraud/
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

No, there isn't voter fraud by any political party. Not by mail and not by other means. The verified (real) cases of someone voting twice or when they should not have are extremely rare and are not throwing elections.

If you want to say otherwise, show some proof by a reputable, impartial source.

The real voter fraud is people who legitimately should have the right to vote but where denied do to clerical slip-up or just because they were sick or had to work on the day of the election.

This is a classic "prove a negative" line of bullshit. Saying or suggesting that "fraud...does happen on both sides of the aisle" is a lie and it is propaganda.

if you think it doesn’t your a fool

If you think it does, you're a sheep. A propagandized sheep.

If you know it doesn't, but you pretend that it is, you're a liar and a propagandist.

Drives me nuts.

Blockchain for voting? I first saw that discussed on XKCD about four years ago: https://xkcd.com/2030/

will solve voter fraud problems merely reveals how little you understand the technology. It's a spectacularly dumb idea. Short version, courtesy of Matt Blaze, a cryptography expert with a deep understanding of election security:

- It doesn't solve any of the problems that civil elections actually have
- It's basically incompatible with "software independence", considered an essential property
- Most important, it makes ballot secrecy difficult or impossible.

Another perspective here, from the Journal of Cybersecurity. From the abstract: "While current election systems are far from perfect, Internet- and blockchain-based voting would greatly increase the risk of undetectable, nation-scale election failures. "

(Likewise, there's pretty much nothing that blockchain does better than existing technological or non-tech alternatives, and meanwhile it's an ecological disaster. I hope if you're one of those cryptocurrency true believers, you got in on the bottom floor of the pyramid scheme.)

Shorter version: if you want secure elections, shun electronic systems in favor of voter-verifiable paper ballots paired with routine risk-limiting audits.

I haven't seen such a well executed troll here in quite some time.