Report Exposes Major Flaws in Mail-In Voting, Could Change Outcome of Election

If there’s one hard-and-fast rule that has been set for conservatives during the unusual 2020 election process, it’s this: Don’t step into the mail-in voting minefield.

There’s an official line that’s been set. Mail-in voting is terrific. It’s better than in-person voting, in fact. Why don’t we make it this easy all the time? It’s the greatest thing to happen to liberty and freedom since the Magna Carta.

Every time you express the slightest doubt about the mechanics of national mail-in voting and whether it could affect the results of the 2020 election, the soul of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. sheds a single tear in heaven.

For the humor-challenged, this is what the kids like to call hyperbole. I don’t feel bad engaging in it because, well, everyone engages in hyperbole when they’re talking about mail-in voting.

I’ve noticed a trend behind almost every argument I read on social media regarding the issue: If you aren’t making the most extreme case for your position, so extreme that it verges on self-parody, all the while claiming you absolutely know every one of the pertinent facts about the process and how they all line up in your favor, you’re doing it wrong.

This puts me in an odd position because my opposition to universal mail-in voting comes from a place of caution about an untried process.

It’s that I merely know that we can’t know what’s going to happen when the tortoise-like evolution of America’s electoral process over 232 years is completely upended in the space of about six months because we’ve concluded there’s no way to socially distance during the in-person voting process. (Even though there’s no evidence in-person voting increases COVID-19 risk.)

We want every American to be able to place his or her vote via mail without knowing what the implications of that are — assuming we’ll end up with the same result we would have otherwise.

Read the rest of the story HERE.

Source