forond.com

la Fuerza escribió: Mié Oct 30, 2024 6:17 pm Ya empezaron los Trumpistas a poner en duda el sistema.

Aquí hay una cosa segura, si el felón pierde volverá a desconocer a las instituciones americanas.

Peligroso.

aquisipasanada escribió: Jue Oct 31, 2024 9:48 pm

la Fuerza escribió: Mié Oct 30, 2024 6:17 pm Ya empezaron los Trumpistas a poner en duda el sistema.

Aquí hay una cosa segura, si el felón pierde volverá a desconocer a las instituciones americanas.

Peligroso.

Lo mismo dijo Maduro de Edmundo, no te da pena decir tamaña estupidez?



La defensa de la integridad del sistema electoral es quizás uno de los actos más importantes de una democracia.

De pana, eres un descerebrado chavista!

la Fuerza escribió: Jue Oct 31, 2024 10:45 pm La verdad es que hay gente que escribe cada pendejada en este foro…

Por eso es que cada día languidece más. Van quedando solo los de pensamiento binario, los insultadores de oficio y los obsesos sexuales. Zape!!

la Fuerza escribió: Dom May 07, 2023 6:17 pm Alguien tiene la más mínima duda de quien es el ídolo político de este “atropellador”?

Ok, les doy una pista: es anaranjado.

Post

See new posts
Conversation
@amuse
@amuse
ELECTION INTEGRITY: Last month the USPS quietly issued a last minute directive preventing the imaging of mail-in ballots. Normally the USPS would be able to confirm the number of mail-in ballots sent to election officials to ensure fraudulent ballots aren't inserted into the election. Bypassing the central scanning facilities, as the directive requires, means there will be NO way to verify the numbers reported by local election authorities match the numbers reported by the USPS.

The integrity of an election hinges on the robustness of the systems that facilitate voter participation. When those systems are altered at the last minute, the checks and balances designed to prevent fraud can be seriously undermined. A recent directive issued by the United States Postal Service (USPS), just a month before the upcoming election, threatens to do precisely that. By instructing USPS facilities to bypass their central scanning operations for mail-in ballots, this change removes a key layer of transparency and makes it difficult, if not impossible, to verify the legitimacy of absentee ballots. This decision effectively jeopardizes the integrity of the election by eliminating an important method of auditing mail-in ballots.

Traditionally, USPS relies on centralized scanning to create digital images of every mail piece, including absentee ballots. These scans are more than just technical formalities—they represent a critical layer of accountability. By scanning ballot envelopes, USPS is able to track the movement of election-related mail, confirm its transit through the system, and provide evidence of delivery. This method has allowed for an additional check against fraud, ensuring that every mail-in ballot destined for election officials is accounted for. The number of mail-in ballots scanned by USPS could be cross-referenced with the numbers reported by local election authorities to ensure consistency, thereby minimizing the possibility of fraudulent ballots being introduced into the system.

However, the recent USPS directive has instructed postal workers to bypass these centralized facilities and deliver absentee ballots directly to local Boards of Election (BOEs) without the standard scanning procedures. This means that the usual chain of digital records—a crucial audit trail—will be absent. There will be no comprehensive count of absentee ballots moving through the mail, and as a result, no reliable way for external observers to verify that the number of ballots received by election officials matches the number actually mailed by voters. With the imaging process deliberately omitted, election observers and watchdog groups lose a powerful tool that could independently verify or challenge local election authorities’ claims.

This sudden change also undermines confidence in an already tense electoral environment. With only a month until Election Day, altering fundamental mail handling procedures is bound to generate suspicion. For many voters, the safeguard that USPS imaging provides—an objective count of ballots—is a reassurance that the process is being conducted fairly. By sidestepping this layer of accountability, USPS has inadvertently fed into the narrative that absentee ballots are vulnerable to manipulation. For an electoral system that is often scrutinized for potential vulnerabilities, eliminating an established verification method only adds fuel to those concerns.

Another problem arises with the lack of transparency. Informed Delivery, a service offered by USPS, has allowed voters to digitally preview their incoming mail, providing them with an image of their ballot envelope. This transparency not only gave voters confidence but also created another line of defense against fraud—any inconsistency between what a voter expected and what was delivered could be flagged. Without the centralized scanning process, this transparency is also lost. Voters now have fewer assurances that their ballot has traveled safely through the system or reached its intended destination.

Ultimately, the USPS directive introduces an alarming level of uncertainty into the electoral process. Election integrity is not just about preventing fraud; it is also about ensuring that the systems in place foster trust. By removing the ability to confirm that the numbers of ballots mailed, received, and counted are consistent, the USPS is inadvertently creating opportunities for discrepancies. These discrepancies, whether intentional or not, could easily undermine public confidence in the outcome of the election.

In conclusion, the last-minute USPS directive to bypass centralized scanning of absentee ballots has significant ramifications for election integrity. It removes a key verification step that has historically helped ensure the legitimacy of mail-in voting. By stripping away a vital layer of transparency, this directive leaves voters and observers in the dark about whether the number of ballots reported by local election authorities truly reflects those mailed. In a time when public trust in elections is already fragile, such a change—made just weeks before Election Day—could prove deeply damaging to the perceived legitimacy of the entire electoral process.

aquisipasanada escribió: Vie Nov 01, 2024 12:38 pm Hace 4 años le eché 100% de la culpa por las trampas en las elecciones a Trump y su administración, quien siendo presidente se dejó meter la pala presuntamente con trampa de sus adversarios. Una vez la trampa hecha es muy difícil dar marcha atrás.

Ahora aplaudo a todos los americanos que estan luchando para que las elecciones sean limpias independientemente de su afinidad política.

Unas elecciones transparentes es lo único que sostiene a la democracia. En Venezuela perdimos la democracia por las maquinitas...