There is nothing shady about backdoor conversions. They were forbidden in the past, and then made explicitly allowable in 2010. Cheating on tests, even in India, is not explicitly allowed by universities. In that case it is pure corruption.

YOU are the one making the assertion. The burden is on YOU to provide evidence of mass voter fraud.

We are both in agreement that the formula is simple: if a measure stops more fraud than legitimate votes it is good.

The concept I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around is that you apparently genuinely believe that removing mail-in ballots would stop more fraudulent than real voters. The number of fraud cases is likely extremely low, to the point of being a statistical anomaly. Why make it harder to vote for people who have to work, single parents, the elderly, those without transportation, etc?

I disagree that it is "beside the point." If you prevent 1,000 cases of fraud by stopping 10,000 legitimate voters then would you really say that is a solution? For many people the mail in ballot is how they vote. It is disenfranchisement for the sake of exclusion, not actually making the system better.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that voter fraud is happening due to mail in ballots?

"child mortality rates of greater than 50% before adulthood"

How do you have child mortality after adulthood?

As someone who has personally dealt with this issue, let me provide some insight. Every time you say "this isn't me!" they will cancel your card and issue you a new one. Now you have to wait a week or so for your new card, update every place where you use that number, hope they don't charge during that time, activate the new card, etc. It's a hassle. Now imagine a future where these scammers are all over the place.

In "highly secure facilities" they are TEMPEST certified, and wireless devices such as cell phones are not physically permitted within the boundary. This is a non-issue.

Why can't I block posts by Bennett?

Nope. It was one person. It is EXTREMELY common to the point of almost 100% that people report multiple shooters when there is just one.

When you state that your product (A) is the best a reasonable person would assume that means you are better than B, C, D, E ... Z.

Identification even.

National identifaction is perfectly fine. The problem is when it is also used as the national authentication.

And, as you admit, it is getting steadily worse. This points more to a systemic problem than a specific person.

Do you genuinely believe any other politician of any other party would behave any differently? Answer honestly if you can.