Atlas Blue members: How are you ok with what Trump is doing to the USPS?

[Person Man]

So far, the closest thing a Republican here has said as a justification to Trump trying to disrupt the election is that Americans are no pro-social enough to be trusted with universal sufferage and therefore we need a benevolent dictator. I guess there is the half-argument that what has worked in the past will continue to work regardless of change in circumstances. That's the default Republican argument in general.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

So far, the closest thing a Republican here has said as a justification to Trump trying to disrupt the election is that Americans are no pro-social enough to be trusted with universal sufferage and therefore we need a benevolent dictator. I guess there is the half-argument that what has worked in the past will continue to work regardless of change in circumstances. That's the default Republican argument in general.

Did you not read my post and just skipped over to latch on to Jessica's post instead?

[Hindsight was 2020]

We’re not saying anyone shouldn’t have the right to vote. We’re saying that voting needs to be done the right way to ensure we never again see any Brenda Snipes style incompetence or fraud.

For Trump, the only 'right way' for voting is only whatever gets him reelected.

What a weak and hilariously drab take. You’re definitely not hitting the ground running.

“ORANGEMAN BAD” suns it up.

The logical fallacies are numerous here (well, at least 3)

1.There is clearly a strong inference of normalcy bias.  I.E 'Trump is no different than any other President.'

2.I don't know the name of the logical fallacy, but there is also a bias based on Trump's bad behavior being so frequent that it should be regarded as normal (this is not the same as normalcy bias.)  If 'Orangeman bad' was a valid argument 3/4 years ago, and it's still a valid argument, then its frequency does not diminish its validity.

3.Finally, this is clearly an attempt to appeal to some kind of humor to dismiss the argument.

All in all, no real counter argument has been presented.

I appreciate that I didn't exactly make an argument initially either, but I'm limited in that I can't post links.

So, I present this:
“A federal judge appointed by Donald Trump gave the president’s campaign one day to turn over evidence to support its claims of widespread mail-in voting fraud or admit that it doesn’t exist,” Bloomberg reports.

Trump’s lawyers claimed Pennsylvania’s mail voting plan “provides fraudsters an easy opportunity to engage in ballot harvesting, manipulate or destroy ballots, manufacture duplicitous votes, and sow chaos.”

You’re a good poster Frank. Welcome aboard 👍

[Person Man]

So far, the closest thing a Republican here has said as a justification to Trump trying to disrupt the election is that Americans are no pro-social enough to be trusted with universal sufferage and therefore we need a benevolent dictator. I guess there is the half-argument that what has worked in the past will continue to work regardless of change in circumstances. That's the default Republican argument in general.

Did you not read my post and just skipped over to latch on to Jessica's post instead?

I guess that's the other argument. That accidents happen. They will always find a way to happen. For example, in 2004, I got a notice in the mail (the first election I voted in) after the election that my ballot wasn't counted and I had to re-register to vote. Good thing I was living in a safe state where I was pleasantly surprised when Bush carried the county at only 42-54 and that the House candidate got within 10 points of winning.

[Devout Centrist]

Why can’t we just vote in person? Voting is already socially distant. The line will be longer because it’ll be four to six feet apart. It’ll require some police presence to help manage it, but the wait time will not be changed at all. If McDonalds can open up their dining rooms in a socially distant manner than there is no reason why each state can’t get the proper logistics in place.

Vote by mail makes it much easier for the average person to cast their vote. It allows a voter to cast their vote days or weeks in advance from the comfort of their own home.

If states reverted to in-person voting, they will be staring down very long lines on election day. Some may simply choose to not vote if the wait is long enough and others wouldn't vote if their employers don't pay them for their time spent voting.