To mail or not to mail
To the editor:
Are we willing to accept the outcome of an election if it goes against our viewpoint? Or do some feel the need to “help it along” by creating a cushion for themselves? Mail-in voting and not requiring voter ID is a way to produce that cushion for those who don’t want to take the chance that they might lose — or there might be those who see the inevitable writing on the wall and want a way to alter the results.
It’s tough to let our opponents have a fair shot, but it also is ethical and produces results that are better in the long term for everyone as the system of our republic is preserved. The combination of voter ID, in-person voting, and traditional absentee voting leave the radical left open to losing, which they can’t allow –and they are convinced that their supposedly superior end justifies their unethical means. They either do not have the confidence that their policies are better and will speak for themselves, or they believe that voters are not capable of making an intelligent, informed decision.
Not everyone who supports mail-in voting is unethical, but do they think that the outcome of an election based on millions of unverified mail-in votes from who-knows-where will be legitimate? Or that more than a few mail-in ballots might not be “lost”? The argument against mail-in votes does not claim that all will be fraudulent, but inundating the postal system opens the door for fraud, chaos, and uncertainty.
To mail or not to mail – that is the question. What is the answer? Unchecked mail-in voting and no accountability will allow the election results to be altered to fit an agenda in a long, drawn out process. In-person voting, the alternative casting of absentee ballots, and voter ID/accountability are the means to a free and fair election. Let’s respect one another and rebuild trust. “America! America! God shed His grace on thee, and crown thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea.”