Besides one being requested and the other not, please explain the difference and what difference it makes. Even if the voter declines to use the mailed ballots is that a concern for fraud? I don't, but think its the next logical step after years of absentee voting and a logical step to safety amid the covid virus threat. almost 190 thousand dead and we should ignore that, or the 6 million cases and what of those to sick to vote, or quarantined at the last crucial moment?

The right has hollered voter fraud for decades and have yet to produce any of significance, while making laws based on those unfounded fears. I see those objections and actions as just another attempt at targeted voter suppression, like all of a sudden the pressure on the post office and the rolling slowdowns because of sickness and slashing of the means to cover those manpower shortfalls.

If I request a ballot, they will have documentation of my request including my signature, and they will know my address is correct. In other words, they know a registered voter is home. As to COVID deaths, did you read the latest report from the CDC regarding that issue?

If you're mailed a ballot without a request they still have your information and it's reasonable to assume you're the one getting it, just like meds or checks or BILLS, whether use use it or not.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/30/opini...ern/index.html

https://www.9news.com/article/news/p...0-956ebd20fa53

Tell us what's the latest CDC says about the virus.

Virus, are we still talking about yesterday, today the issue is to Trump or not to Trump, that is the question, whether to plumb the depths of dispair, or scale the heights of rhetoric, soring even unto utopia

Quote:

---

it's reasonable to assume

---

The flaw in your thinking.

CDC analysis of Covid data shows that only 6% of deaths were from Covid only. The other 94% were from other health factors which contributed to the deaths.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

CDC analysis of Covid data shows that only 6% of deaths were from Covid only. The other 94% were from other health factors which contributed to the deaths.

---

yes but without covid those deaths would have not happened when they did. The lesson is the nation, the world, population is unhealthy, full of life style disease

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

The flaw in your thinking.

---

There is always a flaw in human thinking, but you could acknowledge the progress states like Colorado have achieved over the last several years and election cycles and no one was objecting when Senator Cory Gardner was elected under this system and now it's an abomination?

I acknowledge your concerns though with states that have never done this before and have no experience or the support infrastructure and policies and procedures in place to address those issues you have raised. Anything humans do can always be improved on.

Quote:

---

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by jlisenbe https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images...post-right.png
CDC analysis of Covid data shows that only 6% of deaths were from Covid only. The other 94% were from other health factors which contributed to the deaths.

---

That's pretty specific, but something we already knew in the general sense of who was more at risk of dying because of the covid infection.

covid is something we will learn to live with, like the common cold, and what we have to learn is to abandon the fast food culture and be less fat

I think you have completely missed the point. I'm not arguing against mail in voting. I'm asking questions that any reasonable person who has an interest in honest elections should be asking. That you defend mail in voting and yet can't answer those questions is amazing to me. That you don't see that as a problem is even more astonishing.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by jlisenbe https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/images...post-right.png

Quote:

---

CDC analysis of Covid data shows that only 6% of deaths were from Covid only. The other 94% were from other health factors which contributed to the deaths.

---

from talaniman;
That's pretty specific, but something we already knew in the general sense of who was more at risk of dying because of the covid infection.


The CDC has lost much of its credibility. Under Redfield, it has become a shill for Trump - which is exactly what Trump wants so he can promote his falsehoods through that agency.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest accused Redfield of having a bad record “and an extreme religious agenda.” Redfield was appointed in 2018.

However, the 6% statistic was NOT the fault of the CDC. The 6% death figure, retweeted by Trump and QANON, has since been deleted. It was incorrect and showed a misunderstanding of how deaths are classified.

The full story can be found here: https://www.factcheck.org/2020/09/cd...from-covid-19/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I think you have completely missed the point. I'm not arguing against mail in voting. I'm asking questions that any reasonable person who has an interest in honest elections should be asking. That you defend mail in voting and yet can't answer those questions is amazing to me. That you don't see that as a problem is even more astonishing.

---

Perhaps my guiding you to find those answers has been inadequate so let me try that again in keeping with the example we have been using.

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/main.html?menuheaders=

I see problems as opportunities to resolve issues and not a reason to not take actions that are necessary for better outcomes given particular circumstance. I daresay I have found answers to your questions that satisfy me, even if you are unsatisfied, so no I don't see the problems you ask as being unresolved.

@Athos.

Thanks for clarifying the facts for us as they do make a difference in how we process data. Unfortunately everybody is not as diligent in presenting such facts of which I am guilty of far to much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

CDC analysis of Covid data shows that only 6% of deaths were from Covid only. The other 94% were from other health factors which contributed to the deaths.

---

Like 'Clete said ("yes but without covid those deaths would have not happened when they did"). For instance, I have a friend who has diabetes. She and her doctor are managing it very nicely. She's scared she'll get Covid and end up dead -- not from the diabetes, but because Covid complicated things and hastened her demise.

Quote:

---

Perhaps my guiding you to find those answers has been inadequate so let me try that again in keeping with the example we have been using.

---

So your guiding amounts to another link that you likely have not read, and one that only concerns Colorado at that? No thanks. If you can't answer the questions, then just admit you don't know. Would be a lot easier.

As to the CDC data, it's interesting that some consider the CDC to be a "shill for Trump", but then proceed to refer to CDC data as though it's completely reliable. Well, you can't have it both ways. At any rate, Trump's portrayal of the data, unsurprisingly, was inaccurate. He stupidly retweets material that anyone on his staff could verify in ten minutes. But the fact remains that the great majority of Covid deaths occur in people with underlying health problems. In other words, an already unhealthy person got the virus and died. So to say that 160,000 people have died of the Covid virus is not entirely accurate. It's on the level of a person with serious cardiac problems having a car wreck and dying, and it getting reported that he/she was "killed by a car wreck". But a healthy person would not have died, so that's the dilemma.

CDC is stating an obvious irrelevant point . From the earliest reporting it has been clear that people are at worst risk when they suffer contributing factors.Would they have died if they did not get Covid 19 ? . There are often contributing factors in deaths ,most don't get on the death certificate .Cause of death pneumonia . Contributing factor cardio illness etc .

The problem with the mail in balloting in this cycle is that states that don't have a proper verifiable system in place have rushed sending out ballots . In the case of NJ the dictator decided that ONLY mail in ballots will count and people who go to the polls will have their ballots considered as provisional . Bass ackwards . Assuming we MUST accommodate those who are afraid to go to their polling place ,shouldn't it be on them to REQUEST an absentee ballot ,instead of this willy nillie way, mailing ballots out as if they were just any piece of junk mail ?

The moral of the story seems to be that healthy people are not in any great danger of dying from Covid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So to say that 160,000 people have died of the Covid virus is not entirely accurate. It's on the level of a person with serious cardiac problems having a car wreck and dying, and it getting reported that he/she was "killed by a car wreck". But a healthy person would not have died, so that's the dilemma.

---

Nope. He/she WAS killed in a car wreck. Covid goes after weakened body parts and kills people who have COPD, diabetes, heart problems, kidney disease, and more -- and, if you don't have any medical problems, Covid will weaken your body in some way so you'll be much more susceptible to illness..

https://www.eatthis.com/covid-19-cdc...ign=yahoo-feed

Quote:

---

Nope. He/she WAS killed in a car wreck.

---

Nope. He/she DIED in a car wreck. What killed the person? Hard to say. Did the trauma of the wreck induce a heart attack? Quite possible, and that's the whole point. The vast majority of those who have died from Covid had other health issues from the outset. Covid was a contributor, but by no means the only, or even primary, cause of death. Referred to as comorbidity.

I'm just curious about the link you provided. Did anything in it surprise you, or contradict anything that's been said already? Not sure what your point is.

If all of that is not enough, the NY Times, hardly a bastion of Trump supporters, reported recently that the great majority of people testing positive for Covid, perhaps as much as 90%, have so little of the virus that they pose no risk to others and have no real need to quarantine.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/h...s-testing.html

https://headlineusa.com/nytimes-vast...ot-contagious/

I realize this is all getting off topic. My apologies. I will redirect myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So your guiding amounts to another link that you likely have not read, and one that only concerns Colorado at that? No thanks. If you can't answer the questions, then just admit you don't know. Would be a lot easier.

---

I'm trying to learn and get answers too dude, and we were specifically using the Colorado model to that end.

Quote:

---

As to the CDC data, it's interesting that some consider the CDC to be a "shill for Trump", but then proceed to refer to CDC data as though it's completely reliable. Well, you can't have it both ways. At any rate, Trump's portrayal of the data, unsurprisingly, was inaccurate. He stupidly retweets material that anyone on his staff could verify in ten minutes. But the fact remains that the great majority of Covid deaths occur in people with underlying health problems. In other words, an already unhealthy person got the virus and died. So to say that 160,000 people have died of the Covid virus is not entirely accurate. It's on the level of a person with serious cardiac problems having a car wreck and dying, and it getting reported that he/she was "killed by a car wreck". But a healthy person would not have died, so that's the dilemma.

---

Fact is a lot of people have health issues be they addressed, or not and this covid virus acts on those issues and is dangerous enough to raise the potential of death in many. Even some with NO issues can and have died as a result of contracting it. We cannot predict the outcomes of contraction, nor can we ignore those possibilities either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The problem with the mail in balloting in this cycle is that states that don't have a proper verifiable system in place have rushed sending out ballots . In the case of NJ the dictator decided that ONLY mail in ballots will count and people who go to the polls will have their ballots considered as provisional . Bass ackwards . Assuming we MUST accommodate those who are afraid to go to their polling place ,shouldn't it be on them to REQUEST an absentee ballot ,instead of this willy nillie way, mailing ballots out as if they were just any piece of junk mail ?

---

Glad you specified the issue of mail in ballots tied to THIS CYCLE, while forgetting the circumstance of covid virus which is the driving underlying fear that surrounds not just voting but the whole freaking economy and way of life we have enjoyed and considered as normal.

I can agree that people should be requesting ballots, but sadly too many don't have a clue of how to go about it. After years of repub shenanigans to suppress the vote, surely you can understand the reactions of dems to increase the vote.

Quote:

---

I'm trying to learn and get answers too dude, and we were specifically using the Colorado model to that end.

---

Fair enough. I'm looking for answers as well. I think just mass mailing ballots, which has been proposed, is a terrible idea, but the way it's done in the Arizona district I linked to seemed reasonable.

There is another consideration. Should healthy people be expected to get off their duffs, get out of the house, and go vote? Is it wise to make everything TOO easy? Should those too lazy to work be allowed to vote? Should welfare recipients have the right to vote for pols who promise to take money from working Americans to give to the welfare crowd? Should people who pay no taxes be allowed to vote? Should people who live in tents on the streets of San Francisco have the same right to vote that people who discipline their lives to work for a living have? I'm assuming all of these people are mentally and physically healthy. Should they have the same right to vote as people who work and pay taxes?

I'm just speaking in general terms and not considering Covid.

Quote:

---

After years of repub shenanigans to suppress the vote

---

yeah ok . Dems think cleaning voter rolls as suppression .

Let the dead vote!! Suffrage for the dead! 8D

As of today, the number of deaths from Covid are approaching 188,000. For those who need to understand this figure, I've added a link which explains the death count.


https://www.factcheck.org/2020/09/cd...from-covid-19/

Your link is a link to nowhere.

Not sure what "understanding" of the figure is needed. It's 1,000 less than 189,000?

My apologies - this is the link.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/09/cd...from-covid-19/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Fair enough. I'm looking for answers as well. I think just mass mailing ballots, which has been proposed, is a terrible idea, but the way it's done in the Arizona district I linked to seemed reasonable.

---

I can go with that at face value and sorry I didn't find the link you mentioned, and if you could be so kind to re-provide the link or highlight the points you like I will peruse it and give my feedback.

Quote:

---

There is another consideration. Should healthy people be expected to get off their duffs, get out of the house, and go vote? Is it wise to make everything TOO easy? Should those too lazy to work be allowed to vote? Should welfare recipients have the right to vote for pols who promise to take money from working Americans to give to the welfare crowd? Should people who pay no taxes be allowed to vote? Should people who live in tents on the streets of San Francisco have the same right to vote that people who discipline their lives to work for a living have? I'm assuming all of these people are mentally and physically healthy. Should they have the same right to vote as people who work and pay taxes?

---

By Constitution every one has equal protection and rights under the law and no consideration is given to disposition, attitude, aptitude or ability, or any other arbitrary classification. My answer is yes everyone should be able to vote without discrimination or contrivance.

Quote:

---

I'm just speaking in general terms and not considering Covid.

---

Hard to dismiss or ignore such a devastating condition, but I get your point, thus my answer above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yeah ok . Dems think cleaning voter rolls as suppression .

---

The way repubs do it you're darn skippy.

Quote:

---

I can go with that at face value and sorry I didn't find the link you mentioned, and if you could be so kind to re-provide the link or highlight the points you like I will peruse it and give my feedback.

---

Happy to. https://www.kold.com/2020/07/07/fact...y-mail-ballot/

Quote:

---

By Constitution every one has equal protection and rights under the law and no consideration is given to disposition, attitude, aptitude or ability, or any other arbitrary classification. My answer is yes everyone should be able to vote without discrimination or contrivance.

---

I understand that. I was just suggesting some potential changes. I think that in order to vote, you should have, as they say, some "skin in the game." At any rate, we don't let those under 18 vote and individuals in jail usually cannot vote, so it is restricted. In the American revolution, the battlecry was, "No taxation with representation." Perhaps we should examine, "No representation without taxation." Just throwing it out there for discussion sake.

My reference to Covid was just to say that I was thinking long term and not just for 2020.

Upon my return to posting, I am trying hard not to be a smartaxx. You can feel free to call me out if needed. I do know I can have a tendency in that direction.

Quote:

---

My apologies - this is the link.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/09/cd...from-covid-19/

---

Isn't that the same link you posted yesterday? https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showpo...6&postcount=91

At any rate, the basic argument seems to center around how much impact Covid had on those who died. I imagine it ranges from a little to a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Upon my return to posting, I am trying hard not to be a smartaxx. You can feel free to call me out if needed. I do know I can have a tendency in that direction.

---

But we love you anyway! -- and missed you terribly!

Quote:

---

But we love you anyway! -- and missed you terribly!

---

We're just one, big happy family!!

emphasis on the happy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Isn't that the same link you posted yesterday? https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showpo...6&postcount=91

At any rate, the basic argument seems to center around how much impact Covid had on those who died. I imagine it ranges from a little to a lot.

---

Yes, it's the same link. You said it went nowhere, so I posted it again. It explains why the 6% business was incorrect and was a full explanation of the accuracy of the death count due to COVID being around 188,000. It notes how Trump and QANON retweeted the false information.

Here's a sampling from Dr. Fauci:

“So the numbers you’ve been hearing — the 180,000-plus deaths — are real deaths from Covid-19. Let [there] not be any confusion about that,” Fauci said.

CDC describes it this way. "Conditions Contributing to Deaths where COVID-19 was listed on the death certificate" In other words, Covid was not the only cause.

Additionally, this was stated. "For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death."

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c...#Comorbidities

We already knew that people with health issues were at higher risk but 6% of deaths had NO high risk conditions meaning otherwise healthy people can die from this disease. (If you believe the given figure)

Quote:

---

NOTE: Number of deaths reported in this table are the total number of deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and do not represent all deaths that occurred in that period. Counts of deaths occurring before or after the reporting period are not included in the table.
*Data during this period are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction and cause of death.

---

Indicates a higher number than reported. Not good no matter how you look at it.

If C-19 did not exist.. How many of the dead would be alive ? The vast majority would . They can't be suggesting that contributing factors are the major cause of death.

Let's face it . The CDC has been a POS organization for years ....just like the WHO

All you have to do is a quick search to find sourcing like this :


https://www.virology.ws/2019/03/25/t...se-to-reuters/

https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/13/healt...cdc/index.html

They screwed up the testing

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...3a7_story.html

They misreport test results
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...-texas/611935/

All you need to know about the CDC is that at a critical time early in the pandemic when giving the correct information to the public could've saved lives ;the CDC and the sanctified Dr Fauchi outright lied to us about the need to wear masks .

https://thehill.com/changing-america...-to-wear-masks

Quote:

---

6% of deaths had NO high risk conditions

---

Actually, it doesn't even say that. It simply noted that there were no other health conditions noted in the reports. Might have been there, and yet they didn't report it.

Quote:

---

If C-19 did not exist.. How many of the dead would be alive ? The vast majority would .

---

That's an interesting question to ponder. Another would be, "How many of the dead would have still been alive 12 or 24 months from now without Covid?" I would imagine it would be many fewer.

Forget EVERYBODY else, just follow your leader!