The title of this summary blog post is grossly misleading. (To the point where I suspect it of being an AI hallucination, thanks to its use of ChatGPT's distinctive formatting style of bulleted list with Capitalized Colon-Delimited Headers:.)
As the linked PDF explains, this is not a change to the postmark date system. It's an acknowledgement that the date on the postmark may not be the date that you dropped the letter into a (possibly unattended) mailbox. This has always been true, because the stamping is not done until USPS actually processes the letter. USPS has no knowledge of when the letter physically "entered USPS custody" by being dropped in the mailbox, so the postmark has never accurately reflected that instant.
This rule does not change when postmarks are applied, and it doesn't change how any other parties make decisions based on postmarks. It merely documents the postmarking process that has existed basically forever.
There is a change, not directly to postmarking but the larger collection process which will affect postmarking.
> This discrepancy is expected to become more common due to the implementation of the "Regional Transportation Optimization" (RTO) initiative and the adoption of "leg-based" service standards.
> This change in USPS processes will have a potentially significant impact on tax filings.
Basically, a large chunk of mailboxes across the country will no longer have evening collection, so unless you drop off your mail very early in the morning it will be processed and postmarked at minimum 1+ day later.
Title should be "USPS adds a line to its operating manual clarifying what a postmark is."
And reading between the lines USPS is telling you (and everyone else, including other government agencies) that the postmark is for their internal business use and you should not try to derive any meaning from it.
That kindof makes sense to me: If I drop something into a post office’s mail box (outside or inside) after the day’s last pickup, even if the mail is inside the post office, it’s not going to be touched by USPS hands until the next day that the post office is open.
This can be tricky. For example, at the Stanford post office, the drop boxes outside the post office have Saturday pickup times, but the ones inside the building do not (the signs inside warn about this).
> For example, at the Stanford post office, the drop boxes outside the post office have Saturday pickup times, but the ones inside the building do not (the signs inside warn about this).
That’s counterintuitive though. I can see why people miss the sign.
not familiar with the specific PO at Stanford, but I'm assuming the "ones outside" are the traditional drive up blue boxes that are also emptied/collected from the outside. I could see having these picked up by a truck on the way to a regional office without having the driver also need keys to collect from a location that is not open at the time of collection.
Someone somewhere probably figured out that it’s more efficient to have five drivers ride in a loop all day than to have each post office drain the boxes inside their postal map.
But it’s weird for a pleb to look at a box directly outside an office and assume that office isn’t responsible for that box. Outside a corner coffee shop, sure, but I can see the post office, it’s right there.
Again, your "right there" is just your assumptions you know the inner workings of the USPS. Maybe there was no Saturday pickup at that location until the outside boxes made it possible. This means no increase in that location's budget for paying people to do this. Now, it is part of the regional location (or similar) while at the same time now being able to offer a convenient Saturday pickup for those that use this location.
Not every location offers the same services. It's part of life. The complaining here is coming across as very privileged whining. Do you wish to speak to a manager?
And you’re ignoring the part where you’re blaming the customer for not reading someone else’s mind.
This is feeling like a work argument where the apologists are trying to block UX of DX improvements due to contempt for the people it’ll help and I am full up at the moment. Argue with yourself, I’m out.
Delivering the mail to a drop box is a task often done under duress. This is the same reason we in software have Five Why’s. Someone sitting calmly outside of the problem will always find a way to blame the victim for not reading the instructions. That doesn’t absolve the builders from their share of the guilt.
In the past this used to be handled explicitly: courts, tax offices, municipal administrations, and patent or trademark offices had special mailboxes whose internal compartment switched every hour. That way, the time of deposit itself was objectively recorded and legally relevant, even outside office hours.
The same kind of mailbox was sometimes used for bid submissions in tenders, to prove whether an offer was submitted before or after the deadline.
Last year I was hit with a failure-to-pay penalty, even though I mailed the check on the deadline. When I spoke to an IRS agent, they claimed that the payment needed to be received, not postmarked, by April 15. Never heard of that before. He was kind enough to remove the penalty because it was a first time offense.
Many of the RTOs described in TFA already have extended hours on April 15 where you can drop it off up to midnight, and it would be post marked as the 15th even though the postmark stamping would be after midnight.
Convenient information to know, given the recent discussion about the timing and location of the postmark on the letter that Epstein sent to another inmate.
No it's not. It's just the Post Office trying to save money by being slower. This quote from the article describes it (note the last sentence in particular):
"Potential Delays: Because most postmarks are applied at processing facilities, the date inscribed may be later than the date the mail piece was first accepted by the USPS. This discrepancy is expected to become more common due to the implementation of the "Regional Transportation Optimization" (RTO) initiative and the adoption of "leg-based" service standards."
It could be argued that if a) there is not reasonable, reliable method of determining and documenting when a voter casts their mail-in ballots, and b) we all agree that there must be a deadline for casting ballots, then mail-in voting is prima facie not a great idea
There was plausible deniability on the part of the voter/sender.
Now there isn’t. Except I doubt that many people will actually know about the change/clarification so they’ll continue to mail ballots and taxes at the last second.
In a sane world, anything mailed “close enough” would be accepted. Or there’d be an explict 5-day grace period.
By admitting that the postmark date is a reflection of processing capability rather than voter action, the USPS has undermined the legal standard used in Pennsylvania and other states to determine the validity of late-arriving ballots. This reinforces the argument that mass mail-in voting relies on a logistical system that the USPS itself admits is not "perfectly reliable" for dating time-sensitive documents.
In states that require a postmark by Election Day to count a ballot received later, the operational reality of postmarking creates a chaotic environment where timely votes could be disqualified, or conversely, creates ambiguity about when a ballot actually entered the system.
It is unreasonable to expect every mail-in voter to stand in line at a post office to get a manual stamp to prove they voted on time. If the standard automated system cannot guarantee an accurate date, as this rule admits, then using that system for critical constitutional functions like voting is inherently flawed.
If the postmark is more than a day after the mail-in deadline, even though it was first received by the local post office before it, it can be claimed there is no evidence it was submitted before the deadline and invalidate the balot.
That was already the case. This "rule" is not any kind of change in process, it's just a formal acknowledgement that the situation you're describing can happen. Why do you think that acknowledgement is a problem?
Right, this is how it has always been, if you wanted to insure a postmark you HAD to go into the post office and ask, otherwise there is are no promises, even if you mail it a week in advance it might not get a postmark.
You're muddying the waters by using the word "received".
The instant in time at which your letter is technically "received" by the USPS, in the sense of them having physical possession, has never mattered for any legal purposes whatsoever. That's because in many cases, there is absolutely no physical proof of exactly what instant in time that event happened.
Electoral rules aren't written based on when the USPS received your ballot, because that's typically unprovable. They're either based on when the ballot was delivered to the election office, or when the ballot was postmarked. The postmarking may happen at some point while the piece of mail is in USPS custody, or it may not happen at all if you don't specifically ask for it.
The rules are based on the postmark date because the postmark date is the only available documentary evidence of the date of mailing.
Again, this is not a change in policy, it's merely documenting the way the mail system has always worked.
> Electoral rules aren't written based on when the USPS received your ballot, because that's typically unprovable
Has anyone challenged their ballot being rejected by producing video showing them putting the ballot in an envelope and putting said envelope in a mailbox?
No, and to do so would be to challenge the law itself since the laws are written with reference to postmark date.
Perhaps ironically, video evidence has been used to invalidate ballots. In 2023, a CT judge invalidated the results of the Democratic primary, finding "ballot stuffing" in that 1,253 absentee ballots were submitted at Bridgeport dropboxes despite surveillance video only showing 420 people using the boxes. A new Democratic primary was ordered. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023%E2%80%9324_Bridgeport,_Co...
Why would something picked up from you box not be considered within the postal system's control? Does your box not get picked up from daily?
Also as a slight bit of victim blaming, why would you not drop something of this importance and time sensitive directly into a more controlled drop off?
> why would you not drop something of this importance and time sensitive directly into a more controlled drop off?
In some places I'm sure there will be ICE deployed to make sure nobody who doesn't look American enough will need to prove they are American before they can vote. In their place I would suggest mailing it early to make sure the vote is counted.
> Why would something picked up from you box not be considered within the postal system's control? Does your box not get picked up from daily?
It does. I live on a rural route and as far as I can tell it doesn't get postmarked until it actually processes through the closest city's PO. They get backed up sometimes, I guess?
> Also as a slight bit of victim blaming, why would you not drop something of this importance and time sensitive directly into a more controlled drop off?
It wasn't anything that important - I think it was either a holiday or birthday card. The only reason I knew at all is because the recipient didn't get it until about 7 days later and told me when it was postmarked.
not sure what the point is. this is possible, clearly as that's what has happened. i'm only asking why with the known situation that something left in your personal box not getting postmarked as expected for whatever reasons would you allow something of this import to be handled that way? you only file taxes once a year, and most people only vote every four years. making arrangements for that infrequent to have a piece of mind something was postmarked as expected doesn't seem too outlandish to me. i even stipulated potential for victim blaming suggesting if you read the context that i was in no way suggesting whatever you want to think is a gotcha
Lots of folks might need to mail early or show up in person until regime change as governance infrastructure is sabotaged or degraded by people who might not otherwise be able to win.
that's moving the goalposts of the comment I replied.
"people who might not otherwise be able to win" would mean that without this rule change, the current admin would not have been able to win. that's clearly not true. all this does, as you suggest, makes it harder for their opposition to use a valid means of voting.
Those people previously benefited from not being in power, so voters forgot how abjectly terrible they were. This was helped by conspiring media egging them on about price inflation, much of which had taken years to set in.
The same number of 55+ voters in the US that was the margin of victor for this election die in a year (~2M, ~5k/day). I admit, I'm unsure if those who voted for this have felt sufficient pain yet to vote better, and the votes of those who don't age out by election deadlines are hard to predict, but election results since the presidential election have been very favorable. NYC and Seattle have both elected democratic socialist mayors recently. Certainly, I have no doubt deep red parts of the country will continue to vote for this until death, but those parts of the country also have lower life expectency.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/behind-trump... ("Most adults who were eligible to vote in 2020 – but declined to do so – stayed home again in 2024. But among those who did turn out, Trump had the edge. Among all 2020 nonvoters (including those who were too young and ineligible to vote in 2020), 14% supported Trump in 2024 while 12% supported Harris.")
Observing demographic systems ("demographics are destiny") and its context within a political and governance system, and then building a thesis from those observations is simply academic. Attempting to predict the future isn't a fantasy (death or otherwise) imho, but I do enjoy trying to predict the future from observations and data. But, from your comment "A small price to pay for election integrity," (when elections were already high integrity) I can already deduce your mental model and that it is not grounded in facts or data.
> "We're going to start with an executive order that's being written right now by the best lawyers in the country to end mail-in ballots because they're corrupt," Trump said later Monday, during a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House. "And it's time that the Republicans get tough and stop it because the Democrats want it. It's the only way they can get elected."
> Although Trump himself urged his supporters to vote using mail ballots prior to the 2024 election, Democrats have been significantly more likely to vote using mail-in ballots, compared to Republicans, since the 2020 election. That gap has only gotten wider in recent elections as GOP-led states have passed more restrictions on this method of voting.
> But legal experts say Trump does not have the legal authority to tell states how to run their elections.
As the saying goes, "Every accusation is a confession."
DJT is fixated on anything where he can put his thumb on the scale. this is no different than demanding states gerrymander their maps in his favor. also, clearly DJT won, so not really sure what the argument here is. the original comment said unable to win. QED or some such
Not sure why you're being downvoted. This is exactly what it is. Now mail-in ballots that previously had to be dropped in the box by election day have to be dropped off days in advance.
The postmark isn't the stamp (piece of paper). It's the ink seal that's stamped over the stamp with the date on it. It doesn't matter how you pay for the piece of mail; it now potentially get postmarked at a later date than previously.
Request a Manual Postmark: Customers may present a mail piece at a retail counter and request a "manual (local) postmark". This postmark is applied at the time of acceptance, so the date aligns with the date the USPS took possession.
I should have said manual postmark but it’s what I implied. They’re stamping or postmarking it with a date manually.
Every voting cycle for at least the last 4 you have seen a certain class of citizen not understand why the early numbers come in from small, rural precincts who can finish early and then the densest areas come in later and vote for other people than their guy. I’m sure that this is being fed by people whose livelihood depends on misunderstanding the problem, but it’s something people should be taught in school and the civics curriculum went away sometime around No Child Left Behind. So this has been going on at least since GW Bush, and some of this bullshit tracks all the way back to Reagan.
Downvoted for the reason that I’ve not seen any credible evidence of massive election fraud, in the USA, since the suggestion of it in 2020. If you can point me to something credible, that proves even 1,000s of votes in a single district were impacted, (thereby stealing an election via mail fraud) I’ll remove my downvote.
The title of this summary blog post is grossly misleading. (To the point where I suspect it of being an AI hallucination, thanks to its use of ChatGPT's distinctive formatting style of bulleted list with Capitalized Colon-Delimited Headers:.)
As the linked PDF explains, this is not a change to the postmark date system. It's an acknowledgement that the date on the postmark may not be the date that you dropped the letter into a (possibly unattended) mailbox. This has always been true, because the stamping is not done until USPS actually processes the letter. USPS has no knowledge of when the letter physically "entered USPS custody" by being dropped in the mailbox, so the postmark has never accurately reflected that instant.
This rule does not change when postmarks are applied, and it doesn't change how any other parties make decisions based on postmarks. It merely documents the postmarking process that has existed basically forever.
There is a change, not directly to postmarking but the larger collection process which will affect postmarking.
> This discrepancy is expected to become more common due to the implementation of the "Regional Transportation Optimization" (RTO) initiative and the adoption of "leg-based" service standards.
> This change in USPS processes will have a potentially significant impact on tax filings.
Basically, a large chunk of mailboxes across the country will no longer have evening collection, so unless you drop off your mail very early in the morning it will be processed and postmarked at minimum 1+ day later.
Agreed. I was looking for an actual "change" here. It's just a statement to clarify the existing processing rules. Nothing new here.
Title should be "USPS adds a line to its operating manual clarifying what a postmark is."
And reading between the lines USPS is telling you (and everyone else, including other government agencies) that the postmark is for their internal business use and you should not try to derive any meaning from it.
That kindof makes sense to me: If I drop something into a post office’s mail box (outside or inside) after the day’s last pickup, even if the mail is inside the post office, it’s not going to be touched by USPS hands until the next day that the post office is open.
This can be tricky. For example, at the Stanford post office, the drop boxes outside the post office have Saturday pickup times, but the ones inside the building do not (the signs inside warn about this).
> For example, at the Stanford post office, the drop boxes outside the post office have Saturday pickup times, but the ones inside the building do not (the signs inside warn about this).
That’s counterintuitive though. I can see why people miss the sign.
not familiar with the specific PO at Stanford, but I'm assuming the "ones outside" are the traditional drive up blue boxes that are also emptied/collected from the outside. I could see having these picked up by a truck on the way to a regional office without having the driver also need keys to collect from a location that is not open at the time of collection.
Someone somewhere probably figured out that it’s more efficient to have five drivers ride in a loop all day than to have each post office drain the boxes inside their postal map.
But it’s weird for a pleb to look at a box directly outside an office and assume that office isn’t responsible for that box. Outside a corner coffee shop, sure, but I can see the post office, it’s right there.
Again, your "right there" is just your assumptions you know the inner workings of the USPS. Maybe there was no Saturday pickup at that location until the outside boxes made it possible. This means no increase in that location's budget for paying people to do this. Now, it is part of the regional location (or similar) while at the same time now being able to offer a convenient Saturday pickup for those that use this location.
Not every location offers the same services. It's part of life. The complaining here is coming across as very privileged whining. Do you wish to speak to a manager?
And you’re ignoring the part where you’re blaming the customer for not reading someone else’s mind.
This is feeling like a work argument where the apologists are trying to block UX of DX improvements due to contempt for the people it’ll help and I am full up at the moment. Argue with yourself, I’m out.
If I remember correctly, the sign is located above the sign that lists the pickup hours for the inside drop box.
What's the reason for this? Is the post office locked up on Saturday?
I'd expect 2 drop boxes near the same location would naturally be picked up at the same time.
Delivering the mail to a drop box is a task often done under duress. This is the same reason we in software have Five Why’s. Someone sitting calmly outside of the problem will always find a way to blame the victim for not reading the instructions. That doesn’t absolve the builders from their share of the guilt.
In the past this used to be handled explicitly: courts, tax offices, municipal administrations, and patent or trademark offices had special mailboxes whose internal compartment switched every hour. That way, the time of deposit itself was objectively recorded and legally relevant, even outside office hours.
The same kind of mailbox was sometimes used for bid submissions in tenders, to prove whether an offer was submitted before or after the deadline.
A direct attack on me filing my taxes literally the last minute.
Last year I was hit with a failure-to-pay penalty, even though I mailed the check on the deadline. When I spoke to an IRS agent, they claimed that the payment needed to be received, not postmarked, by April 15. Never heard of that before. He was kind enough to remove the penalty because it was a first time offense.
Since then, I pay electronically. Never again.
from the IRS (https://www.irs.gov/filing/individuals/when-to-file)
Your return is considered filed on time if your envelope is properly addressed, postmarked and deposited in the mail by the due date.
The IRS agent did not know the law (unlikely) or was just messing with you (likely)
You can also use specific DHL, FedEx, and UPS services: https://www.irs.gov/filing/private-delivery-services-pds
Many of the RTOs described in TFA already have extended hours on April 15 where you can drop it off up to midnight, and it would be post marked as the 15th even though the postmark stamping would be after midnight.
E-file. Pay online.
I don't believe that there is a way to do that without third-party software?
What about Free File Fillable Forms?
Not everyone qualifies. Thanks to tax software company lobbying.
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/free_file_fillable_forms_use... says "Free File Fillable Forms has no age, income or residency restrictions".
That's also third party (run by "Free File Alliance, LLC").
Convenient information to know, given the recent discussion about the timing and location of the postmark on the letter that Epstein sent to another inmate.
A direct attack on mail-in voting.
No it's not. It's just the Post Office trying to save money by being slower. This quote from the article describes it (note the last sentence in particular):
"Potential Delays: Because most postmarks are applied at processing facilities, the date inscribed may be later than the date the mail piece was first accepted by the USPS. This discrepancy is expected to become more common due to the implementation of the "Regional Transportation Optimization" (RTO) initiative and the adoption of "leg-based" service standards."
This seems to only clarify that mail might have been in possession by USPS _before_ the postmark date. I don't see how that affects mail in voting.
Delaying the post-mark, or not applying one at all, gives anti-mail ballot groups more leverage in their lawsuits.
It could be argued that if a) there is not reasonable, reliable method of determining and documenting when a voter casts their mail-in ballots, and b) we all agree that there must be a deadline for casting ballots, then mail-in voting is prima facie not a great idea
Didn't it already?
There was plausible deniability on the part of the voter/sender.
Now there isn’t. Except I doubt that many people will actually know about the change/clarification so they’ll continue to mail ballots and taxes at the last second.
In a sane world, anything mailed “close enough” would be accepted. Or there’d be an explict 5-day grace period.
By admitting that the postmark date is a reflection of processing capability rather than voter action, the USPS has undermined the legal standard used in Pennsylvania and other states to determine the validity of late-arriving ballots. This reinforces the argument that mass mail-in voting relies on a logistical system that the USPS itself admits is not "perfectly reliable" for dating time-sensitive documents.
In states that require a postmark by Election Day to count a ballot received later, the operational reality of postmarking creates a chaotic environment where timely votes could be disqualified, or conversely, creates ambiguity about when a ballot actually entered the system.
It is unreasonable to expect every mail-in voter to stand in line at a post office to get a manual stamp to prove they voted on time. If the standard automated system cannot guarantee an accurate date, as this rule admits, then using that system for critical constitutional functions like voting is inherently flawed.
If the postmark is more than a day after the mail-in deadline, even though it was first received by the local post office before it, it can be claimed there is no evidence it was submitted before the deadline and invalidate the balot.
That was already the case. This "rule" is not any kind of change in process, it's just a formal acknowledgement that the situation you're describing can happen. Why do you think that acknowledgement is a problem?
Right, this is how it has always been, if you wanted to insure a postmark you HAD to go into the post office and ask, otherwise there is are no promises, even if you mail it a week in advance it might not get a postmark.
Would a ballot received before the deadline, but postmarked a day later, still be counted? If not, why not, if it was received before the deadline?
You're muddying the waters by using the word "received".
The instant in time at which your letter is technically "received" by the USPS, in the sense of them having physical possession, has never mattered for any legal purposes whatsoever. That's because in many cases, there is absolutely no physical proof of exactly what instant in time that event happened.
Electoral rules aren't written based on when the USPS received your ballot, because that's typically unprovable. They're either based on when the ballot was delivered to the election office, or when the ballot was postmarked. The postmarking may happen at some point while the piece of mail is in USPS custody, or it may not happen at all if you don't specifically ask for it.
The rules are based on the postmark date because the postmark date is the only available documentary evidence of the date of mailing.
Again, this is not a change in policy, it's merely documenting the way the mail system has always worked.
> Electoral rules aren't written based on when the USPS received your ballot, because that's typically unprovable
Has anyone challenged their ballot being rejected by producing video showing them putting the ballot in an envelope and putting said envelope in a mailbox?
No, and to do so would be to challenge the law itself since the laws are written with reference to postmark date.
Perhaps ironically, video evidence has been used to invalidate ballots. In 2023, a CT judge invalidated the results of the Democratic primary, finding "ballot stuffing" in that 1,253 absentee ballots were submitted at Bridgeport dropboxes despite surveillance video only showing 420 people using the boxes. A new Democratic primary was ordered. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023%E2%80%9324_Bridgeport,_Co...
Howso? As far as I could tell, this doesn't actually change anything at all, but more codifies what's already happening.
I've had mail collected from my box that wasn't marked until two days later, this feels like it's just attempting to explain why.
But if I missed something more nefarious I'm interested to hear.
> I've had mail collected from my box that wasn't marked until two days later, this feels like it's just attempting to explain why.
When exactly it was collected is the point - was it on the same day you mailed it or the next?
In the case I remember (see other comment), marked 2 days after it was actually picked up. I always put mail out at night, so next morning + 2.
That was just one I happened to catch because it arrived late, for all I know it happens with every piece of mail.
Why would something picked up from you box not be considered within the postal system's control? Does your box not get picked up from daily?
Also as a slight bit of victim blaming, why would you not drop something of this importance and time sensitive directly into a more controlled drop off?
> why would you not drop something of this importance and time sensitive directly into a more controlled drop off?
In some places I'm sure there will be ICE deployed to make sure nobody who doesn't look American enough will need to prove they are American before they can vote. In their place I would suggest mailing it early to make sure the vote is counted.
> Why would something picked up from you box not be considered within the postal system's control? Does your box not get picked up from daily?
It does. I live on a rural route and as far as I can tell it doesn't get postmarked until it actually processes through the closest city's PO. They get backed up sometimes, I guess?
> Also as a slight bit of victim blaming, why would you not drop something of this importance and time sensitive directly into a more controlled drop off?
It wasn't anything that important - I think it was either a holiday or birthday card. The only reason I knew at all is because the recipient didn't get it until about 7 days later and told me when it was postmarked.
Why not make it as easy and convenient as possible to let people vote?
not sure what the point is. this is possible, clearly as that's what has happened. i'm only asking why with the known situation that something left in your personal box not getting postmarked as expected for whatever reasons would you allow something of this import to be handled that way? you only file taxes once a year, and most people only vote every four years. making arrangements for that infrequent to have a piece of mind something was postmarked as expected doesn't seem too outlandish to me. i even stipulated potential for victim blaming suggesting if you read the context that i was in no way suggesting whatever you want to think is a gotcha
Lots of folks might need to mail early or show up in person until regime change as governance infrastructure is sabotaged or degraded by people who might not otherwise be able to win.
i think your logic is flawed. these people were clearly able to win without these changes
Why wouldn't they want to increase their likelihood of winning in the future?
that's moving the goalposts of the comment I replied.
"people who might not otherwise be able to win" would mean that without this rule change, the current admin would not have been able to win. that's clearly not true. all this does, as you suggest, makes it harder for their opposition to use a valid means of voting.
Those people previously benefited from not being in power, so voters forgot how abjectly terrible they were. This was helped by conspiring media egging them on about price inflation, much of which had taken years to set in.
The same number of 55+ voters in the US that was the margin of victor for this election die in a year (~2M, ~5k/day). I admit, I'm unsure if those who voted for this have felt sufficient pain yet to vote better, and the votes of those who don't age out by election deadlines are hard to predict, but election results since the presidential election have been very favorable. NYC and Seattle have both elected democratic socialist mayors recently. Certainly, I have no doubt deep red parts of the country will continue to vote for this until death, but those parts of the country also have lower life expectency.
https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1puwkpj/democrats...
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/behind-trump... ("Most adults who were eligible to vote in 2020 – but declined to do so – stayed home again in 2024. But among those who did turn out, Trump had the edge. Among all 2020 nonvoters (including those who were too young and ineligible to vote in 2020), 14% supported Trump in 2024 while 12% supported Harris.")
.
Observing demographic systems ("demographics are destiny") and its context within a political and governance system, and then building a thesis from those observations is simply academic. Attempting to predict the future isn't a fantasy (death or otherwise) imho, but I do enjoy trying to predict the future from observations and data. But, from your comment "A small price to pay for election integrity," (when elections were already high integrity) I can already deduce your mental model and that it is not grounded in facts or data.
Trump wants to stop states from voting by mail and using voting machines - https://www.npr.org/2025/08/18/nx-s1-5506210/trump-mail-in-b... - August 19th, 2025
> "We're going to start with an executive order that's being written right now by the best lawyers in the country to end mail-in ballots because they're corrupt," Trump said later Monday, during a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House. "And it's time that the Republicans get tough and stop it because the Democrats want it. It's the only way they can get elected."
> Although Trump himself urged his supporters to vote using mail ballots prior to the 2024 election, Democrats have been significantly more likely to vote using mail-in ballots, compared to Republicans, since the 2020 election. That gap has only gotten wider in recent elections as GOP-led states have passed more restrictions on this method of voting.
> But legal experts say Trump does not have the legal authority to tell states how to run their elections.
As the saying goes, "Every accusation is a confession."
ok but DT himself seems pretty fixated on them...
DJT is fixated on anything where he can put his thumb on the scale. this is no different than demanding states gerrymander their maps in his favor. also, clearly DJT won, so not really sure what the argument here is. the original comment said unable to win. QED or some such
Not sure why you're being downvoted. This is exactly what it is. Now mail-in ballots that previously had to be dropped in the box by election day have to be dropped off days in advance.
Or you get a manual stamp.
The postmark isn't the stamp (piece of paper). It's the ink seal that's stamped over the stamp with the date on it. It doesn't matter how you pay for the piece of mail; it now potentially get postmarked at a later date than previously.
From the article:
Request a Manual Postmark: Customers may present a mail piece at a retail counter and request a "manual (local) postmark". This postmark is applied at the time of acceptance, so the date aligns with the date the USPS took possession.
I should have said manual postmark but it’s what I implied. They’re stamping or postmarking it with a date manually.
Every voting cycle for at least the last 4 you have seen a certain class of citizen not understand why the early numbers come in from small, rural precincts who can finish early and then the densest areas come in later and vote for other people than their guy. I’m sure that this is being fed by people whose livelihood depends on misunderstanding the problem, but it’s something people should be taught in school and the civics curriculum went away sometime around No Child Left Behind. So this has been going on at least since GW Bush, and some of this bullshit tracks all the way back to Reagan.
Civics is still taught in schools
Ask Gen X parents if they really believe that. Every one I’ve heard from complains about the quality and quantity.
.
Downvoted for the reason that I’ve not seen any credible evidence of massive election fraud, in the USA, since the suggestion of it in 2020. If you can point me to something credible, that proves even 1,000s of votes in a single district were impacted, (thereby stealing an election via mail fraud) I’ll remove my downvote.