[Miami Rebel]

The lawsuit filing is linked at the bottom of the article.

What an embarrassment! If Texas can't get it right, what state can? And I wonder how safe Chairman Rinaldi's gig is.

[isthisnickcool]

From a technology standpoint solving the problem is simple as is matching the data the way they did.

[p. henry]

Vote by mail is the ultimate challenge to the secrecy of the ballot box.

[GMThrust]

So we’re supposed to believe that they were able to obtain this information, but don’t tell us how-just generalizations. We have to take their word for it? If they can obtain this data, then doesn’t it follow that they can forge it or manipulate it? With no proof, I think they are just trying to do anything to turn Teas another color.

[thinden]

et tu, texass?

[Yo-Yo]

Texans who vote by mail receive a consecutively-numbered paper ballot that preserves that secrecy. However, many Texans who vote in person, including Plaintiffs, have no choice but to use paper ballots that lack consecutive numbers. Instead, the paper ballots Plaintiffs have been required to utilize at the polls contain computer-generated randomly assigned unique identifier “ballot tracking” numbers, which do not comply with Texas law and, importantly, do not preserve the secrecy of Plaintiffs’ ballots, as described more fully herein. As a result, Plaintiffs are relegated to a class of in-person voters whose votes are neither assured secrecy nor protected from being undermined, diluted and debased by lawlessness and fraud.

This is exactly opposite of how it should be. If you choose to vote by mail, then you should lose your right to a secret ballot so that if fraud is discovered with mail-in ballots, then those ballot votes can be found and removed from the final tally.

If you vote in person, then you have already been vetted by the poll workers, and your vote should be secret.

[RitaOK]

I’ll wait for an evidentiary response to this exercised convolution of allegations.

Mediaiate is no friend to conservative Americans rising.

Also, there was a slight taint that the chaos, created by this pack of complaintants, may reveal DEI proponents. We’ll see how real this is.

[DesertRhino]

If you can identify who cast a ballot you don’t have a secret ballot.

[DesertRhino]

If you don’t have what amounts to an air gap between the voter, and the ballot waiting to be counted, you do not have a secret ballot.

[Excellence]

Rinaldi is retiring. There will be an election at the convention which is, I believe, the first week of June. Probably Abraham George will be elected.
This whole thing it’s worrisome. Texas politics is incredibly acrimonious.

[Macoozie]

show up and vote.
In person.

It’s a simple count of validly cast votes.
Could have any middle school group do the count.

Any other process is open to corruption.

[zeugma]

I’m in Texas, and IIRC, when I have voted in the past, the election worker would normally have 3 or 4 printed ballots that you’d pick from. They’d have no idea which one an individual chose unless they had cameras and a lot of prep-work. That’s how it should be done. Each printed ballot is trackable as having been used that day, in that location, but not identifiable as to the person who used it. I suppose if you were the only person there voting, and you chose yours, marked it, and put it into the counter, they could track it through time-stamps and such, but I can’t recall actually being in that situtation, there were always 6-10 people marking their ballots at once.