I recall that the individual states are in charge of designing and printing their own ballots. That recollection comes from random reports of candidates’ names or party affiliation being left off newly printed ballots.
If that’s correct, it seems foolish for a state to build in a number of anti-fraud security measures if you plan to commit fraud. Wouldn’t they be more likely to water down or remove as many security features as possible? They’ve always known they couldn’t win without fraud, so why create a ballot that will make it easy to prove you committed fraud? I think I’m missing something here.
Okay -I had not heard that about the individual states being responsible for designing and printing. Something I read indicated that the ballots/ballot paper forms came from DHS.
While that may well be the case, where does the paper ballots are printed on come from? Would China or derps now making ballots have access to that same paper? The paper would be the thing that had a watermark but likely one not easily seen without pre knowledge.
Not if you’re a DEM state and the RATs can simply give the info to their minions to duplicate; take Gavin Newsom in CA advisory on particulars of the ballot advisory shown above - if you give your folks on the side the same info ahead of time they can produce what for all other purposes appear to be valid “ballots” then they can claim they’re legit.
1. Ballots prepared through official process but held & distributed to the fraud ops.
2. Ballots prepared on the side via China assist etc. - these might well have been prepared using all (later) known data i.e. particulars of watermarks etc.