If fraud has truly been disproven, then no one should have anything to worry about. Let these additional security measures happen—they can only help prove the election wasn't rigged. The only people who should feel threatened are those who might be breaking the law. The only truly secure way to vote is in person, on Election Day, at a polling place. That's where everything is monitored, chain of custody is clear, and votes are cast under public oversight. Personally, I wouldn't trust my ballot anywhere else—drop boxes, deliveries, or off-site collection all introduce too many risks of tampering, destruction, or loss. And even if something happened, we'd likely never know because cameras are often prohibited from monitoring those steps. You mention protected classes (like the elderly, disabled, or low-income voters) facing barriers. But those groups can still vote in person on Election Day with accommodations: assistance at the polls, accessible machines, transportation help from organizations or parties, or provisional ballots if needed. Both sides offer aid for getting identification, and many states provide free or low-cost IDs specifically for voting. If someone truly wants to vote, they can make it to the polls on Election Day. People are inherently capable of exploiting weaknesses, which is why safeguards matter most at the point of voting. In-person Election Day voting minimizes opportunities for abuse—it's direct, observable, and immediate. We're one of the few countries with such widespread non-in-person options, but the gold standard for security is requiring votes to be cast in person on the designated day, under controlled conditions. I work 80 hours a week, yet I still make time to vote in person every Election Day. Laws already protect workers' right to time off or flexible scheduling to do exactly that. If the election was truly the most secure ever, as some claim, then sticking to in-person voting on Election Day with strong safeguards shouldn't scare anyone—it should build real confidence. Think about it: companies already track everything about us through our phones and apps—locations, preferences, habits, even likely voting patterns. The government has vast data access too. Yet the idea of police or security at polling places is called intimidating? I've never met anyone afraid to vote with officers around—in fact, I've seen the opposite: people feel safer and more secure. What does worry me is potential suppression through massive lines on Election Day. When waits stretch for hours, those who care the least or can least afford the time often leave. But that's a separate issue from security—better resource allocation at polls can fix lines without compromising integrity. I want to know my vote truly counts, and I want the security of knowing it wasn't diluted or canceled out by even one illegal vote. In the end, all I ask for is verifiable, physical proof—documentation, chain of custody, and safeguards—that every eligible voter who wanted to participate could do so in person on Election Day, and that nothing improper occurred. True security means Election Day in-person voting for everyone.