Your inability to think through a situation is surprising.Bob78164 wrote:The difference between electioneering at the polling place and electioneering at the voter's home is that at home, the voter can tell the candidate's surrogate to just go away. But if a voter is willing to allow someone else tell him or her how to vote, that's the voter's right.
Situation 1: Electioneering at a polling place.
Candidates or operatives ask voters for support at the entrance to the polling place. At the polling place are other voters, poll workers, and others. It is a public place. Also, when the voter goes into the voting booth, the vote cast is unseen and thus a private transaction.
Situation 2: Electioneering at a person's place of residence
Voter may or may not be alone, but it is not a public place. Candidate or operatives ask voter for support and to vote a certain way. The amount of coercion is unseen by the public and can be "an offer the voter can't refuse". The ballot is completed not in a private booth beyond the eyes of the candidate or operative (vote harvester) so the "terms of the offer" are certainly on the mind of the voter.
This is why I am concerned with vote "harvesting".
Also, votes harvested from voters may or may not be from voters who are registered but incapacitated mentally. My mother in law would be a prime example of this. She is a registered voter but has dementia and can not make her own decisions. She did not vote in the 2018 election (our choice) though we could have "harvested" her vote.