>The president has made it clear that despite voting by mail himself multiple times, he does not support wide expansion of the practice.

If we take off our hate-goggles here, this really isn't the gotchya that journalists want you to think it is. One can be qualified to legally vote by mail and do so while also claiming that overall the system is broken.

Did you read the very next paragraph in the article after what I quoted? The claims were based on bogus evidence.

Not everyone who disagrees with you has "hate" in them.

I fail to see what would justify one able-bodied individual being able to vote by mail and others not. If he believes that the system unjustly qualifies him to do so, then shouldn't he, out of principle, not exploit it? Shouldn't the leader of a country exemplify their principles?