US Politics Thread 2021-24

[ET2SN]

Originally Posted by mapuc

'You can't rely on our sitting government and our Vice President-She is the one who shall approve the result of the election and if Trump wins she will refuse to acknowledge this result.'

I doubt this would happen, but wouldn't it be a p##ser if it did?

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by ET2SN

I doubt this would happen, but wouldn't it be a p##ser if it did?

Of course it's not going to happen-If Trump win the election she will as sitting VP acknowledge the result.

I don't have the imagination to imagine what would happen if she reject the outcome of the election(if Trump should win).

Markus

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by u crank

[...] In your country and mine some kind of proof is required to vote. Are you against that? If not then why is it unreasonable to ask for that in all US states? What possible reason could there be for not requiring proof of citizenship?

I was relating my post to the conspiracy theory that all political sides in the US try to steal votes and do that all the time. While it seems only Trump stated that votes were "stolen" just because he did not become president last time.

No i am not against proving your identity when voting, indeed me/myself/I think it should be mandatory to make sure, just how is the question.
On the other hand it seems elections and voting (including counting the votes) is
a) already safe in the US
b) most americans do not want a voter ID because it could hamper their freedom, like the possibility to find out for companies (like "Cambridge Analytica" said to be connected to the Trump win and brexit) who voted for what, and change the outcome. And this is indeed a reason for concern
c) it is not my right to lecture americans what to do (while I certainly would like lol)

Last not least a lot of conspiracy theories be it political or economical or whatever are created by Russia, China, you name it, trying to intervene and posting all kind of bullsh!t by bots and those hacker teams, to make other nations' people insecure and divide them.
We should be better than falling for this.
While we should keep an eye on abuse, our systems are not that bad.

[Dargo]

Do not understand why you will not use an ID to vote but gladly drive in a car where an ID is mandatory, where is your freedom then.

[Jeff-Groves]

Actually, an ID to drive is only needed if you get pulled over.

Then it has to be a Drivers License! You know there's lot's of Drivers with NO license out there now.

[Dargo]

Originally Posted by Jeff-Groves

Actually, an ID to drive is only needed if you get pulled over.

Then it has to be a Drivers License! You know there's lot's of Drivers with NO license out there now.

Driver's Licence is an ID and no it is needed if you are the driver, you really think an insurance company will pay your made damage in case of an accident.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Catfish

No i am not against proving your identity when voting, indeed me/myself/I think it should be mandatory to make sure, just how is the question.

Well I am glad to hear you say that. Personally I don't think there is voter fraud on a scale that would tip an election. But that is not the point. If I am a citizen I do not want non citizens, especially those who are here illegally partaking in that process. They haven't earned that right. I don't think that is too much to ask. One thing I would bet on though is this. If Democrats thought for even a second that illegals were voting Republican you would have voter ID laws in every blue state.

[August]

The way the Dems are using mail in early voting is not by creating fictitious voters, although I'm sure some of that goes on like the infamous Dem tactic of getting the dead to vote.

What I believe really makes a difference is vote harvesting.

It's been noted in many previous elections that apparent enthusiasm on the campaign trail doesn't always equal a voter actually showing up at the polls on election day to cast a vote for the chosen candidate. Younger voters are especially prone to this, being easily distracted and undisciplined enough to just blow off all that work that used to be required to actually go and vote ("standing in line with squares, what a drag man"). Others are too busy or too drunk or too stoned, too crazy, or just plain too lazy to put in all that time and effort. It's a sizable percentage.

Mail in voting on the other hand eliminates all of that and allows all those lost votes to be harvested with complete efficiency.

The way vote harvesting works is the party sends out an army of operatives armed with ballots or ballot applications depending on the state. They canvas areas that they control, in the Dems case urban areas, college campus', community centers, homeless shelters, drug rehabs, housing projects, just about anywhere they can get signatures, maybe even from people who don't know or care what they are being asked to do.

Basically their targets just need to supply a name, an address (whether or not they actually live there) and a signature, which in most dem states cannot by law be validated, and the operative takes care of the rest, making sure that all of the ballots he's collected get dropped off at the polls or, in dem states, at unattended ballot drop off points in the dead of night.

"Handling the paperwork" like that is of course illegal but also extremely difficult to prove and even more difficult to prevent those ill gotten votes once submitted from being counted in the election. You might be able to identify some number of invalid ballots after the fact but since voting is secret you cannot say how many voted for one candidate or the other therefore they cannot be deducted from the vote totals.

Harvesting can and I believe has been enough to tip recent elections in certain states. Pennsylvania and Illinois most likely. The only possible response, short of somehow returning most voting to in-person vote on a paper ballot cast at a monitored polling place, is for the Repubes to play the same harvesting game as well or better than the Dems are doing. Now there are a lot more GoP early voters this cycle than before so maybe they are finally waking up but I'm not so sure it isn't just a case of getting voters who would have shown up at the polls on election day anyways to do it early or by mail. Plus one, minus one does not equal two.

[mapuc]

This translated article from the Danish tv-channel tv2 made me sad-Our politicians in EU should know better than sticking their nose into other countries business such as the American election

European green parties have united in a joint call to get Jill Stein, the presidential candidate for the US. Green Party, to abandon presidential dreams and support Kamala Harris.

- It is clear that Kamala Harris is the only one who can block Donald Trump and his anti-democratic, authoritarian policies from reaching the White House, reads, among other things, the statement, which has been shared with the American media Politico before publication.

Jill Stein is on the ballot in almost every US state and is between 1.1% and 1.4% in polls, which could cost Kamala Harris crucial votes.

Among the green parties in Europe that have signed the declaration is also the Danish SF.

Markus

[Jeff-Groves]

Originally Posted by Dargo

Driver's Licence is an ID and no it is needed if you are the driver, you really think an insurance company will pay your made damage in case of an accident.

You really think someone without a license doesn't drive anyway?
Hell. I went 10 YEARS without a drivers license! Didn't stop me from driving.
Sure I paid a few fines for getting caught but I just kept on driving!

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Jeff-Groves

You really think someone without a license doesn't drive anyway?
Hell. I went 10 YEARS without a drivers license! Didn't stop me from driving.
Sure I paid a few fines for getting caught but I just kept on driving!

[Catfish]

^ I guess even this fellow Markus had a driver's licence

Regarding US law I just looked it up: Yes you need a driver's licence. It is an offense in all US states to drive without one.

" [...] A driver license isn’t about taxation and limiting travel; it’s a verification that the holder has at least a minimal understanding of the shared rules that keep us safe on the roads.

Freedom to travel and driver license requirements are really two distinct concepts that the anti-license folks have conflated.

The no-license-needed crowd will try to convince you that all you need during a traffic stop is a clearly articulated explanation to convince the police officer that all his legal training was wrong, that he’s really just a pawn of a corrupt taxation scheme, and that it’s in his best interest to just let you go.

If you try that approach, good luck with that. A strong belief in an incorrect understanding of the law won’t help in court if the entire judicial system disagrees with you."

https://www.bellinghamherald.com/new...226013995.html

Being a bit of rebellious myself, I say this is a shame

[August]

A drivers license was created to ensure a motorist is qualified to operate the vehicle. The license card, just like any other license, membership or other ID card, is created to be a holders proof of that qualification to show to those who need to know that it exists.

Now it has become much more than that, including a general internal passport to travel on public transportation, a permission slip to purchase things and what you show when the authorities demand that you "show us your papers!".

Same thing with social security numbers. They were originally intended to be like a bank account number, semi private and used only for purposes of administering the ss system.

It has now become a general person numbering system and is used for everything from credit card applications to gym memberships to a soldiers serial number, as in "only give your name, rank, Social Security number, and date of birth to the enemy if captured". Uses that had nothing to do with the social security system and which it was specifically promised not to be used for when the system was first introduced.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Great job Dominion. Another programming problem nationwide. One would think they would get their crap together after the last election. Nope, to busy sueing anyone they can.

Oh, wow...such pearl clutching...

First of all, the problem is definitely not nationwide; so far, only the State of Michigan has raised the issue, and, even then, it only affects some of the counties in the state; the problem arise because Michigan is one of only a handful of states that permit "straight party" (aka "straight ticket") voting which allows a voter to just check a single party selection and all the candidates on the ballot from that party will be marked as voted for on the voter's ballot; for example, if you want to "straight party vote for the GOP, you make one, single selection for that party and any GOP candidates appearing on the ballot will be marked with your vote automatically; the problem in Michigan is some of the Dominion machines are not set up to allow a voter to change a single vote for a single candidate to one outside of their "straight Party" selection(s), meaning, if you voted "straight party" for the GOP but felt that a GOP candidate on the ballot was not suitable and wanted to change your vote, the Dominion machine wasn't allowing the change; in Michigan, a voter who tries to vote "straight party" and changes his mind on single candidate(s) will have to void his "straight party" selection and vote for each office individually, as is the normal practice in almost all elections; the flaw is not really Dominion's fault but, rather, a situation caused by a quirk in Michigan's electoral process; some voters may be inconvenienced by not being able to fully use "straight party" voting, but their votes will be accepted and tallied when they vote the 'normal' way; remember, the only people who will be inconvenienced are those who want to vote "straight party" but, for some reason, do not wish to vote for their party's candidate in particular single races...


Michigan Warns of Issue With Some Dominion Voting Machines --

https://www.newsweek.com/michigan-wa...chines-1977909


I personally think the so-called "straight party/ticket" concept is a throwback to the days of party machine politics and political bosses; it is also the lazy person's means of voting and bespeaks of a diminished involvement in the political process; if your not going to make the effort to even ask questions about the candidates who appear on your ballot, maybe its just as well you don't even bother to vote...

So, no nationwide problem, no voters being disenfranchised, no fraud involved, no rigging, just business as usual with a little tiny hiccup...


You can unclutch your pearls now...




<O>

[vienna]

Originally Posted by August

The way the Dems are using mail in early voting is not by creating fictitious voters, although I'm sure some of that goes on like the infamous Dem tactic of getting the dead to vote.

What I believe really makes a difference is vote harvesting.

It's been noted in many previous elections that apparent enthusiasm on the campaign trail doesn't always equal a voter actually showing up at the polls on election day to cast a vote for the chosen candidate. Younger voters are especially prone to this, being easily distracted and undisciplined enough to just blow off all that work that used to be required to actually go and vote ("standing in line with squares, what a drag man"). Others are too busy or too drunk or too stoned, too crazy, or just plain too lazy to put in all that time and effort. It's a sizable percentage.

Mail in voting on the other hand eliminates all of that and allows all those lost votes to be harvested with complete efficiency.

The way vote harvesting works is the party sends out an army of operatives armed with ballots or ballot applications depending on the state. They canvas areas that they control, in the Dems case urban areas, college campus', community centers, homeless shelters, drug rehabs, housing projects, just about anywhere they can get signatures, maybe even from people who don't know or care what they are being asked to do.

Basically their targets just need to supply a name, an address (whether or not they actually live there) and a signature, which in most dem states cannot by law be validated, and the operative takes care of the rest, making sure that all of the ballots he's collected get dropped off at the polls or, in dem states, at unattended ballot drop off points in the dead of night.

"Handling the paperwork" like that is of course illegal but also extremely difficult to prove and even more difficult to prevent those ill gotten votes once submitted from being counted in the election. You might be able to identify some number of invalid ballots after the fact but since voting is secret you cannot say how many voted for one candidate or the other therefore they cannot be deducted from the vote totals.

Harvesting can and I believe has been enough to tip recent elections in certain states. Pennsylvania and Illinois most likely. The only possible response, short of somehow returning most voting to in-person vote on a paper ballot cast at a monitored polling place, is for the Repubes to play the same harvesting game as well or better than the Dems are doing. Now there are a lot more GoP early voters this cycle than before so maybe they are finally waking up but I'm not so sure it isn't just a case of getting voters who would have shown up at the polls on election day anyways to do it early or by mail. Plus one, minus one does not equal two.

The counter to the above about 'ballot harvesting' is simply it is a means available to all parties; do the DEMs use it to a large extent? Yes, they do.; are the GOP denied the same access to the practice? No, they are not.; for some situations, ballot harvesting has been useful to those seeking to ensure broader enfranchisement in the potential voting populace; if the DEMs are succeeding, maybe the GOP ought to step up their game; you really can't complain about the other team scoring more points if you are not prepared to fully engage in the game...

Then there is this: for all the whining and bitching about 'ballot harvesting' by the GOP, they have yet to establish a single instance of the practice having any material effect on the outcome of any major election; when pressed to provide evidence to back up their claim, just like when the GOP make broad claims about "massive voter fraud", etc., the GOP is unable to give concrete evidence to back up their claims; it seems again the GOP is seeking to solve problems that don't exist...




<O>