Post New

“Joe Biden’s DHS Confirms Illegal Aliens Freed into U.S. Will Get Photo ID Cards in 2024”
SNIP
“ President Joe Biden’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has confirmed that the agency is developing a program that will provide border crossers and illegal aliens released into the United States with photo ID cards.

For more than a year, Breitbart News has chronicled how DHS is planning to roll out a pilot program that will give border crossers and illegal aliens photo ID cards, similar to a driver’s license, upon their release into the United States interior from the southern border.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/12/29/joe-...

I thought the left said ID cards are racist.
Reminds me of some of the left at the PA had fits over the thing, ‘Show me your papers’
in some states with aliens of one form or other.

So what will the ID cards be used for? Buy certain items, alcohol, cigarettes, banking, etc?
Or perhaps give these non citizens the right to vote?

I thought the left said ID cards are racist.

No, the left said the way Republicans manipulate the vote with ID cards is racist.

Breitbart. OMFG. They're iffy on facts, and extreme right, even compared to Gateway Pundit. Definitely not a credible source.

Personally, I think the government should provide free ID cards to everyone. I recall a poster at TMF (forget who, now) who lived in Detroit and spent a lot of time helping people get IDs. A lot more difficult than one would think. For example, to get a birth record, you usually need an ID. But to get a first-time ID, you usually need a birth record. Assuming the birth record exists (some older folks didn't even have those, having been born at home -for example).

The notion that the ID can be used to vote is stupid. First, you actually have to register to vote. An ID is part of that, but you have to show eligibility (i.e. that you're a citizen). An ID is a necessary, but not sufficient, requirement to register. 1poorkid's ID used to say something about being too young to drink, for example. Easy enough for non-citizens to have on their cards "not eligible to vote".

Plus, if you issue IDs, you know who is here because they'd have to do some sort of paperwork to get the ID. It's not the French Foreign Legion where you just make up a name and are issued an ID with your photo on it.

They’ll need them to collect benefits and work, of course.
Even though they’re not supposed to.

All by design.

No, the left said the way Republicans manipulate the vote with ID cards is racist.

Said by you? Doesn’t count for anything.

“Why are Democrats doing everything in their power to stop voter ID Laws...”

“Jan 16, 2023 — Why are Democrats doing everything in their power to stop voter ID laws?”

https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/commentary/voter-...

“Why Dems oppose voter ID — yet push ID cards for illegal migrants”

https://nypost.com/2022/07/29/why-dems-oppose-vote...

Fetterman said he opposes voter ID laws because 'people of color are less likely to have their ID’

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fetterman-opposes...

It's not the French Foreign Legion where you just make up a name and are issued an ID with your photo on it. - 1pg

----------------------

This is exactly what some border runners do. I am sure most of you saw the video where a border agent was showing a sack he collected with passports that illegals had discarded just before they running the border. They want to shed their old identity to get a fresh start at US taxpayer expense.

So how do you verify their identity before you give them photo id? The answer is, you can't. It would be useful if you show up without a verifiable identity, you immediately go back but that would be mean.

Lack of identity is what makes a joke out of Biden's claim of that all immigrants are vetted before being released.

Dope: They’ll need them to collect benefits and work, of course.
Even though they’re not supposed to.

Well, Abbot wants police to arrest people who look like immigrants if they have no ID. So give the amnesty folk IDs. When you do that, get photos, fingerprints, and DNA. Why DNA? So we can identify dead bodies, etc. Immigration and borders are Fed areas, and Abbot knows that. Abott's policies give you dead bodies in rivers. No money has been allocated to train cops in this area, so it looks like a stunt.

Abott's policies give you dead bodies in rivers

No, massive Bidenesque incentives to Come On In are doing that.

No, the left said the way Republicans manipulate the vote with ID cards is racist.

Said by you? Doesn’t count for anything.

STRICT PHOTO ID LAWS DEPRIVE MANY AMERICANS OF THE RIGHT TO VOTE
•MillionsofAmericansLackGovernment-Issued ID.
About 7% of U.S.citizens(2011)–or more than 16 million Americans–cannot confirm that they have a government-issued photo ID.
•Obtaining ID Costs Money.Even if offered for free, many voters must incur numerous costs(such as paying for birth certificates)to apply for a government-issued ID.
•Underlying documents required to obtain ID cost money, a significant expense for lower income Americans. The combined cost of document fees, travel expenses and waiting time are estimated to range from$75to$175.3
•The travel required is often a major burdenon people with disabilities, the elderly,or those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation. In Texas,some people in rural areas must travel approximately 170 miles to reach the nearestIDoffice.4
*And a year after Alabama’s strict voter ID law went into effect, state officials tried to shut down 31 driver’s license offices in majority-Black counties, which would have forcedrural and minority votersto travel further to access licenses.5
•Unnecessarily Strict PhotoID Laws Reduce Voter Turnout.A 2014 GAO study found that strict photo ID laws reduceturnout by 2-3 percentage points, which can translate into tens of thousands of votes lost in asinglestate.61National Conference of State Legislatures, Voter Id

But Republicans know and understand in this team sport that fucking your opponent into the ground is all that matters. The moral high ground is for losers.

"But Republicans know and understand in this team sport that fucking your opponent into the ground is all that matters. The moral high ground is for losers."

Really, can't you do better than this?

BHM:the video where a border agent was showing a sack he collected with passports that illegals had discarded just before they running the border.

Mike, if I was planning on shedding my identity I wouldn't carry it to the border, capiche?

Clothes, shoes, passports: migrants forced to dump possessions at US-Mexico wall

<snip>But to get to the next step in the asylum process, agents in Yuma, according to Customs and Border Protection, require they leave everything behind, except for what they can fit into a small plastic Department of Homeland Security-issued bag.<snip>

I wonder if that's still going on?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/08/us...

Abott's policies give you dead bodies in rivers

No, massive Bidenesque incentives to Come On In are doing that.

No, right wingers unwilling to tell their pollies to fix the border by legislation are doing that.

All you wrote is for naught and Left wing BS.

For starters one of the easiest ways to get a government-approved photo ID card is through your local post office. A post office ID card can be used in all states, as it is a legal form of identification throughout the US.
I renewed my passport at my local PO a mere 5/6 blocks away. Even took my picture for me at the PO.

One can call their local Republican/Democrat local headquarters and someone there will be glad to help. They don’t need to know who you will actually vote for once in the voting booth.

Nursing homes and assisted living facilities make arrangements to have one get a photo ID. Besides, one would already had to have proper ID to be admitted.

A drivers license is a valid ID.

Churches will help one to get an ID, all you have to do is ask. You don’t have to belong to the Church.

Google how to get an ID card. Up will come information for every state.

How to Get Free Photo ID If You Can’t Afford It

go here..

https://lowincomerelief.com/how-to-get-free-photo-...

"No, right wingers unwilling to tell their pollies to fix the border by legislation are doing that."

The last I heard it was a two party Congress..

<snip>But to get to the next step in the asylum process, agents in Yuma, according to Customs and Border Protection, require they leave everything behind, except for what they can fit into a small plastic Department of Homeland Security-issued bag.<snip>

A passport or other paper ID info will fit in a small plastic bag.

No, right wingers unwilling to tell their pollies to fix the border by legislation are doing that. - Lapsody

-----------------

OK, both sides can play that game.

No, left wingers unwilling to tell their pollies to forego granting citizenship to all so some progress can be made.

<snip>But to get to the next step in the asylum process, agents in Yuma, according to Customs and Border Protection, require they leave everything behind, except for what they can fit into a small plastic Department of Homeland Security-issued bag.<snip>

A passport or other paper ID info will fit in a small plastic bag. - LM,?I>

----------------

Don't let him change the subject. The issue is not what will fit into a bag in Yuma but rather the utter inability to vet people who show up at the border with no id at all.

Don't let him change the subject. The issue is not what will fit into a bag in Yuma but rather the utter inability to vet people who show up at the border with no id at all.

Exactly..
And why were passports and other documents thrown away?
Were they used to get them thus far and then thrown away because they were fake or stolen?

And why were passports and other documents thrown away?
Were they used to get them thus far and then thrown away because they were fake or stolen? - LM

---------------

The audio that accompanied the video said exactly that, the discarded ids were used to get to the border, but shed at the last minute to get a new identity when they crossed. The commentary did not mention anything about whether the passports were fake or stolen.

All you wrote is for naught and Left wing BS.

For starters one of the easiest ways to get a government-approved photo ID card is through your local post office. A post office ID card can be used in all states, as it is a legal form of identification throughout t

For starters, the problem is becoming less, but still there, you just refuse to recognize it exists. When I was younger and down south, there were large swathes of shanty towns. Whole families with no car. In California I became aware of construction workers with no cars. And the bus system sucks. The Euros make fun of this, but I remind them that we are as big as Europe up to the Russian borders. Germany is the size of Montana. But any person who reads about it becomes aware of the continuing evolving strategies employed by Republicans to suppress voting,as they see the fewer people who vote, the better off they are. Gerrymandering and voter suppression are art forms that are well practiced.

OK, both sides can play that game.

No, left wingers unwilling to tell their pollies to forego granting citizenship to all so some progress can be made.

But it isn't a game, is it? We don't want citizenship for ALL. The Sierra club had a split over something similar.
Most of us don't mind granting asylum for those worthy, but we don't want everyone coming across the border. We do want
to be humane, which is something not regarded highly by Republicans.

You won't tell your pollies to fix it, and make the compromises to fix it. You seem to think compromise is some type of failure - it isn't.
I'm used to not getting what I want, but I would like something to happen and it looks like current crop of Republicans can't make compromises because they are afraid of their constituents. Helluva way to run a country.

But any person who reads about it becomes aware of the continuing evolving strategies employed by Republicans to suppress voting,as they see the fewer people who vote, the better off they are. - Lapsody

----------------------------

No. The Republicans simply want every voter to prove they are properly authorized to vote in that election and that requires confirming your identity. To the extent the burden of providing id results in voter suppression is a secondary effect we can debate but to claim suppression is the primary motivation is just another talking point.

What was the source of this video?

At least in AZ, getting an ID is not trivial without supporting documentation. Apparently also in Michigan, based on the TMF-er living in Detroit that volunteered to help people get IDs**.



**Actual US citizens, not some dodge/scam...if you were wondering.

...but I would like something to happen and it looks like current crop of Republicans can't make compromises because they are afraid of their constituents. Helluva way to run a country.

It's actually worse than that. Before we had competent politicians (like McConnell) becoming afraid to enrage their woefully-misinformed constituents (who read Breitbart, Gateway Pundit, and similar rubbish, and have FOX news on the TV in the background all day). But now those misinformed people are becoming elected officials (like MTG).

Though I think it was Newt who started the "no negotiating" faction in the Congress (30 years ago), and it's still alive and well.

At least in AZ, getting an ID is not trivial without supporting documentation. Apparently also in Michigan, based on the TMF-er living in Detroit that volunteered to help people get IDs**.



**Actual US citizens, not some dodge/scam...if you were wondering. - 1pg

------------------

That TMF'er was MisterFungi. I admired his dedication to helping people get id. Far better to be out there solving the problem rather than blaming mean ol' Republicans for wanting ID in the first place.

The Republicans simply want every voter to prove they are properly authorized to vote in that election and that requires confirming your identity.

I can support that. So let's assign some folks (or hire them) to help process free IDs for every citizen. This would included tracking down birth records, tax records, or anything else that can help establish the person is a citizen with all the rights thereof.

Once everyone has an ID, then absolutely enforce an ID check.

It's been a long time since I registered to vote. As I recall, I had to produce records of my eligibility. As we were lower-middle class, it wasn't that much of a challenge. I already had a history built-up from previous ID events (e.g. driver's license). The problem is the really poor people that have no ability to keep records, or perhaps don't have them at all.

It's too bad TMF expunged their old boards. I could search for the poster that worked on this. He did several posts where he explained all the challenges. I found it eye-opening.

That TMF'er was MisterFungi.

I was about 50% sure it was him. He's on SHREWDM, so maybe I could entice him to tell the stories again. He's posted on the Travel board recently.

Yes, what he is doing is admirable. But it shouldn't be necessary. We should have paid government employees that handle this. They already have access to the records (if any).

The problem with "mean ol' Republicans" is that they want to jump straight to "show me your ID" without addressing the problem of "do you have an ID at all?".

“I could search for the poster that worked on this”

Try post 6897 on this board.

The problem with "mean ol' Republicans" is that they want to jump straight to "show me your ID" without addressing the problem of "do you have an ID at all?".

================

100% ID's is unattainable. Best transitory strategy is to accept provisional ballots from those with no or questionable id.

100% ID's is unattainable.

Probably. But we aren't even making an effort as of now.

Cool. He posted one post, stating that the MAGAs are blocking it. Which is mostly true. It's not in their interest to advance any legislation, or negotiate anything. The ambiguity enrages their base, and the base then blames the Dems and votes for the MAGA.

Ten years since any serious attempt has been made. Sad.

He didn't relate his stories about his work and the difficulties in getting documents to obtain an ID. But it seems you may already know about it(??).

No. The Republicans simply want every voter to prove they are properly authorized to vote in that election and that requires confirming your identity. To the extent the burden of providing id results in voter suppression is a secondary effect we can debate but to claim suppression is the primary motivation is just another talking point.

No. Not true. The requirements continually evolve and change. And if ID doesn't work, then polling stations will be shut down that service workingmen's neighborhoods where Democrats are higher. Since mail in voting helped those with transportation problems, that is discouraged or eliminated. Republicans don't want people voting unless they're Republican. And you get quite inventive at it. Lotsa wasted e3nergy goes into this continuous scuffle. Just tell em to fix the border Mike.

Forgot this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_efforts_t...

I can support that. So let's assign some folks (or hire them) to help process free IDs for every citizen. This would included tracking down birth records, tax records, or anything else that can help establish the person is a citizen with all the rights thereof.

Once everyone has an ID, then absolutely enforce an ID check.

I have no problem with this, but it never ends there. Auto registration on getting your Driver's License. Giving poor people assistance and defraying costs is a good idea. Allowing more things to be handled on line. Setting up biweeekly clinics.

But in reality, the GOP knows they are better off with less people voting. I think three states have been told to redraw their districts. We shouldn't have to waste time on this.

But in reality, the GOP knows they are better off with less people voting. - Lapsody

-----------------------

Not true. But what is true, everything the dems advocate for somehow moves in the direction of diminishing the ability to verify the eligibility of voters and/or making post election audits difficult or impossible. Perhaps the dems plan is that many of the 200,000 to 300,000 illegals crossing each month will give the dems a boost in Nov.

Perhaps the dems plan is that many of the 200,000 to 300,000 illegals crossing each month will give the dems a boost in Nov.

That’s the plan.

bighairyguy: Perhaps the dems plan is that many of the 200,000 to 300,000 illegals crossing each month will give the dems a boost in Nov.

LurkerMom: That’s the plan.

I'm not sure which thread has less actual data, statistics, and facts, this one or "Get Out, We're Closed."

Federal law and the laws of every state prohibit non-citizens from registering to vote or voting in elections (a few municipalities allow non-citizen residents to vote in local elections).

Several nationwide studies have uncovered only a handful of incidents of non-citizens voting -- between 0.0003 percent and 0.001 percent of all votes cast. Undocumented immigrants or persons with undocumented immigrants in their family are careful to steer clear of government officials generally, which would include registering to vote and voting. For intentionally misrepresenting their citizenship status, by federal law non-citizens can be fined up to $100,000 and imprisoned for up to one year or three years. States have their own additional penalties.

In addition, if a non-citizen were to vote, their name would be permanently listed in the record of persons who voted in that election as well as on the list of registered voters, lists which are routinely reviewed by state election officials and independent groups hoping to prove extensive non-citizen voting.

In 2012, Florida conducted this type of analysis of its list of 12 million registered, active voters. At first the state believed it had identified 180,000 potential ineligible voters by searching a state database with out-of-date citizenship information. Upon further investigation, the state narrowed that list down to 2,600 and sent it on to county election officials for review. After the counties conducted their own investigations, Florida removed just 85 ineligible registrants from their statewide list and only one person was convicted for fraud. Investigations in Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, and Ohio ended similarly.

So stop with the nonsense, please. Non-citizen voting is essentially non-existent. Trump's own voting integrity commission found nothing.

And if you have a point to make, support your point with data, statistics, and links.


https://time.com/4669899/illegal-citizens-voting-t...

https://apnews.com/article/f5f6a73b2af546ee97816bb...

Federal law and the laws of every state prohibit non-citizens from registering to vote or voting in elections (a few municipalities allow non-citizen residents to vote in local elections). - co

----------------

How do you know I am a citizen or not if I am not even required to identify myself?

bighairyguy: Perhaps the dems plan is that many of the 200,000 to 300,000 illegals crossing each month will give the dems a boost in Nov.

LurkerMom: That’s the plan.

That is absurd.

Here we have a policy topic that many on both sides of the political spectrum can come to some kind of agreement on. But all you righties want to do is play games and pretend this is all Dem/Biden's fault. Let me repeat: absurd.

It's Congress that needs to act.

Not true. But what is true, everything the dems advocate for somehow moves in the direction of diminishing the ability to verify the eligibility of voters<

Mike, can you support that with credible evidence? I don't think so. I'm a Dem at the moment and I don't advocate anything like that. So why are you telling me this when you can't support it?

and/or making post election audits difficult or impossible.
Not so. But you like to pretend this is so as it fits your narrative. What little voter fraud there is, is mostly Republican from what I've read on reputable sources. Why are you pretending Mike? Do you actually believe that Trump won and the election was stolen? Just how far gone are you Mike?

Perhaps the dems plan is that many of the 200,000 to 300,000 illegals crossing each month will give the dems a boost in Nov.

But they can't vote Mike, so this is irresponsible speculation on your part. Even if accepted it's around a five year stint to citizenship. Then they still have a good chance of voting Republican.

Deal with something real and push your representatives to fix the immigration system

Deal with something real and push your representatives to fix the immigration system - Lapsody

-----------------

Even if illegal immigration was non existent, I would still advocate for voter id. Why? It is just common sense that voters should prove they have a right to vote.

Even if illegal immigration was non existent, I would still advocate for voter id.

I'm against the voter suppression tactics used by Republicans, and I think you are being disingenuous and know about this. You should assist people in getting IDS, make it free to the poor, work with civic groups to help those with difficulties, etc. Instead the opposite happens. Paid operatives look for newer and more clever ways to disenfranchise voters because the Republican party believes fewer people voting is better for them, and have said the silent thing at times.

So we beat you, even when you do your best to suppress the vote and now you've come to the point where you claim everything is rugged, when you do most of the rigging. I question your belief system if this is the result.

You have never answered my question Mike. Do you think Trump won in 2020 and the voting was rigged? I believe there were insurrection elements in Jan 6, and the Republican Party attempted to thwart the will of millions of voters, ALL OF WHOM HAD VOTER IDS. Screw your idea of voter ID. But Happy New Year! :)

Do you think Trump won in 2020 and the voting was rigged? - Lapsody

===================

No, Trump lost under the rules the dems legally put in place at the last minute.

Rigged - no, the but I think the Dems deliberately exploited the Covid crisis to establish massive mail-in voting at the last minute with little time to develop effective procedures to verify ballot requests and verify ballot received.

All legal, so good job dems. Now if they can just boot people off the ballot when they can't defeat them at the polls, then the survival of democracy survival will be assured.

bighairymike: but I think the Dems deliberately exploited the Covid crisis to establish massive mail-in voting at the last minute with little time to develop effective procedures to verify ballot requests and verify ballot received.

And, of course, you're wrong.

Red and blue states alike made changes to make it easier and more accessible for voters to cast their ballots from home in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including the following 30 states: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Please note that almost half of these states are red and a handful are toss-up states.

Several states already had predominantly vote-by-mail elections prior to the pandemic, including Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Washington.

Eight states where a significant percentage of voters choose to cast ballots by mail always had ballot drop boxes (not just beginning with the 2020 election, but in prior elections as well): Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon and Washington. So these predominantly blue states had ballot drop boxes incorporated into their election prior to 2020.

Three states -- Massachusetts, Delaware and South Carolina -- eliminated the excuse requirement for the 2020 election while eight states -- Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York and West Virginia (more red states than blue) -- allowed all voters to cite the coronavirus pandemic as a reason to cast their ballot by mail for the general election.

And no, these changes were not "put in place at the last minute" and certainly not by democrats in red states controlled by republican legislatures or republican election officials. Most states made these changes for their primary voting, months ahead of the general election.


bighairymike: Now if they can just boot people off the ballot...

Simple solution: if you don't want to be removed from the ballot, don't abandon your constitutional responsibility and try to steal an election by entering into a conspiracy to put forward fraudulent electors, illegally pressure state election officials to change their vote counts, or incite your supporters to violently attack the Capitol to block the peaceful transfer of power.



https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/states-changed-rul...

Simple solution: if you don't want to be removed from the ballot, don't abandon your constitutional responsibility and try to steal an election by entering into a conspiracy to put forward fraudulent electors, illegally pressure state election officials to change their vote counts, or incite your supporters to violently attack the Capitol to block the peaceful transfer of power. - co,/O>

----------------------

The voters at large cannot be trusted to detect such awfulness and not vote for them guy. Essentially it's the voters who are the problem and need democrats to protect them from their own ignorance.

bighairymike: The voters at large cannot be trusted to detect such awfulness and not vote for them [sic] guy. Essentially it's the voters who are the problem and need democrats to protect them from their own ignorance.

1. The Law & Order party sure hates it when the justice system rules against them.

2. Rather than make up nonsense, why not address why, in your view, the conduct of the former president does not give rise to disqualification under the 14th Amendment? Isn't what you're proposing -- allowing someone who violated his constitutional oath -- anti-democratic?

3. Tell me, does the Constitution state that we are a nation of laws? "A nation of laws" means that laws, not people, rule. This is not a "political" matter; this is interpreting the Constitution of the United States without regard to politics, let alone partisan politics.

4. The Colorado Supreme Court handed down a decision that addressed every single state law question and every single federal constitutional question as to the meaning and interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Please address where they were wrong.

No, Trump lost under the rules the dems legally put in place at the last minute.

Rigged - no, the but I think the Dems deliberately exploited the Covid crisis to establish massive mail-in voting at the last minute with little time to develop effective procedures to verify ballot requests and verify ballot received.

All legal, so good job dems. Now if they can just boot people off the ballot when they can't defeat them at the polls, then the survival of democracy survival will be assured.

No. Your Fearless Leader knew he was going to lose so they concocted a BS story. Even before the final day of the election various columnists talked about what would happen. It was well known evidently. Most of the rules said mail in votes couldn't be counted until the polls closed, whereas walk in ballots could be counted almost immediately upon being cast. Republicans make it easy for their folks to go down and cast a ballot, so a red wave was predicted that materialized. But it was just white folks voting mostly. We did see long lines of black voters in areas though. But then the mail in votes were counted. Now we knew from the past that this would likely be blue, and it was, but there were still nail biters in many areas.

So Trump knowing he had lost, set this up as Democrats cheating, and the vote had been manipulated. Nothing of the sort happened. Democracy suffers. The reason you repeat this is you've been told this, but I actually think you don't believe what you tell us. It's just you having fun playing with the Dems. Thinking you're out foxing and toying with them. But Democracy suffers when you do it.

That's a line I can't cross.

2. Rather than make up nonsense, why not address why, in your view, the conduct of the former president does not give rise to disqualification under the 14th Amendment? Isn't what you're proposing -- allowing someone who violated his constitutional oath -- anti-democratic? - CO

--------------------

As much as your TDS drives you to support this creative use of the 14th amendment, most states including liberal as it gets California, reject this interpretation as unconstitutional.


4. The Colorado Supreme Court handed down a decision that addressed every single state law question and every single federal constitutional question as to the meaning and interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Please address where they were wrong. - CO

SCOTUS will explain this in their ruling.

The voters at large cannot be trusted to detect such awfulness and not vote for them guy. Essentially it's the voters who are the problem and need democrats to protect them from their own ignorance.

No. The voters who were given an advantage in the compromises we made to become a democracy, have pitched a "no compromise" battle and committed treason along the way, so we are attempting to right the ship of state and steer away from the shoals. You've accused us of a lot we haven't done, Mike, but you've done plenty that you have to deny.

Mike, but you've done plenty that you have to deny. - Lapsody

----------------

Plenty!?!?

I have done nothing more than express my opinions on some message board in the backwater of the internet.

Perhaps I need to be censored so that the weak minded won't be influenced by the opinions and observations I express, similar to how weak minded voters need to be protected from voting for the wrong candidate.

Dope: "No, massive Bidenesque incentives to Come On In are doing that. "

The incentive to migrate to the USA is simply that it's the USA, and everybody knows Biden did not create the USA>

The great Republican icon, George Santos,created the USA.

No, Trump lost under the rules the dems legally put in place at the last minute.


This is nonsense!

Trump lost the election fair and square, despite his best efforts to steal it away from the American voters. Neither election did he get a majority of the popular vote. He only had a chance because of the electoral college system and I expect if he wins this year that will be what happens.

If you go by what most voters think, he is really a two time LOSER.

Why is the right so fixated on this corrupt, incompetent loser? Please...get a decent candidate! Dump Trump.

>>No, Trump lost under the rules the dems legally put in place at the last minute.<<


This is nonsense!

Trump lost the election fair and square - ges

----------------------

Did you not notice the word "legally" in my statement. I put that in there on purpose to indicate the result that was arrived at was fair and square.

How do you know I am a citizen or not if I am not even required to identify myself?

You don’t, but they like to pretend they’re following the law when they know damn well the more unseemly elements of their party will take care of what needs to be done.

How do you know I am a citizen or not if I am not even required to identify myself?

If you are really interested, read this. https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-th...


It's just part of the pattern of the Republican Party that believes it's better off with fewer people voting.

The ACLU used to be an honorable organization that *I* gave money to.

No longer.

In 2018, the Trump administration announced plans to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, with the goal of suppressing participation of immigrant communities, stunting their growing political influence.

And this is how leftists game the system. Blue states would actually love to have more illegals running around being paid for by the feds -and- have them count in the census…because that means more democrat electoral votes.

Of course it also means fewer services and what not for democrat voters, but they seem to not mind.

The ID itself can be costly, and even when IDs are free, applicants must incur other expenses to obtain the underlying documents that are needed to get an ID. This can be a significant burden on people in lower-income communities.

Amd here’s the ACLU’s partisan dishonesty. Most of the states that passed vote ID laws went out of their way to make it easy to get voter ID.

Just for you here’s the NYT’s “analysis” of Georgia’s law:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/02/us/politics/geo...

Basically, liberals
1) Believe that there should be no responsibility on the part of the voter
2) Love to wax on about the sanctity of “democracy”, but wink at people who bend the rules or outright rig stuff.


Before you folks deny #2, here: https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-camp...

PA libs cheered.

Dope: And this is how leftists game the system.

The Constitution(see below) Speaks to counting free persons, Illegal immigrants are free persons and we've always counted them. No gaming the system, IT IS the system.


Article I
Section 2 House of Representatives
Clause 3 Seats

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

Dope: Amd here’s the ACLU’s partisan dishonesty. Most of the states that passed vote ID laws went out of their way to make it easy to get voter ID.

I don't think anyone cares about this argument over IDs. I think Republicans spend good money to figure other ways of suppressing the vote. But here: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive...

The ACLU isn't being dishonest, Republicans don't know how to not be dishonest it seems.

Dope: Just for you here’s the NYT’s “analysis” of Georgia’s law:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/02/us/politics/geo...

You do realize the Republicans passed this bill and it proves my case?

The New York Times analyzed the state’s new 98-page voting law and identified 16 key provisions that will limit ballot access, potentially confuse voters and give more power to Republican lawmakers.

Here are the most significant changes to voting in the state, as written into the new law:

*Voters will now have less time to request absentee ballots.
*There are strict new ID requirements for absentee ballots.
*It’s now illegal for election officials to mail out absentee ballot applications to all voters.
*Drop boxes still exist … but barely.
*Mobile voting centers (think an R.V. where you can vote) are essentially banned.
*Early voting is expanded in a lot of small counties, but probably not in more populous ones.
*Offering food or water to voters waiting in line now risks misdemeanor charges.
*If you go to the wrong polling place, it will be (even) harder to vote.
*If election problems arise, a common occurrence, it is now more difficult to extend voting hours.
*With a mix of changes to vote-counting, high-turnout elections will probably mean a long wait for results.
*Election officials can no longer accept third-party funding (a measure that nods to right-wing conspiracy theories).
*With an eye toward voter fraud, the state attorney general will manage an election hotline.
*The Republican-controlled legislature has more control over the State Election Board.
*The secretary of state is removed as a voting member of the State Election Board.
*The G.O.P.-led legislature is empowered to suspend county election officials.
*Runoff elections will happen faster — and could become harder to manage.

I would like to take credit for proving my points but basic honesty compels me to credit Dope with supporting all my points.

I would like to take credit for proving my points but basic honesty compels me to credit Dope with supporting all my points.

LOL. I chose that article deliberately, as it does a beautiful job of assigning merit to the left’s standard talking points with respect to voter ID.

>>How do you know I am a citizen or not if I am not even required to identify myself?<<

If you are really interested, read this. https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-th...


It's just part of the pattern of the Republican Party that believes it's better off with fewer people voting. - Lapsody

--------------


I did read it and found nothing in it that describes how to know the citizenship of a person who doesn't identify himself.

Plenty!?!?

I have done nothing more than express my opinions on some message board in the backwater of the internet.

Yes... plenty. Many of your oft repeated 'opinions' are based on lies/misinformation/alt-facts.

No matter how many times those lies/alt-facts/bits of misinformation are patiently explained to you, you, in short order, repeat them.

Dope: wink at people who bend the rules or outright rig stuff.

We don't 'wink' at the people from both sides of the aisle who worked hard to assure a free and fair election. We laud them as true supporters of free and fair elections.

The article describes efforts that "crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors"..."fended off voter-suppression lawsuits"...."pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation"...." such that " “Every attempt <by the orange cult> to interfere with the proper outcome of the election was defeated.”

I can understand your chagrine about all that 'free and fair' stuff, Dope, your cult foiled at every turn like Boris Badenov, Natasha Fatale, and Snidely Whiplash such that Fearless Leader goes down.

BHM:
I did read it and found nothing in it that describes how to know the citizenship of a person who doesn't identify himself.

Yes, the Republican party does quite a bit of gerrymandering to stay in power. Gotta keep those black voters in line in Alabam and Mississip. Not that every now and then the Dems do it, but you would think the Republicans would know how to do it without triggering redrawing orders.


"As of July 7, 2023, a total of 74 cases have been filed challenging congressional and legislative maps in 27 states as racially discriminatory and/or partisan gerrymanders, of which 45 remain pending at either the trial or appellate levels.

To date, litigation has resulted in redrawn legislative and/or congressional maps in Alaska, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and South Carolina, though the North Carolina Supreme Court has since vacated its anti-partisan gerrymandering rulings and both congressional and legislative maps there are expected to be redrawn by this fall to recreate gerrymanders.

In addition, congressional maps are expected to be redrawn in time for the 2024 election in Alabama and Louisiana after federal courts found that the maps adopted by the states’ legislatures violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (though an appeal is ongoing with respect to the Louisiana map). A federal court has also ordered South Carolina to redraw its congressional map after finding that the configuration of one district was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. However, the deadline for adopting a new map is not until 30 days after the Supreme Court adjudicates an ongoing appeal of the case. Because a decision in the South Carolina appeal may not come until the summer of 2024, it is unclear whether it will be possible to implement a new map for the 2024 election cycle."

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-re...

LOL.
Ever gone at look at a map for the Congressional Black Caucus?

BHM:
I did read it and found nothing in it that describes how to know the citizenship of a person who doesn't identify himself.

Yes, the Republican party does quite a bit of gerrymandering to stay in power. Gotta keep those black voters in line in Alabam and Mississip. Not that every now and then the Dems do it, but you would think the Republicans would know how to do it without triggering redrawing orders. - Lapsody

=================

Yes, I hate gerrymanderying too. But I don't see how voter id is a factor.

people who bend the rules or outright rig stuff.

Like Trump, right Dope? He certainly did everything he could to rig the outcome.

They did. That's what the registration process is for.

No, Trump lost under the rules the dems legally put in place at the last minute.

I haven't seen anything showing that was Dems making rules changes to accommodate voters,or that that was the reason Biden won. Appears all speculation on your part.

I haven't seen anything showing that was Dems making rules changes to accommodate voters,or that that was the reason Biden won. Appears all speculation on your part.

Learn.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/a-big-deal-f...

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania relaxed controversial verification rules for the processing of mail-in ballots last week in a decided victory and boon for voting rights advocates. The decision also short-circuits a voting access lawsuit already in progress.

Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar (D) issued guidance to counties that local election officials cannot perform on-the-spot signature analysis. Effectively, this means that ballots cannot be rejected because an election official believes the voter’s signature on a ballot envelope does not match the signature on file.

Tell me again how democrats respect democracy. Note that was an executive decision.

But what legislation did they pass?

https://www.newsweek.com/bidens-nearly-2m-mail-pen...

In Pennsylvania, in the 2020 presidential election, President Joe Biden received nearly 2 million mail-in votes, which according to a new court ruling, would be "unconstitutional" for future elections.

On Friday morning, a Pennsylvania state court struck down the state's 2019 law that expanded mail-in voting. The ruling comes after former President Donald Trump and his allies have questioned the legitimacy of the election, filing numerous court cases. At one point, Trump claimed to have "massive proof" of voter fraud in the state.

According to the Pennsylvania Election Returns' website, Biden received 1,995,691 mail-in votes to Trump's 595,538. Biden won the state and its 20 electoral votes with 50.1 percent of the vote to Trump's 48.84 percent.

The democrats don't need to perpetrate fraud. They do it legally, knowing years will pass before they're stopped.

Admit it. The democrats played fast and loose with the rules in 2020 in an all-out effort to beat Trump. It's high time you people on the board stop fooling yourselves.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/14/courts-squash...

Pennsylvania wasn't the only place.

Last week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court delivered a win for election integrity and strengthened the security of Wisconsin’s elections. In a 4-3 ruling, the court ruled that drop boxes will only be allowed at the offices of election clerks.

The court ruled that the Wisconsin Elections Commission does not have the power to enact and change election laws. This power belongs to the state legislature.

Tell me again how much democrats love the rule of law and Constitutional processes.

democrats love power and use any means necessary to keep it.

democrats love power and use any means necessary to keep it.

So, somehow letting people vote is a Constitutional crime? Explain that.

You have not shown that any of that was the deciding factor in favor of Biden.

Trump knew he had lost before election day.

So you have to show me by data that those actions made the difference and Trump would've won if not for those actions.

Dope1: But what legislation did they pass?

Umm... that was litigated all the way to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court which ruled unanimously that it was perfectly lawful.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has issued a unanimous ruling declaring that mail-in ballots cannot be rejected on the basis of signature comparison, a decision hailed as a victory by Democrats and voter rights groups.

Critics say signature analysis is a common tactic used to slow vote counting or to have ballots rejected outright. The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania and the Urban League of Greater Pittsburgh had previously sued over the use of signature matching.

The Pennsylvania Department of State had issued guidelines earlier this year stating that mailed ballots should be counted as long as they contained a signature and voters provided valid identification during their ballot application process –– and without the need for comparison against matching signatures in voter registration files.

https://whyy.org/articles/pa-supreme-court-rules-m...

Dope1: Admit it. The democrats played fast and loose with the rules in 2020 in an all-out effort to beat Trump.

Umm, sorry but you're wrong again.

In 2020, Republicans held a majority in the Pennsylvania state Senate (28R-21D-1I) and state House (107R-92D-4I). So republicans made the new rules with respect to voting in the 2020 election. The legislation, Act 77, passed with bipartisan majorities and was upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court:

Pennsylvania's mail-in voting law has been upheld by the state's Supreme Court, allowing all voters in the key swing state to cast ballots by mail in November and for other future elections.

In a 5-2 decision released Tuesday, the Democratic-majority court overturned a lower court's ruling from January that found Pennsylvania's Act 77 to be in violation of the state's constitution.

"We find no restriction in our Constitution on the General Assembly's ability to create universal mail-in voting," Justice Christine Donohue wrote in the majority opinion.

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/02/1099806224/pennsylv....

To recap: republicans controlled both chambers, wrote the legislation which passed with bipartisan support, and the state Supreme Court ruled it was constitutional in 2020 and future elections.

But thanks for playing.

You have not shown that any of that was the deciding factor in favor of Biden.

Now I know you're not bothering to read anything. On Friday morning, a Pennsylvania state court struck down the state's 2019 law that expanded mail-in voting.

So however many votes Biden got due to that were invalid. Your side got away with it. Honesty dictates you own up to it.

I'm not fetching you any more rocks. I've showed you two cases where swing states did things.
That wasn't enough to swing the election, but that wasn't my point. My point was that "the 2020 election was the cleanest and most awesomest election ever" wasn't ever true.

So PA Republicans passed a sketchy law that was upheld by the PA Supreme Court. And so was removing all signature verification.

Tell me again how much you people love ballot security and verifying who actually votes. Hooray for democracy!

You got away with it in 2020. Congrats.

You have not shown that any of that was the deciding factor in favor of Biden.

Dope: So however many votes Biden got due to that were invalid. Your side got away with it. Honesty dictates you own up to it.

ME: Aside from the fact Commonone shows the ultimate disposition wasn't in your favor, you have not shown that any of that was the deciding factor in Trump losing the election. You would have to show me by data that these changes cost Trump the Presidency.

You cannot support your contention with data because it didn't cost Trump the Presidency. Trump knew he had lost the Presidency before Election Day.

Further - expansive voting bills enacted in 2020

"As with most other areas of public policy, Covid-19 dominated legislative agendas on voting and elections this year. Many states took steps to protect voters and ensure safe and efficient election administration during the global pandemic.

Overall, 29 states and the District of Columbia enacted 79 different bills to expand voting access in 2020.

1 The majority of these bills expanded eligibility for and access to mail voting, while others addressed issues such as early voting, voter registration, polling place standards, and disability and language access. Even during a global pandemic, however, six states enacted laws that restrict voting access."

Now here's a map of the stated that enacted expansive laws for 2020. Note that there are plenty of red states enacting expansive laws.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-re...

So this narrative you have of the Dems cheated is false, you can't support it with data, Commonone shows you the law is fine with it, and I've shown you that plenty of red states enacted expansive voting - not just Dems. So come on now Dope - Honesty dictates you own up to it. :)

On a side note, I tested positive for Covid yesterday but I'd doing OK now.

ME: Aside from the fact Commonone shows the ultimate disposition wasn't in your favor, you have not shown that any of that was the deciding factor in Trump losing the election. You would have to show me by data that these changes cost Trump the Presidency.

I’ve already said, it wouldn’t have mattered. Even if he he won PA he still loses the election.

So this narrative you have of the Dems cheated is false

Didn’t say that either. I said they changed the rules to be in their favor.

On a side note, I tested positive for Covid yesterday but I'd doing OK now.

Glad you’re feeling better. Add ginger to your water or orange juice. It’s a natural inflammation fighter.

No foolin'...

In this era where people TYPE all day, purchase groceries with credit / debit cards that require no signature at all or collect it via a completely foreign rubber tipped "pen" on a capacitative screen which bears NO physical resemblance to operating a pen or pencil to paper, signatures are completely worthless. There are times I might have trouble recognzing one of my prior signatures at gunpoint.

From a logical perspective, it makes sense that the public has a right to ensure someone presenting a ballot is a legitimate voter from THAT particlar physical district and that something like a photo ID that can provide a high confidence / rapid confirmation of identity makes sense. But...

It also makes sense that in a world that operates 24x7 and many people WORK during daylight hours, if we aren't going to have a true election DAY (where polls are operated for 24 hours) and there will always be cases where voters must travel and be away from their local community on election day, we will always have "non-present" voting. Once that is recognized, there will always be some uncertainty about the connection between human and ballot. We can ensure a legit ballot is only sent to a contact address associated with a legit voter but it can never be proven with an anonymous ballot that personA filled in ballotA previously sent to personA's address of addressA.

The question is whether the logical or actual risk of fraud with that mechanism OUTWEIGHS the additional number of LEGITIMATE voters who remained able to vote in the election. If absentee ballot mechanisms used in a city of 1,000,000 voters allows 20,00 extra citizens to vote legitimately and results in 500 cases where ballotA is filled in by personB, then them's the breaks. Obviously, the GOAL is for fraud-free ballots. But given the equally prioritized goal of anonymous ballots, CERTAINTY is not possible with "not-present" voting. So the goal is to maximize PARTICIPATION at a MINIMUM risk of fraud. Given the choice between two sets of balloting / voting rules that

A) result in 65% voter turnout with 0.01% fraud
B) result in 69% voter turnout with 0.01% fraud

B is the better choice even though a 0.01% fraud rate against a higher base will result in (GASP) more "actual" fraud in absolute numbers.

YouTuber Tom Scott created a great video for the channel Computerphile back in 2014 explaining the difficulties of designing a PERFECT electronic voting system that could ELIMINATE fraud while still satisfying the requirement of providing an anonymous ballot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI

Best part of this video at 2:26:

And I know immediately that someone is going to want to comment about checksums or crypto, which is great except now you have to trust the software that's checking that hash. Or, more likely, the one person that's checking it for you. You've just moved the problem. And if you're thinking, "I could verify that", then turn your brain the other way, and think "How could I break that?" because there are trillions of dollars - that's not an exaggeration - trillions riding on the result of big elections, and that's an incredible motivation. If you're coming up with sneaking ways to get around it, believe me, so are lots of other people. It might be one angry techie but it might be and entire political party, or the huge corporations who want one party to win, or entire nation states who want one party to win. And all that is assuming you're even allowed to verify the software that's running, which you never are because plugging in unknown USB sticks into a voting machine is a bad idea.

People are forgetting that aspect of our voting process. You don't have to look far around the world to find places where voting is NOT a private process. Places where a VOTE on a BALLOT can be traced to the VOTER and thus yield a path for subtle or not-so-subtle coercion. By the way, the threat of coercion (via physical threats or bribes) is why it is illegal in most states to take a picture in the voting booth of your completed ballot. The idea is to ensure you are collecting "proof" of your vote to satisfy a prior illegal agreement to sell your vote.

You can even look to caucuses used in many states for "voting" processes that are OVERTLY coercive. Since these are viewed as PARTY functions rather than general elections, they are allowed but you'll get a chance to see in 12 days how truly democratic that process is in Iowa, where party leaders coerce everyone to line up for an indicted con-artist.

Tom Scott also posted a follow-up video in 2020 explaining how NOTHING has improved in this space:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkH2r-sNjQs

The current Republican fixation on voter fraud is an attempt to simply squander available oxygen in the public media that could have gone to discussing other far more sinister problems affecting the country. Of course, one of the problems at the top of the list is gerrymandering, which is the ultimate type of voter fraud where politicians get to pick the citizens allowed to vote for them. THAT'S how you win elections. That's why Republican control of state and federal House bodies exceeds 50% (sometimes by large margins) despite Republican POLICIES being unpopular. And as long as the voting public can be distracted from THAT travesty by a litle theatre regarding voter identification, that theatre will continue.


WTH

Dope1: Didn’t say that either. I said they changed the rules to be in their favor.

And I proved that both houses of the Pennsylvania legislature were controlled by republicans, republicans brought forward the new voting legislation, a bipartisan majority passed that new legislation, and the state Supreme Court upheld its constitutionality. Clearly, that legislation, that you continue to say "changed the rules to be in their (democrats) favor" did nothing of the kind.

Time to admit you were wrong about Pennsylvania and go tilt at windmills in other states.

Slight but crucial typo...

BEFORE: The idea is to ensure you are collecting "proof" of your vote to satisfy a prior illegal agreement to sell your vote.

AFTER: The idea is to ensure you are NOT collecting "proof" of your vote to satisfy a prior illegal agreement to sell your vote.


WTH

You cannot support your contention with data because it didn't cost Trump the Presidency. Trump knew he had lost the Presidency before Election Day.

I agree there's no way to prove the counter-factual. But if you're genuinely trying to understand how this belief took hold in the GOP, it's helpful to look at the vote totals.

In 2016 (Trump v. Clinton), there were about 6.1 million votes cast in Pennsylvania. Fewer than 300,000 votes - less than 5% - were vote-by-mail.

In 20202 (Trump v. Biden), there were about 6.8 million votes cast in Pennsylvania. In this election, though, more than 2.6 million - nearly 40% - were vote-by-mail. Biden won the mail-in vote by nearly 1.4 million ballots (2 million to 600K), for a 75/25 split against Trump. The overall election, though, was decided by only 21K votes.

There is no way of knowing how much of the massive increase in mail-in voting was due to changes made in Pennsylvania's voting procedures, and how much would have just happened anyway due to Covid under the old rules. Given that the purpose of the rule changes was to make it easier for people to vote by mail, however, it is difficult to argue that none of that 1.4 million vote margin stemmed from the rule changes. There's no way to prove the counterfactual that Trump would have won under the old rules - but part of the reason he knew he had lost before the election is because massive numbers of mail-in ballots had already been cast, and the campaigns knew (roughly) who had requested and returned those ballots.

Back in the immediate aftermath of the election, conservatives were constantly talking about the massive upsurge in mail-in voting in swing states, how Biden dominated mail-in voting, and how it was due largely to changes in the voting rules. That discussion got mixed in with all the absolutely specious and often deliberately misleading discussions about actual voter fraud. That toxic and misleading mix translated into a lot of conservatives complaining about significant "fraud" (of which there was virtually no proof), when instead the only significant complaint would have been about the rule changes (which were legal at the time the election was held and did not render the votes invalid, but which Republicans felt were deeply unfair and adopted by improper means).

Flash forward to 2024, and those resentments about the rule changes have metastasized into a general belief that the election was "illegitimate" or "rigged."

I’ve already said, it wouldn’t have mattered. Even if he he won PA he still loses the election.

Then why are you arguing?

So this narrative you have of the Dems cheated is false

Didn’t say that either. I said they changed the rules to be in their favor.

Ok, maybe I need to connect the dots. Sorry if it wasn't apparent. :) OK, since we can see on that map that multiple red states expanded voting with the most prevalent being allowing more mail in voting, all the way to ensuring handicapped access. What we can say is that many states ( Not just Dems) changed the rules in favor of the voter.

You have an emphasis and imply that Dems won by expanding the voting rules to make voting easier, some of it due to the pandemic. Not so. Red states expanded the vote also and it did not affect the outcome of the election. But you admit the changes made by Dems didn't affect the outcome. Now can you admit that Red stated made changes to expand voting too? If so, we agree.

<On a side note, I tested positive for Covid yesterday but I'm doing OK now.

Glad you’re feeling better. Add ginger to your water or orange juice. It’s a natural inflammation fighter.

My wife made me that in a tea, which was hot at the end. I'll have to see how she made it.

And I proved that both houses of the Pennsylvania legislature

but you had zip to say about the Secretary of State's action, other that to crow about their Supreme Court holding it up. Don't worry, no one will ever expect you to be honest about anything.

democrats love power and use any means necessary to keep it.

That is projection.

Look at all the many ways the right does every thing it possibly can to game the system because they DO NOT have majority support. And they feel it is OK to cheat, lie, steal because it is how right wing authoritarians think.

Dope: So however many votes Biden got due to that were invalid. Your side got away with it. Honesty dictates you own up to it.

Trump set the standard for being a whiny loser and the MAGA crowd follows in lockstep. Always the poor victims!

albaby1: Biden won the mail-in vote by nearly 1.4 million ballots (2 million to 600K), for a 75/25 split against Trump.

C'mon, really. In November 2020, 4,389,678 people in the United States contracted the coronavirus, more than double the previous record high set in October. Over 96,000 patients were hospitalized with Covid-19, a 102% increase from the prior month.

And over 37,000 Americans died from Covid-19 in November, with 25 states setting weekly death records.

Of course people wanted to vote by mail.

My polling place at Village Hall is about the size of an average living room, jammed with desks and a dozen-and-a-half voting booths. I didn't want to stand in a line to cast my ballot elbow-to-elbow with other voters and, instead, dropped off my mail-in ballot at a drop box there.

Was it the democrats fault that Orange Jesus told his supporters not to vote by mail? And why? Was it because in case he lost he wanted to be able to blame mail-in voting? Why else?

% of T Voters Flipped to Biden AZ 6.8%; GA 5.7%; MI 6.0%; NV 6.5%; PA 8.7%; WI 8.3%

Looks like a fairly consistent % of voters abandoned Trump.

https://www.thirdway.org/memo/battleground-state-a...

I'm still wondering how 21,000 voters made the difference for Trump in PA.

Why else? - CO

A paper ballot could get damaged or misplaced. Not so likely when you machine vote in person.

OTOH, if the mail-in ballot only voted for president as some do, a helpful election worker can fill in down ballot.

Lapsody: On a side note, I tested positive for Covid yesterday but I'd doing OK now.

I hope you get well soon. I was just reading an article on long COVID in Scientific American and it turns outs the more vaccinations you've had before your first infection, the better you're protected against long COVID.

Although the studies disagree on the exact amount of protection, they show a clear trend: the more shots in your arm before your first bout with COVID, the less likely you are to get long COVID. One meta-analysis of 24 studies published in October, for example, found that people who’d had three doses of the COVID vaccine were 68.7 percent less likely to develop long COVID compared with those who were unvaccinated.

A study published in November in the BMJ found each additional dose of vaccine dramatically increased protection against long COVID:

...a single COVID vaccine dose reduced the risk of long COVID by 21 percent, two doses reduced it by 59 percent and three or more doses reduced it by 73 percent.


MORE HERE... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/vaccina...

I hope you get well soon. I was just reading an article on long COVID in Scientific American and it turns outs the more vaccinations you've had before your first infection, the better you're protected against long COVID.

I've had 8 shots last I counted so I should fare OK. :) I keep mu shots on my phone.

Dope:My point was that "the 2020 election was the cleanest and most awesomest election ever" wasn't ever true.

Dope. the amount that you and I don't know fills libraries. I have some legal background, not much, but it seems you lack the ability to assess what your are looking at, and draw unwarranted conclusions from that, some of which are wild-eyed as you disappear with a protest after being shown your assessment is incorrect.

The 2020 election has been stated as being one of the cleanest elections ever - and this is said by people who actually DO turn on the sound on the 21 second video. People who get paid to critically analyze and know how to write a column hedging their bets.

You've been shown that your belief that the Dems cheated and won is utter bunk, not supported one bit. Both red and blue states expanded voting and some of it due to the pandemic. In a democratic republic that is a good thing to do as the health of the people is a consideration. There is nothing nefarious or scheming about it.

Look, in my view Trump won 2016 because of Comey's letter, which caused a surge away from Hillary and Trump was on a rise, with no time to recover. Was that Trump cheating? No. The people who released the info to the FBI would have to know Comey would write a letter. I think Comey has found out how unwise that letter was, but that's history now.

The 2020 election has been stated as being one of the cleanest elections ever

This is factual.

But it doesn't matter to the MAGA crowd. Lies and conspiracy theories carry more weight than facts and reality.

There is nothing nefarious or scheming about it.


They expanded mail in voting, and were...liberal about following their own rules.
You won in 2020, just leave it at that.

"But in reality, the GOP knows they are better off with less people voting. - Lapsody"

"Not true. - BHM

Actually it is very true. It is why Republicans are trying to enact strict voter laws despite the fact that vote fraud is almost non-existent and easily caught by current laws. Just because you want to ignore all of those facts doesn't make them disappear. It just makes you willfully ignorant.

"But what is true, everything the dems advocate for somehow moves in the direction of diminishing the ability to verify the eligibility of voters and/or making post election audits difficult or impossible."

Again. That simply isn't true. Democrats want to make it easier for people to legally vote. Maybe because they believe in democracy more than Republicans who cannot see to win the popular vote (unless it is right after 9/11). Let's take an example, expanding early voting. Early voting makes it easier for people to legally vote and does nothing to diminish the security of the vote or its auditability. Democrats want to expand early voting and Republicans are generally against it. Same with trying to assist people trying to get to voting places. Democrats like to be able to bus people to the voting centers and Republicans are against it. Yet bussing people in from churches or old folks homes does nothing to lessen the security of voting (every voting person still has to jump through the same hoops) or its auditability.

Republicans hate democracy.

"But in reality, the GOP knows they are better off with less people voting. - Lapsody"

"Not true. - BHM

Actually it is very true. It is why Republicans are trying to enact strict voter laws despite the fact that vote fraud is almost non-existent and easily caught by current laws. Just because you want to ignore all of those facts doesn't make them disappear. It just makes you willfully ignorant.

<snip>“Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,</b?” Clark, the Trump campaign adviser and legal counsel, was taped saying at a closed-door meeting of the Republican National Lawyers Association chapter in Wisconsin last year...


...But Trump himself has already made clear what this is really about. “The things they had in there were crazy,” Trump said this week of Democratic voting proposals. “They had things, levels of voting that if you’d ever agreed to it, you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.”

Trump’s candor seemed to invite lower-level Republicans to speak openly about how voter suppression was necessary to the party’s survival. “This will be extremely devastating to Republicans and conservatives,” Georgia State House Speaker David Ralston said this week, citing proposals that will “certainly drive up turnout.”

Those pitches, for which Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden has expressed support, include the possibilities of remote voting and drive-through voting—ideas that could, indeed, result in larger voter turnout. “This is about making sure that we're able to conduct our democracy while we're dealing with a pandemic,” Biden said this week. “We can do both.” But Republicans have spent years attempting to make it harder, not easier to vote—especially for the minorities and younger Americans who tend to lean Democratic.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/04/republican...

Everyone knows, even Mike, he just pretends.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.