-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I’m cracking up at @Winger s posts about what Trump should do to ensure fairness when the problem is that GOP states are reducing the amount of places to vote in areas where Dem voting is strong.
The left want to rig this election. How do I know. They always accuse others of doing what they plan to do (or have done or are doing). One example
Brilliant logic
I’d say baffling.
I was being facetious
Nuance isn’t a strong suit in this game
Or reason
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I’m cracking up at @Winger s posts about what Trump should do to ensure fairness when the problem is that GOP states are reducing the amount of places to vote in areas where Dem voting is strong.
The left want to rig this election. How do I know. They always accuse others of doing what they plan to do (or have done or are doing). One example
Brilliant logic
I’d say baffling.
I was being facetious
Nuance isn’t a strong suit in this game
Or reason
Or sanity
-
Trumps claim is that there's a difference between absentee voting and vote-by-mail. I haven't studied this in any depth so will withdraw. And will only come back if have time to.
Experts often distinguish between “absentee voting” and “vote-by-mail,” and even though the voting methods are similar, the terminology can be different. In “absentee” systems, voters must pro-actively request a ballot, and sometimes need an excuse. “Voting by mail” refers to states with universal mail voting, where each registered voter is automatically sent a ballot for each election.
-
The US system is poor in a lot of places, but is also stuck that way due to the Constitution and decisions from the Supreme Court upholding (or not, depending on the element) various laws on the subject.
For example, heavy duty ID requirements will probably never be permitted for voting because of a long history of using that to suppress the votes of Black voters and an equally long history of Supreme Court decisions overturning those laws because of that which means the precedent is now entrenched.
A common issue with voting is the official in charge of elections in most states is an elected position similar to the Governor, so they have a vested interest in the outcome and usually slant voting resources (as in polling booths/stations) in their party's favour. Examples abound of Democrat-supporting areas getting one or two polling stations with short time windows, and Republican-supporting areas getting multiple polling stations with much longer time windows.
Gerrymandering is also still alive and well in a number of states. If it's too egregious, it will be struck down as discriminatory (since a lot of Republican gerrymandering targetting Democrat areas also has the effect of disenfranchising Blacks), but mostly it's not quite that bad. The district boundaries are redrawn after the census (same as here), but since it is up to each State to decide how to do it, it is often a partisan process rather than an independent body as NZ does it (although some states use something similar to our model). The US census is every 10 years, not 5, so the elections to win are the decade elections - the Republicans specifically ran campaigns in 2010 with the plan being to win state legislatures and then gerrymander the districts. However, as the Senators and Governors are elected at large, the voter suppression is required to get control Senates and Governorships.
I'm never big on mail voting, but it's better than electronic voting - that's just a recipe for problems.
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Godder enlightening post as usual. So basically they are fucked because all of these important decisions are made into political ones?
Basically, yes. They also directly elect judges, district attorneys and sheriffs in a lot of places, none of which strike me as a good plan.
-
And the voting turnouts are pretty horrible too I think.
It’s a fucking absurd country and has no right to be called the leader of the free world.
They have and hold hegemonic power, and if they didn’t we’d fucking laugh at them. Right now we hold our noses and act nice.
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I’m cracking up at @Winger s posts about what Trump should do to ensure fairness when the problem is that GOP states are reducing the amount of places to vote in areas where Dem voting is strong.
The left want to rig this election. How do I know. They always accuse others of doing what they plan to do (or have done or are doing). One example
Brilliant logic
The old Kafkatrap
-
I only learned yesterday that in the States you don't even have to vote for who is on the ballot paper. You can just write someone's name down as your vote.
That's fucked up.
-
The resignation letter of a NY Times writer Bari Weiss over the SJW culture that she claims has taken over the paper. This might explain why the Times' "mistakes" in regard to reporting on Trump only ever seem to go one way??
Excerpt
**My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are.There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong.
I do not understand how you have allowed this kind of behavior to go on inside your company in full view of the paper’s entire staff and the public. And I certainly can’t square how you and other Times leaders have stood by while simultaneously praising me in private for my courage. Showing up for work as a centrist at an American newspaper should not require bravery.
Part of me wishes I could say that my experience was unique. But the truth is that intellectual curiosity—let alone risk-taking—is now a liability at The Times. Why edit something challenging to our readers, or write something bold only to go through the numbing process of making it ideologically kosher, when we can assure ourselves of job security (and clicks) by publishing our 4000th op-ed arguing that Donald Trump is a unique danger to the country and the world? And so self-censorship has become the norm.**
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It does amaze me though that the country the western world has upheld as the protector of democracy has such piss poor voting systems.
When you look at a system such as we have in NZ where you have to be enrolled by proving your right to vote then have a number of ways to have your vote taken you wonder why it is that difficult.The only excuse they could muster is that compared to NZ they are huge. Change is difficult. But they should have fixed this a long time ago
You'd think that a Federal election would require a Federal approach and standards.
They have a nationwide system in the UK but still have problems with an increasing amount of voting fraud - mainly postal voting. One idiot during the last General Election even tweeting a selfie showing his marking up hundreds of postal ballots he'd collected prior to posting them off.
The authorities have piloted a number schemes to stop it - voter ID, collection of postal ballots etc - but change seems quite difficult to implement without disenfranchising people.
But at least we don't get hanging chads and crashing voting machines
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It does amaze me though that the country the western world has upheld as the protector of democracy has such piss poor voting systems.
When you look at a system such as we have in NZ where you have to be enrolled by proving your right to vote then have a number of ways to have your vote taken you wonder why it is that difficult.The only excuse they could muster is that compared to NZ they are huge. Change is difficult. But they should have fixed this a long time ago
You'd think that a Federal election would require a Federal approach and standards.
They have a nationwide system in the UK but still have problems with an increasing amount of voting fraud - mainly postal voting. One idiot during the last General Election even tweeting a selfie showing his marking up hundreds of postal ballots he'd collected prior to posting them off.
The authorities have piloted a number schemes to stop it - voter ID, collection of postal ballots etc - but change seems quite difficult to implement without disenfranchising people.
But at least we don't get hanging chads and crashing voting machines
We only do 'postal' votes for overseas voters don't we? Or by direct application from a voter.
We don't seem to get complaints about disenfranchisement. Elderly and informed are looked after and get a vote if they want it without risk. -
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It does amaze me though that the country the western world has upheld as the protector of democracy has such piss poor voting systems.
When you look at a system such as we have in NZ where you have to be enrolled by proving your right to vote then have a number of ways to have your vote taken you wonder why it is that difficult.The only excuse they could muster is that compared to NZ they are huge. Change is difficult. But they should have fixed this a long time ago
You'd think that a Federal election would require a Federal approach and standards.
They have a nationwide system in the UK but still have problems with an increasing amount of voting fraud - mainly postal voting. One idiot during the last General Election even tweeting a selfie showing his marking up hundreds of postal ballots he'd collected prior to posting them off.
The authorities have piloted a number schemes to stop it - voter ID, collection of postal ballots etc - but change seems quite difficult to implement without disenfranchising people.
But at least we don't get hanging chads and crashing voting machines
We only do 'postal' votes for overseas voters don't we? Or by direct application from a voter.
We don't seem to get complaints about disenfranchisement. Elderly and informed are looked after and get a vote if they want it without risk.NZ basically decided that if everyone is allowed to vote, and it's a real civic duty, the system needs to be as friendly and open as possible, so a lot of effort has gone into having viable options for overseas Kiwis and the elderly and infirm.
-
@Godder said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It does amaze me though that the country the western world has upheld as the protector of democracy has such piss poor voting systems.
When you look at a system such as we have in NZ where you have to be enrolled by proving your right to vote then have a number of ways to have your vote taken you wonder why it is that difficult.The only excuse they could muster is that compared to NZ they are huge. Change is difficult. But they should have fixed this a long time ago
You'd think that a Federal election would require a Federal approach and standards.
They have a nationwide system in the UK but still have problems with an increasing amount of voting fraud - mainly postal voting. One idiot during the last General Election even tweeting a selfie showing his marking up hundreds of postal ballots he'd collected prior to posting them off.
The authorities have piloted a number schemes to stop it - voter ID, collection of postal ballots etc - but change seems quite difficult to implement without disenfranchising people.
But at least we don't get hanging chads and crashing voting machines
We only do 'postal' votes for overseas voters don't we? Or by direct application from a voter.
We don't seem to get complaints about disenfranchisement. Elderly and informed are looked after and get a vote if they want it without risk.NZ basically decided that if everyone is allowed to vote, and it's a real civic duty, the system needs to be as friendly and open as possible, so a lot of effort has gone into having viable options for overseas Kiwis and the elderly and infirm.
That's what happens when decisions are made for the good of the electoral process, not for the benefit of one party or another
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It does amaze me though that the country the western world has upheld as the protector of democracy has such piss poor voting systems.
When you look at a system such as we have in NZ where you have to be enrolled by proving your right to vote then have a number of ways to have your vote taken you wonder why it is that difficult.The only excuse they could muster is that compared to NZ they are huge. Change is difficult. But they should have fixed this a long time ago
You'd think that a Federal election would require a Federal approach and standards.
They have a nationwide system in the UK but still have problems with an increasing amount of voting fraud - mainly postal voting. One idiot during the last General Election even tweeting a selfie showing his marking up hundreds of postal ballots he'd collected prior to posting them off.
The authorities have piloted a number schemes to stop it - voter ID, collection of postal ballots etc - but change seems quite difficult to implement without disenfranchising people.
But at least we don't get hanging chads and crashing voting machines
We only do 'postal' votes for overseas voters don't we? Or by direct application from a voter.
We don't seem to get complaints about disenfranchisement. Elderly and informed are looked after and get a vote if they want it without risk.Problems in the UK have come from anyone being able to get a postal vote. You don't have to give a reason in mainland UK.
It's a good idea making it as easy to vote as possible, but it isn't easy getting the balance right between that and stopping fraud.
-
Trumps head in the sand approach to Covid is taking its toll on the polls.
No matter the accuracy of them, there has been a trend downwards which must finally be sinking in to the faithful.
Getting quite dangerous for the GOP in some “safe” states and those expected to be swing states are very much in favour of the Dems.
At this point Biden only needs to sit back and watch the damage unfold.
US Politics