When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
There is a new trend here at work. Instead of calling someone a dumbass (or similar), there are now people being called "crats", shorthand for Democrat. It has created some friction, and HR is unsure how to deal with it. I find it amusing.
There is a new trend here at work. Instead of calling someone a dumbass (or similar), there are now people being called "crats", shorthand for Democrat. It has created some friction, and HR is unsure how to deal with it. I find it amusing.
And you believe that the scanner accurately reads and records what you have marked on the paper, that that record is accurately tabulated along with all of the other records, and that the correct sum of those records is then transmitted without distortion or alteration to the state board of elections?
There was literally an entire movie about this. Man of the Year. Robin Williams was in it.
EDIT: Before he died.
Originally Posted by Braineack
The number of ballots handed out/scanned should never exceed the amount of people checked in.
And the number of tickets sold for a given flight should never exceed the number of seats within the airplane assigned to that flight.
There is a new trend here at work. Instead of calling someone a dumbass (or similar), there are now people being called "crats", shorthand for Democrat. It has created some friction, and HR is unsure how to deal with it. I find it amusing.
And you believe that the scanner accurately reads and records what you have marked on the paper, that that record is accurately tabulated along with all of the other records, and that the correct sum of those records is then transmitted without distortion or alteration to the state board of elections?
There was literally an entire movie about this. Man of the Year. Robin Williams was in it.
In that movie he did the right thing and gave up his chance at presidency because he found out the voting machines were having an error. They tabulated votes based on candidates names alphabetically and not by actual vote for each candidate.
I'm at the point of thinking we need a multi verification factor. I say a fingerprint and a copy of the ID put onto each ballot. It wouldn't be hard to have blank ballots that once your print and ID are scanned they are printed out for you to mark your choice. They then go into sealed containers where no one at the polling stations have keys. Once the box is filled it is then taken by a third party to a secure facility. Now your ID and prints are locked out of the system for any further voting that cycle. Require all voters to verify their voting information every election cycle at least 30 days prior to election. The state can send out voter verification cards, the voter says yes this is correct or makes the change required and they then get another verified voter ID card which must be presented to vote. Similar to having to do your vehicle tags/taxes you have to have a specific card each cycle.
Who that third party should be I'm not sure. Why fingerprints? Well if the government already has all our data what does them having our fingerprints change? They probably have those already too. What if someone doesn't have hands? Then use a toe print. No feet and no hands? Then you better have a handicap endorsement on your voter card. Why have a new card every cycle? To verify your polling place and to be able to confirm you are who you are.
Voting day should be a national holiday so everyone can vote. No more early voting. No mail in ballots. If you don't make it to the polls that one specific day that's on you.
Last thing is the whole idea of voting based off population. While it does make sense in a way that everyone gets an "equal" voice you end up with situations where those in rural areas are having to follow laws set by those densely populated cities. Look at Oregon and their situation where a lot of eastern counties want to secede from Oregon and join Idaho or whatever. The whole map of how people voted this year is basically red across the board looking at county's specifically. Yet these small pockets of blue are there and have such a high representation. Should those in cities have less representation? No but there's gotta be a way for it to be truly fair across the board
I have no idea why voting can't be done smoothly here in the US. I'm not for big government but there should be a standard set by the federal government as to the ballot layout, required materials, machines, voting times, and necessary identification required by each voter.
I have no idea why voting can't be done smoothly here in the US.
It's mostly because of the people, the politicians and the corporate sponsors.
Or, let me put this another way:
Why doesn't professional wrestling go smoothly? Because it's not supposed to. Nobody wants it to. If it did, then it would not be entertaining. Nobody would watch, no merch would be sold, there'd be no pay-per-views, etc.
Politics is theater. Its purpose is to divert attention away from the actual workings of government.
Originally Posted by L337TurboZ
I'm not for big government but there should be a standard set by the federal government as to the ballot layout, required materials, machines, voting times, and necessary identification required by each voter.
It's interesting to watch how the beliefs "Voting doesn't matter, since the counts are altered to fit the desired result" and "It's critical that we eliminate mail-in voting so that we can eliminate fraudulent voting" are often expressed simultaneously in the same line of thought by so many.
It's interesting to watch how the beliefs "Voting doesn't matter, since the counts are altered to fit the desired result" and "It's critical that we eliminate mail-in voting so that we can eliminate fraudulent voting" are often expressed simultaneously in the same line of thought by so many.
That's me all the time. And don't forget, "What difference does it make who wins anyhow, they're all in it together to screw all of us!"
Honestly, we do the things we do because like Fox Mulder, we want to believe! We want to believe the system is good. We want to believe in election integrity. We want to believe the system isn't rigged, and justice is blind. Yet somehow we are also cynical about these same things we want to believe in. I guess that's what separates us from the not so complicated thinking other animals. Or just what makes us stupid or insane or both.
Honestly, we do the things we do because like Fox Mulder, we want to believe! We want to believe the system is good. We want to believe in election integrity. We want to believe the system isn't rigged, and justice is blind.
I want to believe that there's enough solid metal left that I'm going to be able to replace all four shocks, plus the upper & lower arms on the right front, without it all falling to pieces.
Because rust is a hell of an enemy. Not the light, dandruffy sort of rust that you cut your finger on and then die horribly a week later because you oppose vaccinations against tetanus, no, this is the serious, deep-seated rust which has taken the place of the underlying structure of the suspension mounting points in the very same way that political parties have taken the place of legitimate, accountable governance in the US.
The kind of rust that makes you say "**** these eight specific bolts in particular" and purchase a new Ryobi cordless impact wrench. And an impact-rated 3/8" wobble coupler. And some more 4.5" cutoff wheels.
It turns out that literally never washing a car which you drive through salt-laden winters is a bad decision.
Kind of like printing half of a nation's GDP as new money in a 24 month period.
I get that they don't want accountable elections. At what point do we the people say enough is enough and start American Revolution 2: Patriot Boogaloo?
If one person stands against the government they're a radical terrorist in the media, if a small group stands they're a radical group. At what number of people does it become an actual movement? Will the military blindly follow orders? I doubt it.
You're talking 400 something congressmen, 100 senators, a president and his cabinet. I'm not saying they need to die. Just saying that if enough people demand their resignation, a temporary military rule and new elections without lobbyists or companies intervening then maybe MAYBE we can actually change the system for the people.
If we continue to sit around doing nothing and complaining then it only means we are subconsciously complacent. I'm in favor of drafting a new Constitution with stricter limitations on the scope of the government.
I get that they don't want accountable elections. At what point do we the people say enough is enough and start American Revolution 2: Patriot Boogaloo?
I honestly can't imagine a set of circumstances, at least within my lifetime, which would lead to that outcome.
We Americans, as a broad generalization, enjoy a high standard of living. Yes, there is inequality of wealth and social capital, but it is tiny in comparison to those hardships which have historically led to rebellion. The very poorest of us are upper-middle-class by, say, Bolshevik standards.
And we're far too diverse and heterogeneous a population to ever rally around a single grievance. The average American hates other citizens who they perceive to be the enemy far more than they do their own government.
We want to believe the system isn't rigged, and justice is blind.
Some people want desperately to believe that the system is rigged. Because evidence of that would validate the message they've been preaching. It would affirm their long-held belief that they are amongst the tiny, red-pilled elite minority who saw it all coming and tried to warn everyone.
Some people want desperately to believe that the system is rigged. Because evidence of that would validate the message they've been preaching. It would affirm their long-held belief that they are amongst the tiny, red-pilled elite minority who saw it all coming and tried to warn everyone.
It would make them special.
To me it isn't about being special it's more of having validation. That moment where you say "I knew it!"
Futurama had a solid episode about elections. People should be able to see how true that is to our own two party system and what's happening.
Some people want desperately to believe that the system is rigged. Because evidence of that would validate the message they've been preaching. It would affirm their long-held belief that they are amongst the tiny, red-pilled elite minority who saw it all coming and tried to warn everyone.
It would make them special.
Paraphrasing you here, you have stated that "politics in the U.S. is theater to entertain and distract people from the inner workings of government".
It would appear you have ingested a generic " red pill" that had no color. I think you may be one of us. Or at least paradoxical in thinking.
That's me all the time. And don't forget, "What difference does it make who wins anyhow, they're all in it together to screw all of us!"
Honestly, we do the things we do because like Fox Mulder, we want to believe! We want to believe the system is good. We want to believe in election integrity. We want to believe the system isn't rigged, and justice is blind. Yet somehow we are also cynical about these same things we want to believe in. I guess that's what separates us from the not so complicated thinking other animals. Or just what makes us stupid or insane or both.
me too bro
Originally Posted by L337TurboZ
I get that they don't want accountable elections. At what point do we the people say enough is enough and start American Revolution 2: Patriot Boogaloo?
If one person stands against the government they're a radical terrorist in the media, if a small group stands they're a radical group. At what number of people does it become an actual movement? Will the military blindly follow orders? I doubt it.
You're talking 400 something congressmen, 100 senators, a president and his cabinet. I'm not saying they need to die. Just saying that if enough people demand their resignation, a temporary military rule and new elections without lobbyists or companies intervening then maybe MAYBE we can actually change the system for the people.
If we continue to sit around doing nothing and complaining then it only means we are subconsciously complacent. I'm in favor of drafting a new Constitution with stricter limitations on the scope of the government.
The government is so thoroughly corrupts at this point it would take elite older military units to make this possible. A wet behind the ears 20yr old infantry person will simply follow orders. I dont however think they would be so daft as to suspend the constitution, they will just continue to slowly erode it.
I am NOT in favor or a convention at this moment in time. New amendments specific in scope and removing some existing ones? Yes. A constitutional convention in a time half the country wants to let biological dudes compete in women's sports and call them the same would be recklessly dangerous.
Add a new one for term limits
Add a new one so that only persons that pay net taxes & their spouse get to vote
Repeal 14 section 4
Amend 16 to state that any income tax shall be a fix percentage of wage income only for all persons, and that congress shall adjust tax revenues it to balance the federal budget on no more than a 5 year rotating basis. Congress may authorize taxes to be collected via wage income OR as a fixed percentage at the point of sale for goods & services, but not both.
Repeal 17
Unsurprisingly, the "red wave" was stymied by single issue voters and never-Trumpers. It's almost as though building a platform around Trump endorsements and anti-abortion bills was a poor choice in swaying moderate voters...
Out of Trump's current 254 endorsements, there is a 79% success rate -- he endorsed 330 this year, IIRC.
He hosted 30 rallies, 50 fund-raisers, raised $330 million, and spent $17 million out of his PAC.
Seriously take a look at where these candidates were polling before Trump's endorsements. One easy example would be JD Vance, he was polling 5 points behind before Trumps endorsement and ultimately won by 8 points despite his campaign being outspent by $35 million.
Democrats in battleground states spent over 5:1, even 10:1, in some locations like New Hampshire or AZ (Kelly $32m vs Masters $9m).
Speaking of spending: that $17million Trump's PAC spent: that was money McConnell refused to spend on those candidates, instead putting GOP money AGAINST them. In AK, local republicans censured Murkowski in 2021, but McConnell still pumped $9million into her campaign against the local favorite Tsibaka. McConnell even pulled committed money from some candidates, like Blake Masters in AZ or Bolduc in NH instead putting funds behind other republican candidates.
So in summary the only thing the stymied the red wave was the GOP (McConnell, Rove, Ryan, McCarthy) itself. Democrats fear Trump, so obviously the propaganda machines is going to pump NPC brains with silly notions like "Trump wave is over" -- so much so that they've already basically endorsed deSantis and have immediately starting pitting the two against each other. They have been constantly pumping stories out this week in order to steer voters to deSantis over Trump. Democrats and swamp creature McConnell alike would love to face deSantis over Trump in 2024. Trump is the biggest threat to their uni-party and they both think we are stupid and can be manipulated this easily by trying to spin the red wave as a failure. But keep gaslighting...
11-10-2022, 02:10 PM
0
