Discussion:
[OT] Right Out of Science Fiction
Add Reply
Robert Carnegie
2020-05-28 09:11:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.

Obviously to not deliver those mails to poor, black, or queer
districts is trivial. And of course this does not suppress only
their postal votes, but all votes.
Robert Carnegie
2020-05-28 09:28:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 26 May 2020 13:08:18 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
<snip stuff so far off base is can't even be said to be wrong>
Wow!
You really have /no idea at all/ how it works, do you?
The paper strip with the number is removed /by the voter/ and
is /not sent back in/.
In the /real/ world, anyway. Over there is alt-reality,
anything can happen.
In the real world that is the State of Washington. But, does
that extend to California?
In California, there's a serial number on the ballot itself, and it
is tied to the identify of the voter. There's literally no pretense
of secret ballots.
There is literally no support for your claim in your post.
In the United Kingdom, when I vote in person, a numbered
ballot form is given to me, and it is recorded that I was given
the form with that number. So my ballot can be identified as
mine. It is not done unless, I suppose, it is claimed that the
person who voted isn't me (claimed by me presumably),
/and/ the outcome of the poll is quite close. Or no doubt if
I write on the paper “I soaked this in a poison undetectable
to science.” The counters probably wear gloves anyway,
and especially this year of plague - people are charged
and convicted for assault for coughing. Possibly murder
following the death of Mrs Belly Mujinga.
Thomas Koenig
2020-05-28 11:51:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
It _is_ hard to remove a *real* dictator by the use of weapons. Donald Trump
hasn't repealed the Second Amendment, so he is not a real dictator.
So? The Democrats claim that he is. Are you saying that they lie?
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated when they equate
Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Who is Adolph Hitler?
Titus G
2020-05-28 23:10:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
It _is_ hard to remove a *real* dictator by the use of weapons.
Donald Trump hasn't repealed the Second Amendment, so he is not
a real dictator.
So? The Democrats claim that he is. Are you saying that they lie?
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated when
they equate Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Who is Adolph Hitler?
Not is but was. A powerful European warlord supported by wealthy white
USA republicans such as manufacturer Henry Ford and banker Prescott Bush.
Major Oz
2020-05-29 02:55:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Thomas Koenig
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
It _is_ hard to remove a *real* dictator by the use of weapons.
Donald Trump hasn't repealed the Second Amendment, so he is not
a real dictator.
So? The Democrats claim that he is. Are you saying that they lie?
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated when
they equate Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Who is Adolph Hitler?
Not is but was. A powerful European warlord supported by wealthy white
USA republicans such as manufacturer Henry Ford and banker Prescott Bush.
And bootlegger Joe Kennedy
h***@gmail.com
2020-05-29 03:03:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Thomas Koenig
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated when
they equate Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Who is Adolph Hitler?
Not is but was. A powerful European warlord supported by wealthy white
USA republicans such as manufacturer Henry Ford and banker Prescott Bush.
It's a shot at the spelling error
Thomas Koenig
2020-05-29 11:10:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Thomas Koenig
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
It _is_ hard to remove a *real* dictator by the use of weapons.
Donald Trump hasn't repealed the Second Amendment, so he is not
a real dictator.
So? The Democrats claim that he is. Are you saying that they lie?
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated when
they equate Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Who is Adolph Hitler?
Not is but was. A powerful European warlord supported by wealthy white
USA republicans such as manufacturer Henry Ford and banker Prescott Bush.
Don't know anybody by that name. I know of somebody whose first name
ended with an "f".
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 14:22:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
Don't know anybody by that name. I know of somebody whose first name
ended with an "f".
Oh. I've seen his first name spelled both ways.

John Savard
Quadibloc
2020-05-30 06:28:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Thomas Koenig
Don't know anybody by that name. I know of somebody whose first name
ended with an "f".
Oh. I've seen his first name spelled both ways.
Most languages, when they borrow words from foreign languages, spell those words
according to their own orthographical conventions. In this way, they maintain a
phonetic writing system, and pronounce the borrowed words in a way that is
similar to that of the language from which they borrowed them, within the
limitations of their own sound system.

English tends not to do this as an absolute rule. It has borrowed a lot of words
from Latin and French with their spelling intact, which means that the rules for
deriving the pronounciation of a word on the printed page from its letters vary
depending on the word's origin, leading to an inconsistent and hence non-
phonetic writing system.

However, English still reserves the right to change the spelling of borrowed
words, and even proper names. Thus, in English, "of" is pronounced with a v
sound, and to get an f sound on the end, you need "off". This used to mean that
the name now transliterated as Petrov was normally spelled Petroff in English.

John Savard
Titus G
2020-05-29 22:21:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by Titus G
Post by Thomas Koenig
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
It _is_ hard to remove a *real* dictator by the use of weapons.
Donald Trump hasn't repealed the Second Amendment, so he is not
a real dictator.
So? The Democrats claim that he is. Are you saying that they lie?
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated when
they equate Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Who is Adolph Hitler?
Not is but was. A powerful European warlord supported by wealthy white
USA republicans such as manufacturer Henry Ford and banker Prescott Bush.
Don't know anybody by that name. I know of somebody whose first name
ended with an "f".
I don't know anybody whose name ends in f except perhaps Stephanie.
(Adolf cunningly changed his name before he arrived in South America
because he was disliked and wished to remain anonymous.)
Dimensional Traveler
2020-05-29 23:02:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Titus G
Post by Thomas Koenig
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
It _is_ hard to remove a *real* dictator by the use of weapons.
Donald Trump hasn't repealed the Second Amendment, so he is not
a real dictator.
So?  The Democrats claim that he is.  Are you saying that they
lie?
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated when
they equate Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Who is Adolph Hitler?
Not is but was. A powerful European warlord supported by wealthy white
USA republicans such as manufacturer Henry Ford and banker Prescott Bush.
Don't know anybody by that name.  I know of somebody whose first name
ended with an "f".
I don't know anybody whose name ends in f except perhaps Stephanie.
(Adolf cunningly changed his name before he arrived in South America
because he was disliked and wished to remain anonymous.)
Adolf is the Germanic spelling, Adolph is the Anglicized spelling. So
there. :P
--
<to be filled in at a later date>
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 12:19:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:58:36 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against the
electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent
elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather than
a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled out by
the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that matter, by *any*
registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something is up.
Signatures? If there is a signature on the ballot, that defeats the
whole concept of a secret ballot.
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway. :-)
Nobody thinks that the US won Vietnam. What you don't get is that the
defeat was political, not military--the people of the US became
convinced with the collusion of the press that the war could not be
won, and prevailed upon the politicians to end it. That they were
losing on the battlefield was news to the military.
Paul S Person
2020-05-28 16:05:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 08:19:24 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:58:36 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against the
electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent
elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather than
a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled out by
the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that matter, by *any*
registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something is up.
Signatures? If there is a signature on the ballot, that defeats the
whole concept of a secret ballot.
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway. :-)
Nobody thinks that the US won Vietnam. What you don't get is that the
defeat was political, not military--the people of the US became
convinced with the collusion of the press that the war could not be
won, and prevailed upon the politicians to end it. That they were
losing on the battlefield was news to the military.
Actually, IIRC, the Army did a study.

Well, of course they did: after-action studies are how they learn
things useful in the future.

What they found was that

support for the war /declined/ with
every dead soldier landed at Dover

I've pointed this out before: the war was supported initially because
it supported the Draft, and the Draft was supported because it made
the boys get their g*dd*m*nd hair cut.

Actually /dying/ was never part of the deal.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:41:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 28 May 2020 08:19:24 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:58:36 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something is up.
Signatures? If there is a signature on the ballot, that defeats
the whole concept of a secret ballot.
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA
won the Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway. :-)
Nobody thinks that the US won Vietnam. What you don't get is
that the defeat was political, not military--the people of the
US became convinced with the collusion of the press that the war
could not be won, and prevailed upon the politicians to end it.
That they were losing on the battlefield was news to the
military.
Actually, IIRC, the Army did a study.
Well, of course they did: after-action studies are how they
learn things useful in the future.
What they found was that
support for the war /declined/ with
every dead soldier landed at Dover
I've pointed this out before: the war was supported initially
because it supported the Draft, and the Draft was supported
because it made the boys get their g*dd*m*nd hair cut.
Actually /dying/ was never part of the deal.
Delusional as usual.

We got involved when oil was discovered in the Gulf of Tonkin. We
got out when it was determined this was in error. That elected
officials were in danger of losing reelections accelerated the
process.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:39:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:58:36 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second envelope,
sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something is up.
Signatures? If there is a signature on the ballot, that defeats
the whole concept of a secret ballot.
And if it's anywhere else, it defeats the whole concept of
verifying that votes come from qualified voters.

One or the other, but not both.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
David Johnston
2020-05-28 17:31:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 2020-05-28 6:19 a.m., J. Clarke wrote:

The signature is removed before the bal
Post by J. Clarke
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway. :-)
Nobody thinks that the US won Vietnam. What you don't get is that the
defeat was political, not military--the people of the US became
convinced with the collusion of the press that the war could not be
won,
Damn that press and their convincing people with accurate reportage.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 23:52:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
The signature is removed before the bal
Post by J. Clarke
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA
won the Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.
:-)
Nobody thinks that the US won Vietnam. What you don't get is
that the defeat was political, not military--the people of the
US became convinced with the collusion of the press that the
war could not be won,
Damn that press and their convincing people with accurate
reportage.
Most of the news medial very accurate presents the Left's propaganda,
yes.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Titus G
2020-05-28 23:18:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 29/05/20 12:19 am, J. Clarke wrote:
snip
Post by J. Clarke
Nobody thinks that the US won Vietnam. What you don't get is that the
defeat was political, not military--the people of the US became
convinced with the collusion of the press that the war could not be
won, and prevailed upon the politicians to end it.
It has always been my impression that the people of the US and
worldwide, (including allies Aust and NZ), were more concerned with the
horrors of war and lack of justification rather than ability to win.

That they were
Post by J. Clarke
losing on the battlefield was news to the military.
From memory ~ 60,000 US dead and over a million north Vietamese.
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 12:22:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 17:02:17 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against the
electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent
elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather than
a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too.  One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled out by
the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that matter, by *any*
registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something is up.
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan Rather.
You *are* Terry, AICMFP.
Have you ever actually read Vo Nguyen Giap's book? If not you might
want to. I suspect it will destroy a few of your illusions.
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 12:23:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 14:07:31 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
Do they have warrants?
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:58:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 14:07:31 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and
one federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and
not under the control of any political party, even the one in
power - do regular door-knocks where identity and residence are
verified.
Do they have warrants?
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to
identify ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking
on the door.
There are a lot of countries where that's such an alien concept
they can't even imagine it.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Titus G
2020-05-28 23:11:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 14:07:31 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
Do they have warrants?
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door. Can you imagine an
Electoral Commission officer being given that authority?
Would you call a policeman any random individual?
It's not terribly difficult.
Major Oz
2020-05-29 02:57:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Titus G
2020-05-29 03:23:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Major Oz
2020-05-29 07:36:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Where I live......also.

It's just that NOBODY can demand ID from me without KNOWING I have committed a crime or they have reasoned suspicion that I am about to.

.....nor do I have to tell them my name, address, etc....

It is in the media's interest to portray cops as bad guys. It attracts eyeballs.....which attracts advertisers.
Titus G
2020-05-29 09:06:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Where I live......also.
It's just that NOBODY can demand ID from me without KNOWING I have committed a crime or they have reasoned suspicion that I am about to.
......nor do I have to tell them my name, address, etc....
In NZ you must supply your name and address to a police officer when
asked. It is an offence not to and you may be detained if they do not
believe you.
Post by Major Oz
It is in the media's interest to portray cops as bad guys. It attracts eyeballs.....which attracts advertisers.
Major Oz
2020-05-29 17:43:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Where I live......also.
It's just that NOBODY can demand ID from me without KNOWING I have committed a crime or they have reasoned suspicion that I am about to.
......nor do I have to tell them my name, address, etc....
In NZ you must supply your name and address to a police officer when
asked. It is an offence not to and you may be detained if they do not
believe you.
That's the difference between a citizen and a subject.
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 17:46:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Where I live......also.
It's just that NOBODY can demand ID from me without KNOWING I have committed a crime or they have reasoned suspicion that I am about to.
......nor do I have to tell them my name, address, etc....
In NZ you must supply your name and address to a police officer when
asked. It is an offence not to and you may be detained if they do not
believe you.
That's the difference between a citizen and a subject.
I love the smug certitude...
Major Oz
2020-05-29 18:05:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Where I live......also.
It's just that NOBODY can demand ID from me without KNOWING I have committed a crime or they have reasoned suspicion that I am about to.
......nor do I have to tell them my name, address, etc....
In NZ you must supply your name and address to a police officer when
asked. It is an offence not to and you may be detained if they do not
believe you.
That's the difference between a citizen and a subject.
I love the smug certitude...
Alternative term for fact.
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 18:56:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Where I live......also.
It's just that NOBODY can demand ID from me without KNOWING I have committed a crime or they have reasoned suspicion that I am about to.
......nor do I have to tell them my name, address, etc....
In NZ you must supply your name and address to a police officer when
asked. It is an offence not to and you may be detained if they do not
believe you.
That's the difference between a citizen and a subject.
I love the smug certitude...
Alternative term for fact.
ummmm.... ...not really.
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 14:22:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
t be.
Post by J. Clarke
Yes, because the government is not allowed to require us to identify
ourselves to any random individual who comes knocking on the door.
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
Where I live......also.
It's just that NOBODY can demand ID from me without KNOWING I have committed a crime or they have reasoned suspicion that I am about to.
.....nor do I have to tell them my name, address, etc....
It is in the media's interest to portray cops as bad guys. It attracts eyeballs.....which attracts advertisers.
When a cop kneels on someone's neck until that person dies...

...he is a bad guy.
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 07:54:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
I am not sure about the details of his statement.

In the United States, there have been a lot of news stories about the lives of
victims of SWATting being placed in danger - one was even killed by police - and
about unarmed black men being killed by police.

In general, though, most of the time, most Americans do regard the police as the
"good guys". They believe they live in a free country, after all.

However, they also want to keep on living in a free country. Which is why they
have a Constitution that places a lot of limits on the power of the government.
They want there to be a lot of roadblocks in the way of any would-be dictator in
their country. And that includes limits on how the police can collect evidence.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 16:14:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 00:54:34 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
I am not sure about the details of his statement.
In the United States, there have been a lot of news stories about the lives of
victims of SWATting being placed in danger - one was even killed by police - and
about unarmed black men being killed by police.
In general, though, most of the time, most Americans do regard the police as the
"good guys". They believe they live in a free country, after all.
However, they also want to keep on living in a free country. Which is why they
have a Constitution that places a lot of limits on the power of the government.
They want there to be a lot of roadblocks in the way of any would-be dictator in
their country. And that includes limits on how the police can collect evidence.
A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged. A liberal is a
conservative who has been arrested. At least it used to be that way,
but now it's the liberals who seem to be convinced that the police can
do no wrong and the conservatives who don't trust them.
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 16:20:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 00:54:34 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
I am not sure about the details of his statement.
In the United States, there have been a lot of news stories about the lives of
victims of SWATting being placed in danger - one was even killed by police - and
about unarmed black men being killed by police.
In general, though, most of the time, most Americans do regard the police as the
"good guys". They believe they live in a free country, after all.
However, they also want to keep on living in a free country. Which is why they
have a Constitution that places a lot of limits on the power of the government.
They want there to be a lot of roadblocks in the way of any would-be dictator in
their country. And that includes limits on how the police can collect evidence.
A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged. A liberal is a
conservative who has been arrested. At least it used to be that way,
but now it's the liberals who seem to be convinced that the police can
do no wrong and the conservatives who don't trust them.
And a simpleton is anyone who thinks it's is anything LIKE that simple.
Kevrob
2020-05-29 16:28:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
I am not sure about the details of his statement.
In the United States, there have been a lot of news stories about the lives of
victims of SWATting being placed in danger - one was even killed by police - and
about unarmed black men being killed by police.
In general, though, most of the time, most Americans do regard the police as the
"good guys". They believe they live in a free country, after all.
However, they also want to keep on living in a free country. Which is why they
have a Constitution that places a lot of limits on the power of the government.
They want there to be a lot of roadblocks in the way of any would-be dictator in
their country. And that includes limits on how the police can collect evidence.
In the USA, a significant % of Law Enforcement Ossifers are anything
but "good guys," or their "goodness" is variable "good" or not, depending
on circumstances.

The same patrol officer who might plant drugs on a suspect to allow for
an easy conviction might risk his life to rescue a child. The highest
value among LEOs being "everybody gets home safe at the end of shift"
rather than "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" contributes
to the "Team Blue as occupying army" mindset.

The percentage I speak of is not necessarily a majority, and varies
from police agency to police agency. The advent of citizen video, and
departments equipping vehicles and personnel with dashcams and bodycams
means that we all get to see the transgressions that were already
committed. The "...cops are always right..." folks can no longer
deny that there are "bad apples," plus some "bruised fruit," that could
be pared and made edible.

Kevin R
Major Oz
2020-05-29 17:58:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
In the USA, a significant % of Law Enforcement Ossifers are anything
but "good guys," or their "goodness" is variable "good" or not, depending
on circumstances.
The same patrol officer who might plant drugs on a suspect to allow for
an easy conviction might risk his life to rescue a child. The highest
value among LEOs being "everybody gets home safe at the end of shift"
rather than "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" contributes
to the "Team Blue as occupying army" mindset.
The percentage I speak of is not necessarily a majority, and varies
from police agency to police agency. The advent of citizen video, and
departments equipping vehicles and personnel with dashcams and bodycams
means that we all get to see the transgressions that were already
committed. The "...cops are always right..." folks can no longer
deny that there are "bad apples," plus some "bruised fruit," that could
be pared and made edible.
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.

....but sounds good in the classroom....
Kevrob
2020-05-29 19:25:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Friday, May 29, 2020 at 1:58:31 PM UTC-4, Major Oz wrote:

[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.

B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.

(iii) [quote]

Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd

Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?

[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020

https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko

Kevin R
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 19:29:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
And...

'George Floyd death: Ex-officer charged with murder in Minneapolis'

<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52854025>
Kevrob
2020-05-29 20:21:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
And...
'George Floyd death: Ex-officer charged with murder in Minneapolis'
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52854025>
I wouldn't go that far that news story.

[quote]

Ex-police officer Derek Chauvin charged with murder, manslaughter
in George Floyd death

The officer was captured on video kneeling on the neck of Floyd
in video seen around the world.

By Chao Xiong and Paul Walsh - Star Tribune staff writers
May 29, 2020 — 2:43pm

[/quote] - `strib, from the Mini-Apple.

https://www.startribune.com/derek-chauvin-charged-with-murder-manslaughter/570869672/

Kevin R
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 20:25:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
And...
'George Floyd death: Ex-officer charged with murder in Minneapolis'
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52854025>
I wouldn't go that far that news story.
[quote]
Ex-police officer Derek Chauvin charged with murder, manslaughter
in George Floyd death
The officer was captured on video kneeling on the neck of Floyd
in video seen around the world.
By Chao Xiong and Paul Walsh - Star Tribune staff writers
May 29, 2020 — 2:43pm
[/quote] - `strib, from the Mini-Apple.
https://www.startribune.com/derek-chauvin-charged-with-murder-manslaughter/570869672/
Kevin R
I don't know what you mean.

What went "that far"?
Kevrob
2020-05-29 20:55:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Kevrob
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
And...
'George Floyd death: Ex-officer charged with murder in Minneapolis'
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52854025>
I wouldn't go that far that news story.
[quote]
Ex-police officer Derek Chauvin charged with murder, manslaughter
in George Floyd death
The officer was captured on video kneeling on the neck of Floyd
in video seen around the world.
By Chao Xiong and Paul Walsh - Star Tribune staff writers
May 29, 2020 — 2:43pm
[/quote] - `strib, from the Mini-Apple.
https://www.startribune.com/derek-chauvin-charged-with-murder-manslaughter/570869672/
Kevin R
I don't know what you mean.
What went "that far"?
"That far," geographically: a London, England - based
network, the creature of a foreign government, writing
about events in Minnesota, USA.

Kevin R
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 22:11:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Kevrob
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
And...
'George Floyd death: Ex-officer charged with murder in Minneapolis'
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52854025>
I wouldn't go that far that news story.
[quote]
Ex-police officer Derek Chauvin charged with murder, manslaughter
in George Floyd death
The officer was captured on video kneeling on the neck of Floyd
in video seen around the world.
By Chao Xiong and Paul Walsh - Star Tribune staff writers
May 29, 2020 — 2:43pm
[/quote] - `strib, from the Mini-Apple.
https://www.startribune.com/derek-chauvin-charged-with-murder-manslaughter/570869672/
Kevin R
I don't know what you mean.
What went "that far"?
"That far," geographically: a London, England - based
network, the creature of a foreign government, writing
about events in Minnesota, USA.
I think that probably makes them MORE credible, not less.
Major Oz
2020-05-29 20:51:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
Major Oz
2020-05-29 20:55:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
In the absence of evidence, it is obvious that the cop contributed to his death......and may have actually caused it.

That is subject to investigation.......no phone video.

I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.

But.........IF the facts prove such.....hang his ass.

....but not before.....

(note: no video, no pics, no nothing documenting any action prior to that recorded by the oscar-nominated video)
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 21:06:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
I agree that every person accused of a crime has the right to a fair trial.

However, since so many innocent people have now sustained serious property
losses in the rioting, is this going to end up like Rodney King, where people
start developing the attitude that, if the cops kill an innocent black man,
maybe it's better to just hush it up?

To be clear: I'm not saying that's a good attitude. What I am sayign is that I'm
saddened that those people doing the rioting and the looting didn't stop to
think of that, and not give in to the pain and rage.

But I just read another news story that makes this seem even worse. This wasn't
just a cop taking excessive force on some random black man because he was afraid
the black man was lying about not being able to breathe, and had a hidden gun or
something... sadly, I could understand that a little.

No. The cop with his knee on the guy's neck, and the guy on the ground... had
both previously worked as bouncers at the same restaurant. This was no random
black guy, this was a former co-worker of his, someone he knew personally.

This opens up the possibility that further investigation may justify first-
degree murder charges instead of just third-degree.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 21:58:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 14:06:22 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Major Oz
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
I agree that every person accused of a crime has the right to a fair trial.
However, since so many innocent people have now sustained serious property
losses in the rioting, is this going to end up like Rodney King, where people
start developing the attitude that, if the cops kill an innocent black man,
maybe it's better to just hush it up?
No, it's better to treat the cop like everybody else who kills
somebody, charge him with manslaughter or homicide or whatever the
circumstances suggest is appropriate, and let the courts decide
whether he was justified.

I keep hearing from liberals that it's OK for police to go armed
because they have all this "training" that is supposedly not available
to non-cops. That being the case, with all that "training" the cop
should easily be able to justify his actions.
Post by Quadibloc
To be clear: I'm not saying that's a good attitude. What I am sayign is that I'm
saddened that those people doing the rioting and the looting didn't stop to
think of that, and not give in to the pain and rage.
The rioting and looting happens because there isn't any effective way
for minorities to get justice other than by doing so.
Post by Quadibloc
But I just read another news story that makes this seem even worse. This wasn't
just a cop taking excessive force on some random black man because he was afraid
the black man was lying about not being able to breathe, and had a hidden gun or
something... sadly, I could understand that a little.
No. The cop with his knee on the guy's neck, and the guy on the ground... had
both previously worked as bouncers at the same restaurant. This was no random
black guy, this was a former co-worker of his, someone he knew personally.
This opens up the possibility that further investigation may justify first-
degree murder charges instead of just third-degree.
John Savard
Major Oz
2020-05-30 00:24:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 14:06:22 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Major Oz
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
I agree that every person accused of a crime has the right to a fair trial.
However, since so many innocent people have now sustained serious property
losses in the rioting, is this going to end up like Rodney King, where people
start developing the attitude that, if the cops kill an innocent black man,
maybe it's better to just hush it up?
No, it's better to treat the cop like everybody else who kills
somebody, charge him with manslaughter or homicide or whatever the
circumstances suggest is appropriate, and let the courts decide
whether he was justified.
I keep hearing from liberals that it's OK for police to go armed
because they have all this "training" that is supposedly not available
to non-cops. That being the case, with all that "training" the cop
should easily be able to justify his actions.
Post by Quadibloc
To be clear: I'm not saying that's a good attitude. What I am sayign is that I'm
saddened that those people doing the rioting and the looting didn't stop to
think of that, and not give in to the pain and rage.
The rioting and looting happens because there isn't any effective way
for minorities to get justice other than by doing so.
HORSESHIT......of the purest ray, serene.
Quadibloc
2020-05-30 06:07:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
The rioting and looting happens because there isn't any effective way
for minorities to get justice other than by doing so.
It's also a pretty effective way in at least the medium term to prevent progress
towards justice... even if it seems like it's the only way in the short term to
get anyone to pay attention.

My inclination, when I saw that statement, though, would be to reply with
something to the effect: "you speak as though white liberals do not exist",
although no doubt a devastating reply to that is possible.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-05-30 13:41:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 23:07:34 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The rioting and looting happens because there isn't any effective way
for minorities to get justice other than by doing so.
It's also a pretty effective way in at least the medium term to prevent progress
towards justice... even if it seems like it's the only way in the short term to
get anyone to pay attention.
My inclination, when I saw that statement, though, would be to reply with
something to the effect: "you speak as though white liberals do not exist",
although no doubt a devastating reply to that is possible.
While liberals exist. White liberals who actually possess a clue are
far, far rarer.
h***@gmail.com
2020-05-30 07:23:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
The rioting and looting happens because there isn't any effective way
for minorities to get justice other than by doing so.
Here's a twitter thread with various white riots and what's triggered them
https://twitter.com/brokeymcpoverty/status/1266104126942908416

There's also confirmed cases in the current situation where property damage has been done by cops as a false flag and there's footage of a drive by macing by cops

Also a lot of fires at protests are caused by police weapons
Titus G
2020-05-29 21:51:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
In the absence of evidence, it is obvious that the cop contributed to his death......and may have actually caused it.
That is subject to investigation.......no phone video.
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
But.........IF the facts prove such.....hang his ass.
.....but not before.....
(note: no video, no pics, no nothing documenting any action prior to that recorded by the oscar-nominated video)
There is now video footage from a restaurant security camera showing him
in handcuffs co-operating with police, being walked across the road and
sat on the footpath. Twitter video. But there is still a gap between the
end of that and being kneeled on at the start of the oscar-nominated video.
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 22:13:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
In the absence of evidence, it is obvious that the cop contributed to his death......and may have actually caused it.
That is subject to investigation.......no phone video.
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
But.........IF the facts prove such.....hang his ass.
....but not before.....
(note: no video, no pics, no nothing documenting any action prior to that recorded by the oscar-nominated video)
It is a substantiated fact that the cop was on his neck for 8 minutes.

It is a substantiated fact that the man is dead.

It is a substantiated fact that the police released a redacted version
of the event.
Major Oz
2020-05-30 00:26:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
In the absence of evidence, it is obvious that the cop contributed to his death......and may have actually caused it.
That is subject to investigation.......no phone video.
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
But.........IF the facts prove such.....hang his ass.
....but not before.....
(note: no video, no pics, no nothing documenting any action prior to that recorded by the oscar-nominated video)
It is a substantiated fact that the cop was on his neck for 8 minutes.
It is a substantiated fact that the man is dead.
It is a substantiated fact that the police released a redacted version
of the event.
.....and, therefore.......??
Alan Baker
2020-05-30 03:52:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
In the absence of evidence, it is obvious that the cop contributed to his death......and may have actually caused it.
That is subject to investigation.......no phone video.
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
But.........IF the facts prove such.....hang his ass.
....but not before.....
(note: no video, no pics, no nothing documenting any action prior to that recorded by the oscar-nominated video)
It is a substantiated fact that the cop was on his neck for 8 minutes.
It is a substantiated fact that the man is dead.
It is a substantiated fact that the police released a redacted version
of the event.
.....and, therefore.......??
You said you preferred substantiated facts.

I just provided you some.

Apparently the sum total of facts known to this point was enough to get
the cop who did it arrested for murder.
Kevrob
2020-05-30 00:58:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Kevrob
[snip]
Post by Major Oz
CNN / DNC talking points with NO substantiation.
....but sounds good in the classroom....
1) I don't watch much CNN.
B) I'm a Libertarian, not a Democrat. I have been
much more influenced by the journalism of writers
such as Radley Balko* than by TV talking heads.
Not everything is Team Red/Team Blue.
(iii) [quote]
Even Police Unions Trash the Actions of the Cop Who Killed
George Floyd
Are we seeing a tipping point where police begin to grasp why
the public is so outraged?
[/quote] - Scott Shackford article in REASON, 29 May, 2020
https://reason.com/2020/05/29/even-police-unions-trash-the-actions-of-the-cop-who-killed-george-floyd/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radley_Balko
Kevin R
In the absence of evidence, it is obvious that the cop contributed to his death......and may have actually caused it.
That is subject to investigation.......no phone video.
I tend to prefer substantiated fact in preference to emotion.
But.........IF the facts prove such.....hang his ass.
....but not before.....
(note: no video, no pics, no nothing documenting any action prior to that recorded by the oscar-nominated video)
DA in Hennepin County had a look at the police dashcam and
bodycam video, and who knows what all else. The charges
against ex-cop Chauvin came very swiftly, compared to
other police violence cases in MN. Of course, enough to
arrest may not be enough to convict.

A grand jury will still have to indict.

3 minutes to curfew in the Twin Cities. (8 pm/22:00
Central Daylight Time)

Kevin R
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 20:41:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Titus G
Post by Major Oz
Post by Titus G
Your government is allowed to require you to identify yourself to a
police officer who comes knocking on the door.
If you are addressing a US resident IN the US.......you are wrong.
Really? It should be obvious that a US resident would know more about
this than I would, so as I was addressing a US resident IN the US, then
I am wrong. Thank you.
Where I live, the police are the good guys.
I am not sure about the details of his statement.
In the United States, there have been a lot of news stories about the lives of
victims of SWATting being placed in danger - one was even killed by police - and
about unarmed black men being killed by police.
In general, though, most of the time, most Americans do regard the police as the
"good guys". They believe they live in a free country, after all.
However, they also want to keep on living in a free country. Which is why they
have a Constitution that places a lot of limits on the power of the government.
They want there to be a lot of roadblocks in the way of any would-be dictator in
their country. And that includes limits on how the police can collect evidence.
In the USA, a significant % of Law Enforcement Ossifers are anything
but "good guys," or their "goodness" is variable "good" or not, depending
on circumstances.
The same patrol officer who might plant drugs on a suspect to allow for
an easy conviction might risk his life to rescue a child. The highest
value among LEOs being "everybody gets home safe at the end of shift"
rather than "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" contributes
to the "Team Blue as occupying army" mindset.
The percentage I speak of is not necessarily a majority, and varies
from police agency to police agency. The advent of citizen video, and
departments equipping vehicles and personnel with dashcams and bodycams
means that we all get to see the transgressions that were already
committed. The "...cops are always right..." folks can no longer
deny that there are "bad apples," plus some "bruised fruit," that could
be pared and made edible.
A problem we have, IMO, is that "police" as an armed, uniformed
government force, was a very new idea at the time that the US was
founded and the Founders didn't really think about controlling that
power--if they had I suspect that they would have come up with another
one of their three-legged checks and balances.
Post by Kevrob
Kevin R
h***@gmail.com
2020-05-30 07:21:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
A problem we have, IMO, is that "police" as an armed, uniformed
government force, was a very new idea at the time that the US was
founded and the Founders didn't really think about controlling that
power--if they had I suspect that they would have come up with another
one of their three-legged checks and balances.
Police in the USA came about to control the black population
Quadibloc
2020-05-30 07:28:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
A problem we have, IMO, is that "police" as an armed, uniformed
government force, was a very new idea at the time that the US was
founded and the Founders didn't really think about controlling that
power--if they had I suspect that they would have come up with another
one of their three-legged checks and balances.
Police in the USA came about to control the black population
And, given slavery, obviously it *needed* to be controlled, at least from the
white perspective.

The racial divide in the United States is the reason for a lot of its
peculiarities. Like the continuing support for the Second Amendment. Or the long
delay in achieving a government-supported health care system.

But police are not a U.S. peculiarity, other countries had police too.

And so the South justified itself by pointing to the North as being in danger of
heading the way Europe went during the Industrial Revolution... of having a
divide that would lead to white people needing to be controlled. If only they
had robots instead of other people to use in this manner...

Hmm. The original Battlestar Galactica started out with a subtext of not
forgetting that, as we learned before World War II, that appeasement doesn't
work, the bad guys can't be trusted. Did it also have a better-hidden subtext
that slave revolts are evil?

John Savard
h***@gmail.com
2020-05-30 07:47:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Saturday, May 30, 2020 at 5:28:38 PM UTC+10, Quadibloc wrote:


Quaddie please realise that you don't understand people and stop pushing your bullshit
J. Clarke
2020-05-30 13:47:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 30 May 2020 00:28:35 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
A problem we have, IMO, is that "police" as an armed, uniformed
government force, was a very new idea at the time that the US was
founded and the Founders didn't really think about controlling that
power--if they had I suspect that they would have come up with another
one of their three-legged checks and balances.
Police in the USA came about to control the black population
And, given slavery, obviously it *needed* to be controlled, at least from the
white perspective.
Big need to control the black population in New York, Boston, and
Philadelphia was there?

Sorry, but the notion that police were created in the US to oppress
black people is another one that doesn't pass the giggle test.
Post by Quadibloc
The racial divide in the United States is the reason for a lot of its
peculiarities. Like the continuing support for the Second Amendment. Or the long
delay in achieving a government-supported health care system.
But police are not a U.S. peculiarity, other countries had police too.
And so the South justified itself by pointing to the North as being in danger of
heading the way Europe went during the Industrial Revolution... of having a
divide that would lead to white people needing to be controlled. If only they
had robots instead of other people to use in this manner...
Hmm. The original Battlestar Galactica started out with a subtext of not
forgetting that, as we learned before World War II, that appeasement doesn't
work, the bad guys can't be trusted. Did it also have a better-hidden subtext
that slave revolts are evil?
John Savard
Jaimie Vandenbergh
2020-05-30 11:00:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
A problem we have, IMO, is that "police" as an armed, uniformed
government force, was a very new idea at the time that the US was
founded and the Founders didn't really think about controlling that
power--if they had I suspect that they would have come up with another
one of their three-legged checks and balances.
Police in the USA came about to control the black population
Slave catching teams, which evolved into police departments.

Well, I say evolved. Clearly not.

Cheers - Jaimie
--
"For our younger readers -
books are hardened bits of the internet that have fallen off."
-- http://www.e4.com/wtf/ispot-games/?sheet=28
J. Clarke
2020-05-30 13:48:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 30 May 2020 11:00:47 GMT, Jaimie Vandenbergh
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
A problem we have, IMO, is that "police" as an armed, uniformed
government force, was a very new idea at the time that the US was
founded and the Founders didn't really think about controlling that
power--if they had I suspect that they would have come up with another
one of their three-legged checks and balances.
Police in the USA came about to control the black population
Slave catching teams, which evolved into police departments.
Well, I say evolved. Clearly not.
I see. So which specific "slave catching teams" became
government-sanctioned police departments and on what dates?

I believe you are conflating bounty hunters with police.
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 12:24:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 17:11:14 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
If we were to do that for everyone here in the US..........there would be HUGE screams of racism.
The question is, would it be the blacks complaining about being
enfranchised, or the *whites* complaining about the blacks being
enfranchised???
It would be the white liberals complaining that somehow it was
disenfranchising black people.
Sometimes the USA seems a complete waste of democracy...
And yes, we didn't enfranchise our locals until 1966, but we did do it.
Cheers,
Gary B-)
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:44:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 17:11:14 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 11:09:07 PM UTC-5, Gary R.
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental
agencies, and not under the control of any political party,
even the one in power - do regular door-knocks where identity
and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it must be.
If we were to do that for everyone here in the
US..........there would be HUGE screams of racism.
The question is, would it be the blacks complaining about being
enfranchised, or the *whites* complaining about the blacks being
enfranchised???
It would be the white liberals complaining that somehow it was
disenfranchising black people.
In some places, they'd be right.

In other places, it'd probably also be right, but it would be the
white liberals doing it. (Remember, Trump had a *lot* of black
votes.)
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
h***@gmail.com
2020-05-28 17:02:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by J. Clarke
It would be the white liberals complaining that somehow it was
disenfranchising black people.
In some places, they'd be right.
In other places, it'd probably also be right, but it would be the
white liberals doing it. (Remember, Trump had a *lot* of black
votes.)
Interesting definition of "a lot"

https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2016

African-Americans 89% Clinton, 8% Trump

Slightly higher for Trump than Mitch in 2012
93% Obama, 6% Rommney

or McCain in 2008
95% Obama 4% McCain
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 12:30:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 27 May 2020 22:11:59 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said that she was
going to punish them for not following her orders.
People who break the law get punished.
Please identify the specific law that was broken and the specific
punishments prescribed for violating that law.

A governor's edict, no matter how much closet royalists like you want
it to be, is NOT THE LAW.
And those who make a point of flouting the
law will get particular attention. Dictatorship depends on the content of the
laws. Not engaging in acts that endanger the lives of others is something that it
is legitimate to make illegal.
And when the specific action in question is actually made illegal get
back to us.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:30:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 22:11:59 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 7:24:36 PM UTC-6, Lynn McGuire
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said
that she was going to punish them for not following her
orders.
People who break the law get punished.
Please identify the specific law that was broken and the
specific punishments prescribed for violating that law.
A governor's edict, no matter how much closet royalists like you
want it to be, is NOT THE LAW.
Especially when it *intentionally* punishes millions of people the
governor *knows* did not break it.

The only one breaking the law is the governor. Well, her and the jack
booted thugs that work for her, but most of them have chickened out
when it came right down to it.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Quadibloc
2020-05-28 17:36:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
A governor's edict, no matter how much closet royalists like you want
it to be, is NOT THE LAW.
I know that the President of the United States can issue Executive Orders that
have the force of law, and I thought that the laws in most U.S. states allowed
governors to do something similar. Not being an American, I could be mistaken.

Speaking of Executive Orders, I see that there's one coming up aimed at Twitter...

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 12:33:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then what is
the point of putting them in hardened underground silos in
the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now you'll
listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct more often
than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't listened to
him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is a true statement
if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor and understanding of
American politics, but which led to much consternation among his
opponents.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 17:02:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then
what is the point of putting them in hardened
underground silos in the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now
you'll listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct
more often than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't
listened to him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is
a true statement if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor
and understanding of American politics, but which led to much
consternation among his opponents.
Rush also knows full well not to take himself seriously, as do his
fans. Only those who hate him with blind, stupid passtion see him
as anything other than trollish entertainment.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Major Oz
2020-05-28 18:12:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then
what is the point of putting them in hardened
underground silos in the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now
you'll listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct
more often than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't
listened to him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is
a true statement if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor
and understanding of American politics, but which led to much
consternation among his opponents.
Rush also knows full well not to take himself seriously, as do his
fans. Only those who hate him with blind, stupid passtion see him
as anything other than trollish entertainment.
I first heard him in the late 80's and what you say was completely obvious.

It has been absolute amazement to me that anyone could take him in any way other than what you describe.......though I know a number of campus leftists that glory in doing so.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 23:59:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:02:27 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then
what is the point of putting them in hardened
underground silos in the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an
anti-tank weapon then what is the point of putting
armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own
population. (see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now
you'll listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct
more often than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't
listened to him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which
is a true statement if interpreted with a reasonable sense of
humor and understanding of American politics, but which led
to much consternation among his opponents.
Rush also knows full well not to take himself seriously, as do
his fans. Only those who hate him with blind, stupid passtion
see him as anything other than trollish entertainment.
I first heard him in the late 80's and what you say was
completely obvious.
It is, to people who aren't delusional. And to some who are.
It has been absolute amazement to me that anyone could take him
in any way other than what you describe.......
Catch him in a talkative mood, and he'll describe himself as an
entertainer, and only that.
though I know a
number of campus leftists that glory in doing so.
One cannot run a cult without a boogie man. They *need* him, and
they need him to be taken seriously no matter how idiotic one has
to be to do so.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Lynn McGuire
2020-05-28 18:23:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then what is
the point of putting them in hardened underground silos in
the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now you'll
listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct more often
than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't listened to
him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is a true statement
if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor and understanding of
American politics, but which led to much consternation among his
opponents.
Nope. Rush says that he is right 99.8% of the time. 99.8% is not "always".

Lynn
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 21:37:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:23:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then what is
the point of putting them in hardened underground silos in
the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now you'll
listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct more often
than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't listened to
him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is a true statement
if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor and understanding of
American politics, but which led to much consternation among his
opponents.
Nope. Rush says that he is right 99.8% of the time. 99.8% is not "always".
Well then he's changed his story. I do want to know about the 0.2% of
the time that he's left though.
Lynn McGuire
2020-05-28 21:47:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:23:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then what is
the point of putting them in hardened underground silos in
the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now you'll
listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct more often
than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't listened to
him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is a true statement
if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor and understanding of
American politics, but which led to much consternation among his
opponents.
Nope. Rush says that he is right 99.8% of the time. 99.8% is not "always".
Well then he's changed his story. I do want to know about the 0.2% of
the time that he's left though.
Good luck with that. I have heard him say that he was wrong about
something and say what the correction is (I do not remember when that
was other than it was recently). I suspect that he has a person on
staff to correct him. I think I heard him say once that he has 30
people on staff.

Lynn
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 21:53:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 16:47:39 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:23:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then what is
the point of putting them in hardened underground silos in
the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now you'll
listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct more often
than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't listened to
him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is a true statement
if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor and understanding of
American politics, but which led to much consternation among his
opponents.
Nope. Rush says that he is right 99.8% of the time. 99.8% is not "always".
Well then he's changed his story. I do want to know about the 0.2% of
the time that he's left though.
Good luck with that. I have heard him say that he was wrong about
something and say what the correction is (I do not remember when that
was other than it was recently). I suspect that he has a person on
staff to correct him. I think I heard him say once that he has 30
people on staff.
He may be wrong but that doesn't make him any less right. You do know
that "right" has more than one meaning do you not?
Lynn McGuire
2020-05-28 23:19:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 16:47:39 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:23:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then what is
the point of putting them in hardened underground silos in
the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now you'll
listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct more often
than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't listened to
him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is a true statement
if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor and understanding of
American politics, but which led to much consternation among his
opponents.
Nope. Rush says that he is right 99.8% of the time. 99.8% is not "always".
Well then he's changed his story. I do want to know about the 0.2% of
the time that he's left though.
Good luck with that. I have heard him say that he was wrong about
something and say what the correction is (I do not remember when that
was other than it was recently). I suspect that he has a person on
staff to correct him. I think I heard him say once that he has 30
people on staff.
He may be wrong but that doesn't make him any less right. You do know
that "right" has more than one meaning do you not?
Right.

Lynn
Titus G
2020-05-28 23:43:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:23:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then what is
the point of putting them in hardened underground silos in
the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own population.
(see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now you'll
listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct more often
than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't listened to
him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which is a true statement
if interpreted with a reasonable sense of humor and understanding of
American politics, but which led to much consternation among his
opponents.
Nope. Rush says that he is right 99.8% of the time. 99.8% is not "always".
Well then he's changed his story. I do want to know about the 0.2% of
the time that he's left though.
"Of Limbaugh's controversial statements and allegations they have
investigated, Politifact has rated 84% as ranging from "Mostly False" to
"Pants-On-Fire" (signifying extremely false), with 5% of Limbaugh's
contested statements rising to the level of "Mostly True" and 0% rated
"True."

So his record is far better than the Dimwire's.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 23:59:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:23:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:50:28 -0700, Robert Woodward
On Tue, 26 May 2020 16:15:05 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Mon, 25 May 2020 09:01:49 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Sun, 24 May 2020 16:40:27 +0200, Sjouke Burry
If they are not able to survive a first strike then
what is the point of putting them in hardened
underground silos in the first place?
If a tank is not able to survive a hit by an anti-tank
weapon then what is the point of putting armor on it?
Tanks are quite suitable to control your own
population. (see China at the chinamen?? square.)
Tienanmen.
So close, and yet so far.
Ti*a*nanmen Square.
Well, drat. You're right.
I keep telling you people I'm *always* right. Maybe now
you'll listen to me.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I will point out that a clock that runs backwards is correct
more often than that.
Rush Limbaugh used to say (maybe he still does, I haven't
listened to him in decades) that he was _always_ right, which
is a true statement if interpreted with a reasonable sense of
humor and understanding of American politics, but which led to
much consternation among his opponents.
Nope. Rush says that he is right 99.8% of the time. 99.8% is
not "always".
Well then he's changed his story. I do want to know about the
0.2% of the time that he's left though.
That's probably when he thought he was wrong, but was mistaken.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Paul S Person
2020-05-28 15:53:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
BTW, Charlotteville, legally contracted site of the RNC this
year, is becoming the next Hot Spot. But perhaps it will have
peaked by August.
Wow dude, you are delusional.
It's so obvious it's embarassing. One wonders if he's in the US, or
just relying on the international press propaganda for his mental
image of the US.
He can't tell Charlottesville, VA from Charlotte, NC,
though there's many a USAian that couldn't.
It's actually called a "typo". What can I say?

And NC has its infection rate /rising/, and Charlotte is right smack
dab in the middle of it -- a Hot Spot in the making. Well, as of
recently, anyway; who can say what it's doing right now?

And the RNC does have a contract with Charlotte for the convention.
Plus two years of effort and contracts with various vendors (I would
think they have, by now, rented entire hotels for the convention
dates, for example) -- and no inclination to move it.

If Trump doesn't want to show up, well, they [1] can always nominate
him in absentia. Or nominate somebody else -- somebody interested
enough in the job to show up.

It's their [1] choice, after all.

[1] Reference is, of course, to the delegates to the Republican
Convention.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 17:01:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:48:27 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 7:13:53 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula
BTW, Charlotteville, legally contracted site of the RNC
this year, is becoming the next Hot Spot. But perhaps it
will have peaked by August.
Wow dude, you are delusional.
It's so obvious it's embarassing. One wonders if he's in the
US, or just relying on the international press propaganda for
his mental image of the US.
He can't tell Charlottesville, VA from Charlotte, NC,
though there's many a USAian that couldn't.
It's actually called a "typo". What can I say?
That's your story, and you're sticking to it!
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Paul S Person
2020-05-28 16:02:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 27 May 2020 13:08:16 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 13:08:18 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
<snip stuff so far off base is can't even be said to be wrong>
Which is to say, you know I'm right but you're not man enough to
admit it.
What I have figured it that you are so far off base that what you say
can't even be said to be wrong.

IOW, on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being "wrong" and 10 being "correct",
you are at about -1000.
Wow!
You really have /no idea at all/ how it works, do you?
The paper strip with the number is removed /by the voter/ and is
/not sent back in/.
So there's no verification that it came from someone eligible to vote
at all.
In your reality, maybe.

Over here, where the rest of us live, I've done exactly that in every
election for many, many elections.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 17:03:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 27 May 2020 13:08:16 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Tue, 26 May 2020 13:08:18 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
<snip stuff so far off base is can't even be said to be wrong>
Which is to say, you know I'm right but you're not man enough to
admit it.
What I have figured it that you are so far off base that what
you say can't even be said to be wrong.
IOW, on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being "wrong" and 10 being
"correct", you are at about -1000.
I know you are, but what am ?
Post by Paul S Person
Wow!
You really have /no idea at all/ how it works, do you?
The paper strip with the number is removed /by the voter/ and
is /not sent back in/.
So there's no verification that it came from someone eligible to
vote at all.
In your reality, maybe.
Over here, where the rest of us live, I've done exactly that in
every election for many, many elections.
Secret ballot, or verified to come from a qualified voter, but not
both. You may be programmed to believe otherwise, but that's no a
surprise, given how clearly delusional you are on every other
subject.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Paul S Person
2020-05-29 15:47:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 10:03:45 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 27 May 2020 13:08:16 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Tue, 26 May 2020 13:08:18 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
<snip stuff so far off base is can't even be said to be wrong>
Which is to say, you know I'm right but you're not man enough to
admit it.
What I have figured it that you are so far off base that what
you say can't even be said to be wrong.
IOW, on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being "wrong" and 10 being
"correct", you are at about -1000.
I know you are, but what am ?
Post by Paul S Person
Wow!
You really have /no idea at all/ how it works, do you?
The paper strip with the number is removed /by the voter/ and
is /not sent back in/.
So there's no verification that it came from someone eligible to
vote at all.
In your reality, maybe.
Over here, where the rest of us live, I've done exactly that in
every election for many, many elections.
Secret ballot, or verified to come from a qualified voter, but not
both. You may be programmed to believe otherwise, but that's no a
surprise, given how clearly delusional you are on every other
subject.
Has anyone else picked up on Trump's slam of Twitter?

Where he accuses them, not of violating his 1st Amendment rights, not
of showing anti-alt-right bias, but of /interfering in political
contest/.

IOW, where he admitted that the entire "mail voting" thing is simply a
compaign issue, like "Mexico will pay", and not to be taken seriously.

By anybody. Least of all his supporters, who might wonder why he
hasn't kept his promise.

So I suggest we all back off from this now-identified-by-Trump as a
non-issue topic.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 16:06:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 28 May 2020 10:03:45 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Paul S Person
On Wed, 27 May 2020 13:08:16 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
On Tue, 26 May 2020 13:08:18 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
<snip stuff so far off base is can't even be said to be
wrong>
Which is to say, you know I'm right but you're not man enough
to admit it.
What I have figured it that you are so far off base that what
you say can't even be said to be wrong.
IOW, on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being "wrong" and 10 being
"correct", you are at about -1000.
I know you are, but what am ?
Post by Paul S Person
Wow!
You really have /no idea at all/ how it works, do you?
The paper strip with the number is removed /by the voter/
and is /not sent back in/.
So there's no verification that it came from someone eligible
to vote at all.
In your reality, maybe.
Over here, where the rest of us live, I've done exactly that
in every election for many, many elections.
Secret ballot, or verified to come from a qualified voter, but
not both. You may be programmed to believe otherwise, but that's
no a surprise, given how clearly delusional you are on every
other subject.
Has anyone else picked up on Trump's slam of Twitter?
Where he accuses them, not of violating his 1st Amendment
rights, not of showing anti-alt-right bias, but of /interfering
in political contest/.
Which is a fair accusation, really. Their bias hasn't been all that
subtle. Accusing major social media companies of manipuating
politics is hardly unique to Trump. That's been happening for as
long as social media has existed, because the mainuplation has
existed for as long as social media has existed.

If social media companies want immunity to liability for what they
allow to be posted, they need to not edit at all. If they want to
edit, they need to be liable for what they let through. They've had
their cake and eaten it too for a long time, and it's well past
time for that to end.

A *lot* of peopel have been saying that for some time.
Post by Paul S Person
IOW, where he admitted that the entire "mail voting" thing is
simply a compaign issue, like "Mexico will pay", and not to be
taken seriously.
By anybody. Least of all his supporters, who might wonder why he
hasn't kept his promise.
So I suggest we all back off from this now-identified-by-Trump
as a non-issue topic.
In your dreams, loon.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Paul S Person
2020-05-28 16:10:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
And it is ... when only /some/ cases are followed up on, all of them
located in certain areas known to contain "them".

But the solution to that is to identify the racists-in-charge and Lock
Them Up.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:58:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:42:11 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental agencies,
and not under the control of any political party, even the one
in power - do regular door-knocks where identity and residence
are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
And it is ... when only /some/ cases are followed up on, all of
them located in certain areas known to contain "them".
But the solution to that is to identify the racists-in-charge
and Lock Them Up.
There are a lot of Democrats who should be locked up, yes.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:23:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 2:20:50 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
It should also be obvious that a literal coup by a leftist
dictator is more dangnerous than the virus.
Yes, I agree with that. I don't agree that, say, Gretchen
Whitmer is a potential or aspiring "leftist dictator" by any
stretch of the imagination, though.
Then you're not paying attention.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:24:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 2:20:50 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
It should also be obvious that a literal coup by a leftist
dictator is more dangnerous than the virus.
Yes, I agree with that. I don't agree that, say, Gretchen
Whitmer is a potential or aspiring "leftist dictator" by any
stretch of the imagination, though.
John Savard
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said that
she was going to punish them for not following her orders.
Specifically by extending the lockdown with no pretense of any
medical reason, but *only* to punish those who would dare challenge
her authority.

She's drive the state to the point of armed, though not *yet*
violent, insurrection, and now they have looting in the streets.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:29:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 7:24:36 PM UTC-6, Lynn McGuire
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said
that she was going to punish them for not following her orders.
People who break the law get punished.
An uconstitutional order isn't law, it's fascism.

And her threat was to punish *everyone* in the state for the
actions of those who defied her seized authority.

Would *you* like to be locked up as punishment for something that
your neighbors did, when the person punishing you knows full well
you couldn't have done anything to stop it? And by "punish," we're
talking about being locked up at home with no income until you get
evicted and left literally homeless, probably in the middle of
winter in Michigan?

Are you *really* so fucking delusional that you find that
acceptable?
And those who make a
point of flouting the law will get particular attention.
In this case, no, they don't get particular attention. What she
threatened was to punish *everyone* for the acts of a few.
Dictatorship depends on the content of the laws.
Indeed. And the legitimacy of them.
Not engaging in
acts that endanger the lives of others is something that it is
legitimate to make illegal.
You've just agreed that the governor of Michigan's actions were
illegal. Especially in light of hospitals reporting more suicide
deaths than cornonavirus deaths (to the tune of more suicides in
the last four weeks than all of last year).
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Quadibloc
2020-05-28 17:39:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
An uconstitutional order isn't law, it's fascism.
And her threat was to punish *everyone* in the state for the
actions of those who defied her seized authority.
Would *you* like to be locked up as punishment for something that
your neighbors did, when the person punishing you knows full well
you couldn't have done anything to stop it? And by "punish," we're
talking about being locked up at home with no income until you get
evicted and left literally homeless, probably in the middle of
winter in Michigan?
Are you *really* so fucking delusional that you find that
acceptable?
I wouldn't, but I think you're mischaracterizing her actions and words.

John Savard
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 23:53:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 10:29:22 AM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
An uconstitutional order isn't law, it's fascism.
And her threat was to punish *everyone* in the state for the
actions of those who defied her seized authority.
Would *you* like to be locked up as punishment for something
that your neighbors did, when the person punishing you knows
full well you couldn't have done anything to stop it? And by
"punish," we're talking about being locked up at home with no
income until you get evicted and left literally homeless,
probably in the middle of winter in Michigan?
Are you *really* so fucking delusional that you find that
acceptable?
I wouldn't,
Then you're a hypocrite.
but I think
No, you don't, ever. Not a single time in your entire life. The
only mental action you're capable of is obedience.
you're mischaracterizing her actions and
words.
Not in any way, but you're too delusional to accept that.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Peter Trei
2020-05-29 00:37:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 7:24:36 PM UTC-6, Lynn McGuire
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said
that she was going to punish them for not following her orders.
People who break the law get punished.
An uconstitutional order isn't law, it's fascism.
And her threat was to punish *everyone* in the state for the
actions of those who defied her seized authority.
Would *you* like to be locked up as punishment for something that
your neighbors did, when the person punishing you knows full well
you couldn't have done anything to stop it? And by "punish," we're
talking about being locked up at home with no income until you get
evicted and left literally homeless, probably in the middle of
winter in Michigan?
Are you *really* so fucking delusional that you find that
acceptable?
And those who make a
point of flouting the law will get particular attention.
In this case, no, they don't get particular attention. What she
threatened was to punish *everyone* for the acts of a few.
Dictatorship depends on the content of the laws.
Indeed. And the legitimacy of them.
Not engaging in
acts that endanger the lives of others is something that it is
legitimate to make illegal.
's u
You've just agreed that the governor of Michigan's actions were
illegal. Especially in light of hospitals reporting more suicide
deaths than cornonavirus deaths (to the tune of more suicides in
the last four weeks than all of last year).
Got a cite for that? I tried to look it up. Found that Michigan has a bit over
1500 suicides a year, and this year they're projecting 2000. That up quite a
bit.

However, so far this year, MI has already had over 5300 deaths from the virus.

So, do you have source for this, other than pulling it out of your ass?

pt
h***@gmail.com
2020-05-29 01:42:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You've just agreed that the governor of Michigan's actions were
illegal. Especially in light of hospitals reporting more suicide
deaths than cornonavirus deaths (to the tune of more suicides in
the last four weeks than all of last year).
Got a cite for that? I tried to look it up. Found that Michigan has a bit over
1500 suicides a year, and this year they're projecting 2000. That up quite a
bit.
However, so far this year, MI has already had over 5300 deaths from the virus.
So, do you have source for this, other than pulling it out of your ass?
It's Terry, he switched over to permanent troll mode a couple of years ago so he'll bullshit about anything
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 15:50:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by h***@gmail.com
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:29:22 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You've just agreed that the governor of Michigan's actions
were illegal. Especially in light of hospitals reporting more
suicide deaths than cornonavirus deaths (to the tune of more
suicides in the last four weeks than all of last year).
Got a cite for that? I tried to look it up. Found that Michigan
has a bit over 1500 suicides a year, and this year they're
projecting 2000. That up quite a bit.
However, so far this year, MI has already had over 5300 deaths from the virus.
So, do you have source for this, other than pulling it out of
your ass?
It's Terry, he switched over to permanent troll mode a couple of
years ago so he'll bullshit about anything
And here you come, humping my pantleg for attention because you're
jealous.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 15:50:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:29:22 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 7:24:36 PM UTC-6, Lynn McGuire
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said
that she was going to punish them for not following her
orders.
People who break the law get punished.
An uconstitutional order isn't law, it's fascism.
And her threat was to punish *everyone* in the state for the
actions of those who defied her seized authority.
Would *you* like to be locked up as punishment for something
that your neighbors did, when the person punishing you knows
full well you couldn't have done anything to stop it? And by
"punish," we're talking about being locked up at home with no
income until you get evicted and left literally homeless,
probably in the middle of winter in Michigan?
Are you *really* so fucking delusional that you find that
acceptable?
And those who make a
point of flouting the law will get particular attention.
In this case, no, they don't get particular attention. What she
threatened was to punish *everyone* for the acts of a few.
Dictatorship depends on the content of the laws.
Indeed. And the legitimacy of them.
Not engaging in
acts that endanger the lives of others is something that it
is legitimate to make illegal.
's u
You've just agreed that the governor of Michigan's actions were
illegal. Especially in light of hospitals reporting more
suicide deaths than cornonavirus deaths (to the tune of more
suicides in the last four weeks than all of last year).
Got a cite for that? I tried to look it up. Found that Michigan
has a bit over 1500 suicides a year, and this year they're
projecting 2000. That up quite a bit.
The worst numbers were one particular hospital in the San Franciso
area. I didn't bother to bookmark the story.
However, so far this year, MI has already had over 5300 deaths
from the virus.
So, do you have source for this, other than pulling it out of
your ass?
If I did, past experience says you'd ignore it, lie about it, or
move the goalposts. It's not like you interact with reality.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:34:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?

How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA
won the Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway. :-)
Better than than under the fascist boot heel of the left.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-29 03:27:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the various
candidates to scrutinise the votes?

I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you don't allow
it, why bother even pretending to have an election?

ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it "The
Stainless Steel Rat For President?"

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 06:45:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the various
candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you don't allow
it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it "The
Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers' paradise you
inhabit is one required to put one's name on the ballot one casts so
that the winning side can track down everyone who voted against it? If
so, please be aware that the US has a secret ballot. One is required
to identify oneself in order to vote but the identification is not
tied to the ballot. Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered
voters in the polling place, and your name gets checked off when you
arrive.
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-29 13:54:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the various
candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you don't allow
it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it "The
Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers' paradise you
inhabit is one required to put one's name on the ballot one casts so
that the winning side can track down everyone who voted against it? If
so, please be aware that the US has a secret ballot. One is required
to identify oneself in order to vote but the identification is not
tied to the ballot. Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered
voters in the polling place, and your name gets checked off when you
arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed envelope
containing your ballot papers are placed. This internal envelope has a
flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob before the envelope is passed
on to the people that physically open it, scrutinise the ballot, and
record it.

So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened envelope
containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as intended by the
voter, but at no point in the process can those who count things connect
the ballot to the voter.

I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have grown up
with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in the USA.

The other point to bear in mind is that Oz has compulsory voting, which
means that no nefarious group can "vote the graveyard" or the like.

Yes, ballots can (and have) been interfered with, but having an
independent Electoral Commission, using paper ballots, and having
competent scrutineers, both from the parties and nominally independent,
means that we have managed to avoid any real electoral screw-ups. (But
those we do have tend to be quite entertaining! Lost ballot boxes,
candidates who do not qualify under Australian law, all sorts of fun.
Generally they have no impact on the results, although sometimes they
lead to by-elections shortly after a general election. :-) )

Cheers,
Gary B-)

1 - My using "completed" here does not mean that the ballot is
necessarily "valid," that's a whole other kettle of fish!
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 14:39:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed envelope
containing your ballot papers are placed. This internal envelope has a
flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob before the envelope is passed
on to the people that physically open it, scrutinise the ballot, and
record it.
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened envelope
containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as intended by the
voter, but at no point in the process can those who count things connect
the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have grown up
with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in the USA.
Surely, though, the objection is obvious.

Yes, there is a secret ballot: *provided the people to whom you mail your ballot
follow the rules*. But since you're not there in person, how do you know this is
happening?

Sure, there might be some sort of oversight system - but in the United States,
individual states have jurisdiction over the electoral process. And
gerrymandering of electoral districts is so prevalent that both parties are now
doing it.

If there was a commitment at the highest level of government to fair elections,
obviously one solution would be to move how electins are conducted to Federal
jurisdiction.

In the United States, Donald Trump just recently threatened to delay emergency
aid to Michigan in response to flooding there, because its governor was going to
allow mail-in ballots in a primary, which Trump claimed would allow "voter
fraud". In fact, this is seen as an attempt to force her to participate in
Republican attempts to suppress voting from minority groups.

If the United States were a civilized country like Canada, where all the major parties have a firm, unshakeable commitment to the integrity of the electoral process, that would be one thing.

Oh, wait a momeent. A few years back, someone acting on behalf of the federal
Conservative party hired a call centre to call people, and give them the wrong
address for their local polling station...

and not only was this not resolved by a successful police investigation that
found every person responsible for this...

but the call centre accepted the commission because it had received legal advice
that it could do so (apparently the legal advice was not correct, but they still
weren't charged - instead of the legal advice being something like "you, and
even every individual on the floor who makes such a call, may wind up behind
bars for the next fourteen years")...

but at least one major figure within the Conservative party actually made a
public statement to the affect that sort of thing was a normal part of the game
of politics (instead of bordering on treason).

Apparently Canada is starting to follow the bad example set by the United
States.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 16:13:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 07:39:59 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed envelope
containing your ballot papers are placed. This internal envelope has a
flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob before the envelope is passed
on to the people that physically open it, scrutinise the ballot, and
record it.
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened envelope
containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as intended by the
voter, but at no point in the process can those who count things connect
the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have grown up
with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in the USA.
Surely, though, the objection is obvious.
Yes, there is a secret ballot: *provided the people to whom you mail your ballot
follow the rules*. But since you're not there in person, how do you know this is
happening?
How do you know that they didn't tear up your ballot and replace it
with another one? There are procedures in place to ensure that this
sort of thing doesn't happen. Votes aren't counted by one person
alone in a locked room.
Post by Quadibloc
Sure, there might be some sort of oversight system - but in the United States,
individual states have jurisdiction over the electoral process. And
gerrymandering of electoral districts is so prevalent that both parties are now
doing it.
What does gerrymandering have to do with vote counting?
Post by Quadibloc
If there was a commitment at the highest level of government to fair elections,
obviously one solution would be to move how electins are conducted to Federal
jurisdiction.
And that would require a Constitutional Amendment.
Post by Quadibloc
In the United States, Donald Trump just recently threatened to delay emergency
aid to Michigan in response to flooding there, because its governor was going to
allow mail-in ballots in a primary, which Trump claimed would allow "voter
fraud". In fact, this is seen as an attempt to force her to participate in
Republican attempts to suppress voting from minority groups.
You're the one wanting the Federal government to oversee elections. Be
careful what you wish for.
Post by Quadibloc
If the United States were a civilized country like Canada, where all the major parties have a firm, unshakeable commitment to the integrity of the electoral process, that would be one thing.
Well it isn't and fuck you very much.
Post by Quadibloc
Oh, wait a momeent. A few years back, someone acting on behalf of the federal
Conservative party hired a call centre to call people, and give them the wrong
address for their local polling station...
and not only was this not resolved by a successful police investigation that
found every person responsible for this...
but the call centre accepted the commission because it had received legal advice
that it could do so (apparently the legal advice was not correct, but they still
weren't charged - instead of the legal advice being something like "you, and
even every individual on the floor who makes such a call, may wind up behind
bars for the next fourteen years")...
but at least one major figure within the Conservative party actually made a
public statement to the affect that sort of thing was a normal part of the game
of politics (instead of bordering on treason).
Apparently Canada is starting to follow the bad example set by the United
States.
Interesting that you blame the US instead of the UK for the ills of
your electoral system.
Chrysi Cat
2020-05-29 19:47:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed envelope
containing your ballot papers are placed. This internal envelope has a
flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob before the envelope is passed
on to the people that physically open it, scrutinise the ballot, and
record it.
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened envelope
containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as intended by the
voter, but at no point in the process can those who count things connect
the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have grown up
with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in the USA.
Surely, though, the objection is obvious.
Yes, there is a secret ballot: *provided the people to whom you mail your ballot
follow the rules*. But since you're not there in person, how do you know this is
happening?
"The people to whom you mail your ballot" are the same people they'd be
if you had voted at a precinct polling-place and your ballots had been
driven there in a non-Postal Service truck. In _most_ places in the US
where ballots are _distributed_ by mail, the majority of ballots /are/
driven there in a non-Postal Service truck because they have secured
ballot-drop boxes in many of the spots where a polling place would
otherwise have been located, but they don't need to be staffed, mainly
by older people.

Of course, at THIS point, we may start seeing alt-right folx destroying
any outdoor ballot-drop boxes, so maybe you and Terry have a point on a
damaged chain of custody NOW.
Post by Quadibloc
Sure, there might be some sort of oversight system - but in the United States,
individual states have jurisdiction over the electoral process. And
gerrymandering of electoral districts is so prevalent that both parties are now
doing it.
If there was a commitment at the highest level of government to fair elections,
obviously one solution would be to move how electins are conducted to Federal
jurisdiction.
In the United States, Donald Trump just recently threatened to delay emergency
aid to Michigan in response to flooding there, because its governor was going to
allow mail-in ballots in a primary, which Trump claimed would allow "voter
fraud". In fact, this is seen as an attempt to force her to participate in
Republican attempts to suppress voting from minority groups.
If the United States were a civilized country like Canada, where all the major parties have a firm, unshakeable commitment to the integrity of the electoral process, that would be one thing.
Oh, wait a momeent. A few years back, someone acting on behalf of the federal
Conservative party hired a call centre to call people, and give them the wrong
address for their local polling station...
and not only was this not resolved by a successful police investigation that
found every person responsible for this...
but the call centre accepted the commission because it had received legal advice
that it could do so (apparently the legal advice was not correct, but they still
weren't charged - instead of the legal advice being something like "you, and
even every individual on the floor who makes such a call, may wind up behind
bars for the next fourteen years")...
but at least one major figure within the Conservative party actually made a
public statement to the affect that sort of thing was a normal part of the game
of politics (instead of bordering on treason).
Apparently Canada is starting to follow the bad example set by the United
States.
John Savard
Yeeeah, the English-speakers may arguably have been the last to go
all-in on fraud to maintain or create parliamentary majorities at all
costs, but at this point very few countries are left with free,
untainted elections. That this is the way that Russians have wanted
things to be run in the rest of the world since the time of Alexander I
is merely a coincidence, surely!
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 15:59:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot. One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed. This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.

You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."

US voters do not trust such people, for good reason.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
but at no point in the process can those
who count things connect the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have
grown up with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in
the USA.
What's simple and obvious are the sheeple who do as they're told
and believe whatever they're spoon fed.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
The other point to bear in mind is that Oz has compulsory
voting, which means that no nefarious group can "vote the
graveyard" or the like.
Heh. There are a number of ways to compromise the system you
describe, that you have been programmed to be incapabler of
recognizing even when they're pointed out.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Yes, ballots can (and have) been interfered with, but having an
independent Electoral Commission, using paper ballots, and
having competent scrutineers, both from the parties and
nominally independent, means that we have managed to avoid any
real electoral screw-ups.
That you know of. Your very trust in the integrity of people who
have a vested personal interest in having none suggests that if a
real effort were made, you'd never know about it.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
1 - My using "completed" here does not mean that the ballot is
necessarily "valid," that's a whole other kettle of fish!
Unless the second envelope is opened immediately as well, there's
no way to know if it's valid. And if it is, there's no secret
ballot.

Thanks for making my point so clear.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 16:05:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot. One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed. This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
The point that you're perfectly wrong.

I get an envelope and verify its source, then I detach that source and
put it into a locked box...

JUST LIKE ANY OTHER BALLOT.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
US voters do not trust such people, for good reason.
Election officials are accompanied by "scrutineers" from each party.

That's what keeps the system working.
James Nicoll
2020-05-29 16:54:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Election officials are accompanied by "scrutineers" from each party.
Note that (at least in the Canadian version of all this), this may mean teams from half
a dozen parties. Some of them are ... unlikely to win, to put it diplomatically... but
highly motivated to make sure the major parties don't pull a fast one.

One by-election I worked, the scrutineers must have had some sense from exit polls
of how things were going. The riding had been Progressive Conservative for a very long
time. The PCs expected to hold onto it. The Liberals were keen to pick it up; I think
it might have given them a majority if they won. Turned out the voters had been loyal
to the PC MPP who had retired, not to her party. The candidate who actually became MPP
was the NDP one. Throughout the day, the Liberals looked sadder and sadder, the Tories
increasingly furious, and the NDP kids happier and happier.

What made it esp interesting was the timing, just after the fall university term began.
This meant there were thousands of people entitled to vote who were not necessarily
registed to vote. Of course, we had ways to ensure they got to enjoy their democratic
rights.

(we kicked the NDP scrutineers out at one point because they showed up wearing NDP t-shirts)
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Major Oz
2020-05-29 18:03:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
What made it esp interesting was the timing, just after the fall university term began.
This meant there were thousands of people entitled to vote who were not necessarily
registed to vote.
How coincidently convenient. The law appears to be...uh...loose.
Post by James Nicoll
Of course, we had ways to ensure they got to enjoy their democratic
rights.
"we had ways..." ...heh,heh... betchya did
Robert Carnegie
2020-05-29 20:46:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Alan Baker
Election officials are accompanied by "scrutineers" from each party.
Note that (at least in the Canadian version of all this), this may mean teams from half
a dozen parties. Some of them are ... unlikely to win, to put it diplomatically... but
highly motivated to make sure the major parties don't pull a fast one.
One by-election I worked, the scrutineers must have had some sense from exit polls
of how things were going. The riding had been Progressive Conservative for a very long
time. The PCs expected to hold onto it. The Liberals were keen to pick it up; I think
it might have given them a majority if they won. Turned out the voters had been loyal
to the PC MPP who had retired, not to her party. The candidate who actually became MPP
was the NDP one. Throughout the day, the Liberals looked sadder and sadder, the Tories
increasingly furious, and the NDP kids happier and happier.
What made it esp interesting was the timing, just after the fall university term began.
This meant there were thousands of people entitled to vote who were not necessarily
registed to vote. Of course, we had ways to ensure they got to enjoy their democratic
rights.
(we kicked the NDP scrutineers out at one point because they showed up wearing NDP t-shirts)
Mmm.

Not quite related to this, but, presuming I haven’t missed anything,
may I congratulate you on not trying to make Terry Austin see reason?

If everyone followed that, then he would be stuck writing as StarMaker.
James Nicoll
2020-05-30 01:44:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Alan Baker
Election officials are accompanied by "scrutineers" from each party.
Note that (at least in the Canadian version of all this), this may mean teams from half
a dozen parties. Some of them are ... unlikely to win, to put it diplomatically... but
highly motivated to make sure the major parties don't pull a fast one.
One by-election I worked, the scrutineers must have had some sense from exit polls
of how things were going. The riding had been Progressive Conservative for a very long
time. The PCs expected to hold onto it. The Liberals were keen to pick it up; I think
it might have given them a majority if they won. Turned out the voters had been loyal
to the PC MPP who had retired, not to her party. The candidate who actually became MPP
was the NDP one. Throughout the day, the Liberals looked sadder and sadder, the Tories
increasingly furious, and the NDP kids happier and happier.
What made it esp interesting was the timing, just after the fall university term began.
This meant there were thousands of people entitled to vote who were not necessarily
registed to vote. Of course, we had ways to ensure they got to enjoy their democratic
rights.
(we kicked the NDP scrutineers out at one point because they showed up wearing NDP t-shirts)
Mmm.
Not quite related to this, but, presuming I haven’t missed anything,
may I congratulate you on not trying to make Terry Austin see reason?
If everyone followed that, then he would be stuck writing as StarMaker.
I killfiled him 20 years ago.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Paul S Person
2020-05-30 16:48:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 09:05:45 -0700, Alan Baker
Post by Alan Baker
Election officials are accompanied by "scrutineers" from each party.
That's what keeps the system working.
That's a good point, which seems to be overlooked a lot:

all voting systems in the USA are, like any other part of the
Executive branch of that State, /created/ by State legislatures and
/monitored/ by at least the two major parties.

All voting systems.

If /both/ parties did not agree, a different system would be in use.
If there were /serious/ doubts about all-mail voting in the States
that have it, there would long-since have been lawsuits (and/or
legislative action) to change back.

Precisely to ensure that the chain of custody is unbroken, and nothing
else of a dubious nature occurs.

Indeed, centralizing this to each county may mean that some of the
other parties are also able to provide observers. This presumes that
they are legally entitled to do so, but lack the staffing/funding
needed to have someone at each and every polling place.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 18:21:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Unless the second envelope is opened immediately as well, there's
no way to know if it's valid. And if it is, there's no secret
ballot.
Although you have a valid point, here you are overstating it.

The first envelope can be opened in the presence of people watching to see that
the second envelope is not opened, and that it is put into a special box that
was empty.

Then the special box, when it is filled with second envelopes, goes to the
people who open the second envelopes. The box was watched all the time, to make
sure only valid ballots went in it.

So you have people who open the first envelope, and different people in a
different room opening the second envelope.

You can even have the box lock when it's closed, and have the key to open it
with the people who open the second envelope. And you can have more than one set
of people guarding the box, with a handover before the box goes to the second
room.

John Savard
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 18:42:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Unless the second envelope is opened immediately as well,
there's no way to know if it's valid. And if it is, there's no
secret ballot.
Although you have a valid point, here you are overstating it.
Only if you trust the people involved. Americans do not. For good,
solid historical reasons.
Post by Quadibloc
The first envelope can be opened in the presence of people
watching to see that the second envelope is not opened, and that
it is put into a special box that was empty.
Then the special box, when it is filled with second envelopes,
goes to the people who open the second envelopes. The box was
watched all the time,
By whom? You are trusting those people with your "democracy."
Post by Quadibloc
to make sure only valid ballots went in
it.
So you have people who open the first envelope, and different
people in a different room opening the second envelope.
And there's the opportunity to tamper.

(Aside from things like interfering with the mail, incepting
ballots and replacing them, registering fake voters, voting the
dead, making educated guesses on who won't miss not getting a
ballot and filling it in for them, etc. All either unique
opportunities for mail-in ballots or opporutnities made easier by
them.)
Post by Quadibloc
You can even have the box lock when it's closed, and have the
key to open it with the people who open the second envelope. And
you can have more than one set of people guarding the box, with
a handover before the box goes to the second room.
But you cannot verify that only qualified voters are voting while
at the same time providing a secret ballot.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 18:57:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Unless the second envelope is opened immediately as well,
there's no way to know if it's valid. And if it is, there's no
secret ballot.
Although you have a valid point, here you are overstating it.
Only if you trust the people involved. Americans do not. For good,
solid historical reasons.
Post by Quadibloc
The first envelope can be opened in the presence of people
watching to see that the second envelope is not opened, and that
it is put into a special box that was empty.
Then the special box, when it is filled with second envelopes,
goes to the people who open the second envelopes. The box was
watched all the time,
By whom? You are trusting those people with your "democracy."
You are ALWAYS trusting the people who run elections with your democracy.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Quadibloc
to make sure only valid ballots went in
it.
So you have people who open the first envelope, and different
people in a different room opening the second envelope.
And there's the opportunity to tamper.
(Aside from things like interfering with the mail, incepting
ballots and replacing them, registering fake voters, voting the
dead, making educated guesses on who won't miss not getting a
ballot and filling it in for them, etc. All either unique
opportunities for mail-in ballots or opporutnities made easier by
them.)
Post by Quadibloc
You can even have the box lock when it's closed, and have the
key to open it with the people who open the second envelope. And
you can have more than one set of people guarding the box, with
a handover before the box goes to the second room.
But you cannot verify that only qualified voters are voting while
at the same time providing a secret ballot.
Yes. You can.

He just demonstrated how.
Chrysi Cat
2020-05-29 19:52:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot. One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed. This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
No. You're completely ignoring the actual way of doing things which is
that the INNER envelopes basically comprise a normal ballot box just
like any that was compiled by paper or electronic ballots being cast in
person in a polling place after "ihre Papieren, bitte" and placed in a
lockbox to be counted ELSEWHERE.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
The ballots become anonymous as they fall randomly into the "voter
registration verified" box. If you don't trust /their/ chain of custody
after this, you shouldn't be trusting the
polling-place-to-county-clerk's-office chain of custody for in-person
voting either.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
US voters do not trust such people, for good reason.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
but at no point in the process can those
who count things connect the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have
grown up with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in
the USA.
What's simple and obvious are the sheeple who do as they're told
and believe whatever they're spoon fed.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
The other point to bear in mind is that Oz has compulsory
voting, which means that no nefarious group can "vote the
graveyard" or the like.
Heh. There are a number of ways to compromise the system you
describe, that you have been programmed to be incapabler of
recognizing even when they're pointed out.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Yes, ballots can (and have) been interfered with, but having an
independent Electoral Commission, using paper ballots, and
having competent scrutineers, both from the parties and
nominally independent, means that we have managed to avoid any
real electoral screw-ups.
That you know of. Your very trust in the integrity of people who
have a vested personal interest in having none suggests that if a
real effort were made, you'd never know about it.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
1 - My using "completed" here does not mean that the ballot is
necessarily "valid," that's a whole other kettle of fish!
Unless the second envelope is opened immediately as well, there's
no way to know if it's valid. And if it is, there's no secret
ballot.
Thanks for making my point so clear.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 20:00:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too.  One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in...  Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business?  In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot.  One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
  Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed.  This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
No. You're completely ignoring the actual way of doing things which is
that the INNER envelopes basically comprise a normal ballot box just
like any that was compiled by paper or electronic ballots being cast in
person in a polling place after "ihre Papieren, bitte" and placed in a
lockbox to be counted ELSEWHERE.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
The ballots become anonymous as they fall randomly into the "voter
registration verified" box. If you don't trust /their/ chain of custody
after this, you shouldn't be trusting the
polling-place-to-county-clerk's-office chain of custody for in-person
voting either.
But that's inconvenient to his argument in this case...

...and therefore you suffer from TDS!

:-)
Chrysi Cat
2020-05-29 20:32:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too.  One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in...  Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business?  In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot.  One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
  Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed.  This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
No. You're completely ignoring the actual way of doing things which is
that the INNER envelopes basically comprise a normal ballot box just
like any that was compiled by paper or electronic ballots being cast
in person in a polling place after "ihre Papieren, bitte" and placed
in a lockbox to be counted ELSEWHERE.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
The ballots become anonymous as they fall randomly into the "voter
registration verified" box. If you don't trust /their/ chain of
custody after this, you shouldn't be trusting the
polling-place-to-county-clerk's-office chain of custody for in-person
voting either.
But that's inconvenient to his argument in this case...
...and therefore you suffer from TDS!
:-)
Which is interesting since this has eff all to do with Trump, and much
more to do with "my state tried to move to fungible voting centers in
2008, where everyone in the metro area could vote even if their office
hours were similar to their local precinct polling place's hours had
been, since those are predicated on where one lives, not works.

The end result was that I got to the voting center about 2 1/2 hours
before the polls closed and got to vote 3 hours _after_ the doors had
been locked to ensure that no one came in after the polls had closed and
managed to vote illegally nonetheless. Because it screwed over suburban
whites--especially since it's Colorado and there's one city in the
entire state with more than 11% Black people in its population, so
anything that screws over _anyone_ is going to screw over whites, it was
then abandoned".

The state tried one more off-year election with precinct polling places
back in play (the only election at which I had to produce a driver's
license to vote), then switched to exclusively mail-delivered ballots.
Over half the assemblyfolk who voted FOR that change were Republican and
they specifically cited that Oregon had shown it could be done.

I'm honestly wondering if Terry would have a problem with _this_ because
it came from Oregon regardless of whether he perceived it to hold back
his slightly-less-despised Republiklan or not.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-30 04:30:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too.  One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in...  Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business?  In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot.  One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
  Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed.  This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
No. You're completely ignoring the actual way of doing things which is
that the INNER envelopes basically comprise a normal ballot box just
like any that was compiled by paper or electronic ballots being cast
in person in a polling place after "ihre Papieren, bitte" and placed
in a lockbox to be counted ELSEWHERE.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
The ballots become anonymous as they fall randomly into the "voter
registration verified" box. If you don't trust /their/ chain of
custody after this, you shouldn't be trusting the
polling-place-to-county-clerk's-office chain of custody for in-person
voting either.
But that's inconvenient to his argument in this case...
...and therefore you suffer from TDS!
:-)
Hehe.

I think it may become necessary to coin a new phrase - "'<USA president>
Derangement Syndrome' Derangement Syndrome" - it would allow for a
simple catch-all for Terry's blithering, and possibly others. :->

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Alan Baker
2020-05-30 05:10:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too.  One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in...  Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business?  In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot.  One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
  Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed.  This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
No. You're completely ignoring the actual way of doing things which
is that the INNER envelopes basically comprise a normal ballot box
just like any that was compiled by paper or electronic ballots being
cast in person in a polling place after "ihre Papieren, bitte" and
placed in a lockbox to be counted ELSEWHERE.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
The ballots become anonymous as they fall randomly into the "voter
registration verified" box. If you don't trust /their/ chain of
custody after this, you shouldn't be trusting the
polling-place-to-county-clerk's-office chain of custody for in-person
voting either.
But that's inconvenient to his argument in this case...
...and therefore you suffer from TDS!
:-)
Hehe.
I think it may become necessary to coin a new phrase - "'<USA president>
Derangement Syndrome' Derangement Syndrome" - it would allow for a
simple catch-all for Terry's blithering, and possibly others.  :->
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
So TDSDS...

(for this president naturally)

...or do you think TDS-DS is a better presentation?

:-)
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-30 13:51:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too.  One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in...  Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business?  In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot.  One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
  Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed.  This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
No. You're completely ignoring the actual way of doing things which
is that the INNER envelopes basically comprise a normal ballot box
just like any that was compiled by paper or electronic ballots being
cast in person in a polling place after "ihre Papieren, bitte" and
placed in a lockbox to be counted ELSEWHERE.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
The ballots become anonymous as they fall randomly into the "voter
registration verified" box. If you don't trust /their/ chain of
custody after this, you shouldn't be trusting the
polling-place-to-county-clerk's-office chain of custody for
in-person voting either.
But that's inconvenient to his argument in this case...
...and therefore you suffer from TDS!
:-)
Hehe.
I think it may become necessary to coin a new phrase - "'<USA
president> Derangement Syndrome' Derangement Syndrome" - it would
allow for a simple catch-all for Terry's blithering, and possibly
others.  :->
     Cheers,
         Gary    B-)
So TDSDS...
(for this president naturally)
...or do you think TDS-DS is a better presentation?
:-)
Hmm, might cause people to stutter on the hyphen...

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-30 04:05:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
7>>>>>>> So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What
kind of formal training do they receive in that forensic
science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an
election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot. One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed
envelope containing your ballot papers are placed. This
internal envelope has a flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob
before the envelope is passed on to the people that physically
open it, scrutinise the ballot, and record it.
So, either both envelopes are opened at the same time, by people in
each other's presence, making it not only trivial but nearly
inherent that a particular ballot can be connected to a specific
voter, or not, and there's no guarantee that the envelope with the
ballot came from a qualified voter because the break in the "chain
of custody," so to speak.
You have perfectly illustrated my point.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened
envelope containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as
intended by the voter,
Only if you trust the people who handle those envelopes between
opening the outer one and opening the inner one, or trust the
winners to not seek retribution against those who voted "wrong."
US voters do not trust such people, for good reason.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
but at no point in the process can those
who count things connect the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have
grown up with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in
the USA.
What's simple and obvious are the sheeple who do as they're told
and believe whatever they're spoon fed.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
The other point to bear in mind is that Oz has compulsory
voting, which means that no nefarious group can "vote the
graveyard" or the like.
Heh. There are a number of ways to compromise the system you
describe, that you have been programmed to be incapabler of
recognizing even when they're pointed out.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Yes, ballots can (and have) been interfered with, but having an
independent Electoral Commission, using paper ballots, and
having competent scrutineers, both from the parties and
nominally independent, means that we have managed to avoid any
real electoral screw-ups.
That you know of. Your very trust in the integrity of people who
have a vested personal interest in having none suggests that if a
real effort were made, you'd never know about it.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
1 - My using "completed" here does not mean that the ballot is
necessarily "valid," that's a whole other kettle of fish!
Unless the second envelope is opened immediately as well, there's
no way to know if it's valid. And if it is, there's no secret
ballot.
Thanks for making my point so clear.
And thank you for pointing out that you really don't know the meaning of
the words "ballot" and "valid," particularly when used in combination.

But you're from a strange place, aren't you, Terry? Not terribly
connected to reality in many ways...

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 16:06:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 23:54:31 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the various
candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you don't allow
it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it "The
Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers' paradise you
inhabit is one required to put one's name on the ballot one casts so
that the winning side can track down everyone who voted against it? If
so, please be aware that the US has a secret ballot. One is required
to identify oneself in order to vote but the identification is not
tied to the ballot. Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered
voters in the polling place, and your name gets checked off when you
arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed envelope
containing your ballot papers are placed. This internal envelope has a
flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob before the envelope is passed
on to the people that physically open it, scrutinise the ballot, and
record it.
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened envelope
containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as intended by the
voter, but at no point in the process can those who count things connect
the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have grown up
with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in the USA.
I don't understand what you believe to be "scary and difficult". The
US has had procedurs for voting by mail for as long as I can remember.
You just have to have a good reason for doing it--like you're in the
military and deployed.

You're the one going on about checking signatures, like there's some
massive pool of experts who can in a few days validate a hundred
million or more signatures.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
The other point to bear in mind is that Oz has compulsory voting, which
means that no nefarious group can "vote the graveyard" or the like.
How does compulsory voting prevent the dead from being registered?
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Yes, ballots can (and have) been interfered with, but having an
independent Electoral Commission, using paper ballots, and having
competent scrutineers, both from the parties and nominally independent,
means that we have managed to avoid any real electoral screw-ups. (But
those we do have tend to be quite entertaining! Lost ballot boxes,
candidates who do not qualify under Australian law, all sorts of fun.
Generally they have no impact on the results, although sometimes they
lead to by-elections shortly after a general election. :-) )
Bear in mind that your total population is about the same as that of
one city in the US. And you do not have a Federal system in which the
country is composed of independent states which have independent
election laws.
Kevrob
2020-05-29 18:53:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Bear in mind that your total population is about the same as that of
one city in the US. And you do not have a Federal system in which the
country is composed of independent states which have independent
election laws.
Nitpick: Australia does have a federal structure,
but a dual-track election system. Federal elections...

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

...are separate from those of the states and territories.

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

It looks like voter enrollment is through the national
commission, judging by a .au website I checked.

The US Constitution would allow for setting up a federal voting roll
under Article I, section 4:

[quote]

Section 4 - Times, etc., of holding elections, how prescribed. One session in each year.

1. The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators
and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the
Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make
or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.
[That last clause moot, due to Amendment XVII providing for direct
election of Senators.]

There was a real chance of the US states having to create separate
voter rolls when the 18-year-old voting age was changed by ordinary
federal legislation in 1970. SCOTUS said it was OK for Congress to
do that, but only for federal elections. The states could have
different rules for state and local elections. See:

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

Faced with running dual systems, the states ratified Amendment XXVI.

Kevin R
Paul S Person
2020-05-29 16:10:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 23:54:31 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the various
candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you don't allow
it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it "The
Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers' paradise you
inhabit is one required to put one's name on the ballot one casts so
that the winning side can track down everyone who voted against it? If
so, please be aware that the US has a secret ballot. One is required
to identify oneself in order to vote but the identification is not
tied to the ballot. Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered
voters in the polling place, and your name gets checked off when you
arrive.
No, you sign the *sealed* envelope in which a second, sealed envelope
containing your ballot papers are placed. This internal envelope has a
flap (q.v), removed by the electoral mob before the envelope is passed
on to the people that physically open it, scrutinise the ballot, and
record it.
So we have a chain which implies strongly that the unopened envelope
containing the completed[1] ballot papers is indeed as intended by the
voter, but at no point in the process can those who count things connect
the ballot to the voter.
I forget that this is all simple and obvious to people who have grown up
with it, and somehow scary and difficult to those in the USA.
The Trump, by complaining that Twitter was interfering with his 2020
campaign when it fact-checked his tweets on this topic, has shown that
this is just a campaign issue. Nobody is actually frightened, scared,
or even concerned about it. The usual suspects are simply making a lot
of noise about this /campaign issue/, which is only to be expected.

Like the promise to "Make Mexico pay for the Wall", this issue will
vanish after the November election, never to be heard from again.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
The other point to bear in mind is that Oz has compulsory voting, which
means that no nefarious group can "vote the graveyard" or the like.
I don't think that can happen here, at least not to the point of
actually impacting the results. Historically, of course, it is said to
have happened in large cities run by political "machines", and that
provides an /excellent/ background for stirring things up. Cultural
memories last a long long time.
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Yes, ballots can (and have) been interfered with, but having an
independent Electoral Commission, using paper ballots, and having
competent scrutineers, both from the parties and nominally independent,
means that we have managed to avoid any real electoral screw-ups. (But
those we do have tend to be quite entertaining! Lost ballot boxes,
candidates who do not qualify under Australian law, all sorts of fun.
Generally they have no impact on the results, although sometimes they
lead to by-elections shortly after a general election. :-) )
In one memorable Gubernatorial race, the winner won by something like
52 votes -- after several hundred "uncounted ballots", in several
sets, were mysteriously discovered by the county elections officer, at
that time an appointed position.

It is, of course, possible that he ran his office so sloppily that
multiple carts holding multiple bins each of uncounted ballots were
just lying around after the count was allegedly over, but the optics
were bad. That position became an elected position, and nothing quite
/that/ bad has occurred in the county/state concerned since.

Of course, there was a Congressional District that had to completely
re-run the 2018 election because an operative was hired who turned out
to have some interesting ideas on how to treat absentee ballots. But
that can't be what Trump is complaining about, because he was working
for a Republican candidate.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 15:52:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind
of formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot. One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
It is, as I said, a failing inherent to mail in ballots: you can
verify it came from a qualified voter, or you can have a secret
ballot, but not both.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 15:58:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind
of formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot. One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
It is, as I said, a failing inherent to mail in ballots: you can
verify it came from a qualified voter, or you can have a secret
ballot, but not both.
And you're simply wrong.

A sealed envelope inside the mailing envelope has a detachable code
flap. That tells you it who it came from.

Detach the flap, then send the ballot on to different people to open and
count.
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-30 03:59:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact
envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind
of formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you
don't allow it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it
"The Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers'
paradise you inhabit is one required to put one's name on the
ballot one casts so that the winning side can track down
everyone who voted against it? If so, please be aware that the
US has a secret ballot. One is required to identify oneself in
order to vote but the identification is not tied to the ballot.
Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered voters in the
polling place, and your name gets checked off when you arrive.
It is, as I said, a failing inherent to mail in ballots: you can
verify it came from a qualified voter, or you can have a secret
ballot, but not both.
Or you can be an idiot, like you, who refuses to understand that it is
perfectly possible to do it.

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Paul S Person
2020-05-29 15:58:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 02:45:04 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the various
candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you don't allow
it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
ObSF: The Donald Duck/Mickey Mouse options in... Damn, was it "The
Stainless Steel Rat For President?"
What is this "signatures" business? In whatever workers' paradise you
inhabit is one required to put one's name on the ballot one casts so
that the winning side can track down everyone who voted against it? If
so, please be aware that the US has a secret ballot. One is required
to identify oneself in order to vote but the identification is not
tied to the ballot. Generally there's a checkoff list of reqistered
voters in the polling place, and your name gets checked off when you
arrive.
You also /sign/ the list (well, we did here) and the poll-worker /may/
have recorded the ballot number on the detachable endpiece as well.

Well, you have to have /some/ way to verify that the number of ballots
counted equals the number of ballots issued to voters.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
James Nicoll
2020-05-29 17:04:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Well, you have to have /some/ way to verify that the number of ballots
counted equals the number of ballots issued to voters.
In the last federal election I worked, the system was very straight forward: retain the
ballot books from which the ballots come, and at the end of the day manually count the
ballots in the ballot box (plus the ruined ones that had to be reissued) and compare that
number to the stubs in the ballot books. It was one of the steps that filled me with
terror because one would only find one lost track of a ballot [1] too late to deal with
the issue. It's the sort of error that can make ballot counting run very very late. My
polling station balanced.

Even better, it was a different polling place that made the news. One of their staff got
confused and sealed all copies of their paperwork...including the results...into the ballot
box. For some hours, it seemed like vital paperwork had vanished. In a riding where the
results were close.

1: So, we have a movement called the Ballot Eaters. Guess what they do to ballots?

I suppose finding an extra ballot would be worse than coming up short one.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
James Nicoll
2020-05-29 17:13:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
I suppose finding an extra ballot would be worse than coming up short one.
Actually, that came up, sort of. So each polling place has a number of polling
stations, each with its own box and associated staff. Voters are assigned to
specific stations according to address. You're supposed to get issued your
ballot, go to the voting table to mark your ballot behind a screen and then
place the ballot in the box associated with your polling station. One person
at the polling station on the other side of the room took it, turned around,
crossed the room, used my station's table and put it in my box, ignoring our
helpful attempts to steer them right. So at the end of the day, I was up one,
and the other guys were down one but between us we balanced.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 15:51:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind
of formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
Do other countries really, really trust candidates to do so without
adult supervision? No wonder other countries are such shitholes.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-30 04:01:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't
match (having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the
right way") who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind
of formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the
various candidates to scrutinise the votes?
Do other countries really, really trust candidates to do so without
adult supervision? No wonder other countries are such shitholes.
Yes, well, "adult" in relation to "politics" is one of those strange
relations, but, really, when an idiot from the OC uses it, it really is
a good example of irony.

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Paul S Person
2020-05-29 15:56:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:27:46 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope, rather
than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too. One inner envelope which
contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a detachable
flap, which is then placed into a second envelope, sealed, and
signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was filled
out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for that
matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that something
is up.
And if the person examining the signature *say* they don't match
(having reviewed whether or not the person voted "the right way")
who is to say they're wrong?
How many people are devoted to comparing signatures? What kind of
formal training do they receive in that forensic science?
Does the USA really, really, not allow representatives of the various
candidates to scrutinise the votes?
I've done it here a few times, at various levels, and if you don't allow
it, why bother even pretending to have an election?
I'm reasonably certain that representatives of the major parties, at
least, do so.

Just as they scrutinize how the polls are working for in-person
voting.

I don't know that they normally scrutinize the actual ballots, but I
would think any ballot rejected by the tallying machine would be
looked at. They would probably be involved in that if a /manual/
recount is ordered.

They clearly /were/ involved in the "hanging chad" recounts in Florida
in 2000.

You have to understand that, since Trump himself has identified this
as merely a 2020 campaign issue (his complaint was, precisely, that
Twitter was interfering in the 2020 campaign by fact-checking his
tweets), it will all vanish like a puff of smoke after the election.
Sort of like the "Mexico will pay for the wall" vanished, never to be
mentioned again, after the 2016 election.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:37:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 11:19:06 PM UTC-5, Alan Baker
On 28/05/2020 02:11, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:04:53 -0700 (PDT),
[SNIP]
Sure you can
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable
flap which has the details of the voter That's verified
against the electoral lists, removed and then the
intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a
vote.
In Washington state it's an entire outer envelope,
rather than a flap, but it's the same principle.
That's how it works in Oz, too.  One inner envelope
which contains the ballot and has the declaration(s) on a
detachable flap, which is then placed into a second
envelope, sealed, and signed.
So there's no way to verify that the actual ballot was
filled out by the registered voter it was sent to. Or, for
that matter, by *any* registered voter?
You can have one or the other, but not both.
Well, if the signatures don't match, I would say that
something is up
.
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the
USA won th
e
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-
)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US
press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan
Rather.
No, the US military won the battles
It lost the war
No, they won the war. The politicians lost the peace (before it
began) because the population wanted them to.
You can tell because of which side had their objectives happen
Our military objectives were achieved. We destroyed the NVA, and
reduced the VC to a pathetic shadow of their previously pathetic
glory. The *political* objectives were achieved, too, if you
consider that the *real* objective was to extract ourselves from a
war that would cost elections - at any cost.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
h***@gmail.com
2020-05-28 16:51:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 11:19:06 PM UTC-5, Alan Baker
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the
USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US
press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan
Rather.
No, the US military won the battles
It lost the war
No, they won the war.
Generally you don't measure a war as won when your allies get wiped out and the forces they were fighting end up in control of the area they were fighting over.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The politicians lost the peace (before it
began) because the population wanted them to.
The US population got sick of the continued promises that we've won and this time there won't be another offensive from the enemy
When the government lies too often the public stops believing them
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You can tell because of which side had their objectives happen
Our military objectives were achieved. We destroyed the NVA, and
reduced the VC to a pathetic shadow of their previously pathetic
glory.
You channelling Shawn nowadays?
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The *political* objectives were achieved, too, if you
consider that the *real* objective was to extract ourselves from a
war that would cost elections - at any cost.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 17:12:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Friday, May 29, 2020 at 2:37:38 AM UTC+10, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 2:44:42 PM UTC+10, Major Oz
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 11:19:06 PM UTC-5, Alan Baker
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where
the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US
press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to
Dan Rather.
No, the US military won the battles
It lost the war
No, they won the war.
Generally you don't measure a war as won when your allies get
wiped out and the forces they were fighting end up in control of
the area they were fighting over.
Not until after we withdrew.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
The politicians lost the peace (before it
began) because the population wanted them to.
The US population got sick of the continued promises that we've
won and this time there won't be another offensive from the
enemy When the government lies too often the public stops
believing them
Because the news media told them to. What people believed and the
reality on the ground, as usual, have only the thinnest connection.
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
You can tell because of which side had their objectives
happen
Our military objectives were achieved. We destroyed the NVA,
and reduced the VC to a pathetic shadow of their previously
pathetic glory.
You channelling Shawn nowadays?
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:42:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 11:09:07 PM UTC-5, Gary R. Schmidt
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental agencies,
and not under the control of any political party, even the one
in power - do regular door-knocks where identity and residence
are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it must be.
If we were to do that for everyone here in the US..........there
would be HUGE screams of racism.
And in all likelyhood, those screams would *under*state the reality,
even if they turned to riots.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:42:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sometimes the USA seems a complete waste of democracy...
And yet, we run the world. Go figure.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:46:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:09:07 AM UTC-4, Gary R. Schmidt
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental agencies,
and not under the control of any political party, even the one
in power - do regular door-knocks where identity and residence
are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
A few years ago I lived in three different towns, though just
the one state, in one year. My apartment building had a fire
that displaced me, then I lived in an apartment about 10 miles
away which we moved out of fairly quickly. At last I found my
current place in yet a third town. I could have easily have
been on the voter roll in all 3 towns, if the clerk registering
me at the new domicile messed up the process of informing the
old town to delete my info. I sure as hell wound up getting
property tax bills from more than one town on the same vehicle!
The state Department of Motor Vehicles was responsible for
that mix-up.
Well, if you have single agency that is responsible for voter
registration, and they maintain a singular roll of voters, that
sort of error is less likely.
And the power to abuse that system is in fewer hands.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-29 03:29:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:09:07 AM UTC-4, Gary R. Schmidt
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is
sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental agencies,
and not under the control of any political party, even the one
in power - do regular door-knocks where identity and residence
are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
A few years ago I lived in three different towns, though just
the one state, in one year. My apartment building had a fire
that displaced me, then I lived in an apartment about 10 miles
away which we moved out of fairly quickly. At last I found my
current place in yet a third town. I could have easily have
been on the voter roll in all 3 towns, if the clerk registering
me at the new domicile messed up the process of informing the
old town to delete my info. I sure as hell wound up getting
property tax bills from more than one town on the same vehicle!
The state Department of Motor Vehicles was responsible for
that mix-up.
Well, if you have single agency that is responsible for voter
registration, and they maintain a singular roll of voters, that
sort of error is less likely.
And the power to abuse that system is in fewer hands.
You really do not comprehend the size of a Government Agency in a
Westminster Democracy, do you.

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 16:01:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:09:07 AM UTC-4, Gary R.
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental
agencies, and not under the control of any political party,
even the one in power - do regular door-knocks where
identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if
undeliverable, in order to get names of those who have
possibly moved or died. This is considered "voter
suppression" by some.
A few years ago I lived in three different towns, though just
the one state, in one year. My apartment building had a fire
that displaced me, then I lived in an apartment about 10
miles away which we moved out of fairly quickly. At last I
found my current place in yet a third town. I could have
easily have been on the voter roll in all 3 towns, if the
clerk registering me at the new domicile messed up the
process of informing the old town to delete my info. I sure
as hell wound up getting property tax bills from more than
one town on the same vehicle!
The state Department of Motor Vehicles was responsible for
that mix-up.
Well, if you have single agency that is responsible for voter
registration, and they maintain a singular roll of voters,
that sort of error is less likely.
And the power to abuse that system is in fewer hands.
You really do not comprehend the size of a Government Agency in
a Westminster Democracy, do you.
Is it your claim that multiple agencies would *not* mean more
people?

Are you that fucking *stupid*?

Appaerntly so.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-30 04:09:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Gary R. Schmidt
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 12:09:07 AM UTC-4, Gary R.
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter That's verified against
the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope
is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahead of time, with some election
commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental
agencies, and not under the control of any political party,
even the one in power - do regular door-knocks where
identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if
undeliverable, in order to get names of those who have
possibly moved or died. This is considered "voter
suppression" by some.
A few years ago I lived in three different towns, though just
the one state, in one year. My apartment building had a fire
that displaced me, then I lived in an apartment about 10
miles away which we moved out of fairly quickly. At last I
found my current place in yet a third town. I could have
easily have been on the voter roll in all 3 towns, if the
clerk registering me at the new domicile messed up the
process of informing the old town to delete my info. I sure
as hell wound up getting property tax bills from more than
one town on the same vehicle!
The state Department of Motor Vehicles was responsible for
that mix-up.
Well, if you have single agency that is responsible for voter
registration, and they maintain a singular roll of voters,
that sort of error is less likely.
And the power to abuse that system is in fewer hands.
You really do not comprehend the size of a Government Agency in
a Westminster Democracy, do you.
Is it your claim that multiple agencies would *not* mean more
people?
Are you that fucking *stupid*?
Appaerntly so.
Why don't you go to school somewhere and learn something about how
politics works in civilised countries, rather than than proving, again,
and again, and again, that you'd rather cover the screen with your own
spittle and febrile irrelevant comments?

Too difficult, I suppose. A bit too much like thinking, perhaps?

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 16:57:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has
the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and
then the in
tact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in
person, ahea
d of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by
providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory,
and one federal - which are independent governmental
agencies, and not under th
e
control of any political party, even the one in power - do
regular door-knocks where identity and residence are
verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I
suppose it mus
t be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as
we know, President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
A postal service employee was just arrested for tampering with vote
by mail stuff a few days ago. Specifically, he changed the party
affiliation on the requests.

Not large scale, but excatly what conservaties say that lefties do.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 17:00:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 7:13:53 PM UTC-4, Jibini Kula
BTW, Charlotteville, legally contracted site of the RNC this
year, is becoming the next Hot Spot. But perhaps it will
have peaked by August.
Wow dude, you are delusional.
It's so obvious it's embarassing. One wonders if he's in the
US, or just relying on the international press propaganda for
his mental image of the US.
He can't tell Charlottesville, VA from Charlotte, NC,
though there's many a USAian that couldn't.
He can't tell his ass from a hole in the ground, even with a thumb
test.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Major Oz
2020-05-28 17:52:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan Rather.
Another delusion.
Me, Giap, or Rather ?
Robert Carnegie
2020-05-28 17:55:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
It should also be obvious that a literal coup by a leftist dictator
is more dangnerous than the virus.
Yes, I agree with that. I don't agree that, say, Gretchen Whitmer is a potential or aspiring "leftist dictator" by any stretch of the imagination, though.
John Savard
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said that she was
going to punish them for not following her orders.
Lynn
I have no knowledge of the case at all but a different and more credible
narrative applies: the virus must be held back, and that is to be done by
people not gathering together for as long as is required to have the
necessary effect. If a minority of people are gathering together just
as a form of resistance to the rule of not gathering together, then the
virus is not being held back. Consequently, to have the effect
originally intended will now require that the rule of not gathering
together is kept in place for a longer period of time.

To put it more simply, taking a holiday from your lockdown just
means that you collectively have to spend that much extra time,
or even more, to complete your lockdown.

It’s your own time you’re wasting.

I’m ashamed that this also has had to be explained to people
in Scotland by our wise and reasonable First Minister, especially
during recent extremely nice weather. I haven’t heard it in the
messages from England where the government isn’t sticking to
the rules itself anyway.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-28 23:57:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 2:20:50 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
Tumbili Kuj
It should also be obvious that a literal coup by a leftist
dictator is more dangnerous than the virus.
Yes, I agree with that. I don't agree that, say, Gretchen
Whitmer is a
potential or aspiring "leftist dictator" by any stretch of the
imagination, though.
John Savard
Oh, she crossed right into the dictator thing when she said
that she was
going to punish them for not following her orders.
Lynn
I have no knowledge of the case at all
Then perhaps you should STFU about it, foreigner.
but a different and more
credible narrative
A more accurate for for "narrative" is "propaganda." And that is,
in fact, the correct context here.
applies: the virus must be held back, and
that is to be done by people not gathering together for as long
as is required to have the necessary effect. If a minority of
people are gathering together just as a form of resistance to
the rule of not gathering together, then the virus is not being
held back. Consequently, to have the effect originally intended
will now require that the rule of not gathering together is kept
in place for a longer period of time.
You're willing to literally kill people in a way that destroys
democracy - for disagreeing with your poltiical beliefs. That makes
you a fascist.

Civilized people consider you a subhuman monster.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 07:48:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Robert Carnegie
applies: the virus must be held back, and
that is to be done by people not gathering together for as long
as is required to have the necessary effect. If a minority of
people are gathering together just as a form of resistance to
the rule of not gathering together, then the virus is not being
held back. Consequently, to have the effect originally intended
will now require that the rule of not gathering together is kept
in place for a longer period of time.
You're willing to literally kill people in a way that destroys
democracy - for disagreeing with your poltiical beliefs. That makes
you a fascist.
Civilized people consider you a subhuman monster.
Nope. Civilized people consider you a liar.

John Savard
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-05-29 16:02:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 5:57:33 PM UTC-6, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Post by Robert Carnegie
applies: the virus must be held back, and
that is to be done by people not gathering together for as
long as is required to have the necessary effect. If a
minority of people are gathering together just as a form of
resistance to the rule of not gathering together, then the
virus is not being held back. Consequently, to have the
effect originally intended will now require that the rule of
not gathering together is kept in place for a longer period
of time.
You're willing to literally kill people in a way that destroys
democracy - for disagreeing with your poltiical beliefs. That
makes you a fascist.
Civilized people consider you a subhuman monster.
Nope. Civilized people consider you a liar.
We've known for some time that you're a racist asshole with murder
fantasies you're too cowardly to ever act on, son. You don't need to
keep proving it.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Lynn McGuire
2020-05-28 18:29:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has
the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the
intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person,
ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing
a photo ID ?
In your dreams.
I must have been dreaming then, because my daughter just registered,
with her photo ID.
We allow people to register in advance, the voting age here is 18, the
same as the drinking age, but we allow people to register at 16, she did
so after getting her learner driver permit.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
Sorry, here in Texas you can register to vote just by sending in a card,
no id required. But when you actually vote in person, you must show a
government issued photo id.

I am unclear on the absentee balloting here in Texas though as I am
neither 65 nor disabled.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/27/politics/texas-supreme-court-blocks-vote-by-mail-expansion/index.html

Lynn
Dimensional Traveler
2020-05-28 18:42:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.

The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
--
<to be filled in at a later date>
J. Clarke
2020-05-28 21:35:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass. There is the right thing to do and there is the lawful thing to
do. When the two are the same all is well. When they are in conflict
there is a problem.
Quadibloc
2020-05-28 21:38:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass. There is the right thing to do and there is the lawful thing to
do. When the two are the same all is well. When they are in conflict
there is a problem.
Oh, that's true. In the case of loyalty to the Constitution of the U.S. versus
loyalty to Donald J. Trump, though, I think it's not difficult to see which one is
more likely to lead one to the right thing to do.

John Savard
Major Oz
2020-05-28 21:41:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass. There is the right thing to do and there is the lawful thing to
do. When the two are the same all is well. When they are in conflict
there is a problem.
Oh, that's true. In the case of loyalty to the Constitution of the U.S. versus
loyalty to Donald J. Trump, though, I think it's not difficult to see which one is
more likely to lead one to the right thing to do.
John Savard
....and, of course....

/s/

It is not possible to have both

/s/
Alan Baker
2020-05-28 22:35:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass. There is the right thing to do and there is the lawful thing to
do. When the two are the same all is well. When they are in conflict
there is a problem.
Oh, that's true. In the case of loyalty to the Constitution of the U.S. versus
loyalty to Donald J. Trump, though, I think it's not difficult to see which one is
more likely to lead one to the right thing to do.
John Savard
....and, of course....
/s/
It is not possible to have both
/s/
It's not possible to have a belief in the rule of law and loyalty to
Donald Trump.
Major Oz
2020-05-29 02:47:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Major Oz
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass. There is the right thing to do and there is the lawful thing to
do. When the two are the same all is well. When they are in conflict
there is a problem.
Oh, that's true. In the case of loyalty to the Constitution of the U.S. versus
loyalty to Donald J. Trump, though, I think it's not difficult to see which one is
more likely to lead one to the right thing to do.
John Savard
....and, of course....
/s/
It is not possible to have both
/s/
It's not possible to have a belief in the rule of law and loyalty to
Donald Trump.
I assume you have also seen bigfoot
Quadibloc
2020-05-28 23:16:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass. There is the right thing to do and there is the lawful thing to
do. When the two are the same all is well. When they are in conflict
there is a problem.
Oh, that's true. In the case of loyalty to the Constitution of the U.S. versus
loyalty to Donald J. Trump, though, I think it's not difficult to see which one is
more likely to lead one to the right thing to do.
....and, of course....
/s/
It is not possible to have both
/s/
Oh, it is. But "no man can serve two masters", so _if_ a conflict appeared
between the two, what one chooses shows where one's ultimate loyalty lies.

Trump's supporters, for example, point out that winning by the Electoral College
is winning fair and square, since that's in the Constitution.

His detractors see him in conflict with the spirit of certain other parts of the
U.S. Constitution, but that conflict has not come to a head - they fear what
Trump's appointees on the Supreme Court might do, rather than condemning what
they have done.

John Savard
Scott Lurndal
2020-05-29 14:50:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.

Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 18:23:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
Originally, a judge was the one who said the law was not an ass, and what he
meant by that was that the law as a whole, not any particular law, is not to be
interpreted literally the way a computer would obey a program. (Before there
were computers, the donkey was used as an example of literal-mindedness, for
example the paradox of "Buridan's ass".)

John Savard
Dimensional Traveler
2020-05-29 19:03:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
--
<to be filled in at a later date>
Alan Baker
2020-05-29 19:07:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 12:04:56 AM UTC-5,
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap
which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then
the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person,
ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by
providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult...  Well, if you're USAian I suppose
it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts.  He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law,  a donkey is a donkey.  The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
Why do people say that like it ISN'T a right anywhere else?
Quadibloc
2020-05-29 20:59:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dimensional Traveler
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
Why do people say that like it ISN'T a right anywhere else?
Perhaps, sometimes, when foreigners like myself comment on these matters, we
fail to word our comments clearly.

Thus, for example, when we express astonishment at a protest, in the vicinity of
a state legislature, by people who are also carrying guns at the time over laws
aimed at containing the spread of COVID-19, they might not understand that it's
the guns that are what seem the most unusual to us. (Also surprising is that one
managed to find more than a handful of people with enough lack of sense to think
that social distancing in a pandemic is a bad thing, of course.)

John Savard
Major Oz
2020-05-29 21:21:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dimensional Traveler
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
Why do people say that like it ISN'T a right anywhere else?
Perhaps, sometimes, when foreigners like myself comment on these matters, we
fail to word our comments clearly.
Thus, for example, when we express astonishment at a protest, in the vicinity of
a state legislature, by people who are also carrying guns at the time over laws....
No....they were dictatorial edicts.....
Post by Quadibloc
aimed at containing the spread of COVID-19, they might not understand that it's
the guns that are what seem the most unusual to us.
“BRITANNUS (shocked).
Caesar: this is not proper.

THEODOTUS (outraged).
How!

CAESAR (recovering his self-possession).
Pardon him. Theodotus: he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature.”

You may note -- difficult, I know, as the media ignores it -- that there were no confrontations, no arson, no looting by the Michigan folks. They protested.......and went home. All legal and SELF controlled.
Post by Quadibloc
(Also surprising is that one
managed to find more than a handful of people with enough lack of sense to think
that social distancing in a pandemic is a bad thing, of course.)
MUCH worse was tyranny, which was the PURPOSE of the protest.

But, of course, to folks in a nation borne of "please, sir", rather than that of resistance to tyranny.....I would expect your sneering disapproval.
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 21:53:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 13:59:00 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dimensional Traveler
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
Why do people say that like it ISN'T a right anywhere else?
Perhaps, sometimes, when foreigners like myself comment on these matters, we
fail to word our comments clearly.
Thus, for example, when we express astonishment at a protest, in the vicinity of
a state legislature, by people who are also carrying guns at the time over laws
aimed at containing the spread of COVID-19, they might not understand that it's
the guns that are what seem the most unusual to us. (Also surprising is that one
managed to find more than a handful of people with enough lack of sense to think
that social distancing in a pandemic is a bad thing, of course.)
One thing you need to understand is the difference between recognizing
that something is a good idea and accepting that being compelled by
the government to do it is a good idea.

I never ride my motorcycle without a helmet, even in localities in
which it is lawful to do so. But I resent the laws that demand that I
do it. I wore seat belts even when it was not fashionable to do so,
but I nonetheless resent the laws that demand that I do it.

I'm fine with social distancing, I'm just not fine with the police
enforcing it.
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 20:36:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 12:03:43 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
And all of this is small consolation, to, for example, those who have
been killed, beaten, or imprisoned for the horrible crime of going
about their daily lives while black.
Scott Lurndal
2020-05-29 22:03:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 12:03:43 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
And all of this is small consolation, to, for example, those who have
been killed, beaten, or imprisoned for the horrible crime of going
about their daily lives while black.
Name the 'law' that is responsible for that horrible crime?

Or have you shifted the topic again because you can't refute
what was said?
Quadibloc
2020-05-30 06:20:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
And all of this is small consolation, to, for example, those who have
been killed, beaten, or imprisoned for the horrible crime of going
about their daily lives while black.
Name the 'law' that is responsible for that horrible crime?
What if some alert armed citizen rescued George Floyd, saving his life, by
shooting Derek Chauvin dead?

There is a law somewhere on the books that would result in that being
differently from someone rescuing a police officer by shooting dead a criminal
who was in the process of killing him, even if I can't name the precise statute
offhand.

And under normal circumstances, it would be a highly reasonable law to have
around, so the solution isn't repealing it.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2020-05-30 13:38:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 23:20:29 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
And all of this is small consolation, to, for example, those who have
been killed, beaten, or imprisoned for the horrible crime of going
about their daily lives while black.
Name the 'law' that is responsible for that horrible crime?
What if some alert armed citizen rescued George Floyd, saving his life, by
shooting Derek Chauvin dead?
There is a law somewhere on the books that would result in that being
differently from someone rescuing a police officer by shooting dead a criminal
who was in the process of killing him, even if I can't name the precise statute
offhand.
And under normal circumstances, it would be a highly reasonable law to have
around, so the solution isn't repealing it.
Don't bother trying to reason with someone who is even less in contact
with reality than you are.
Scott Lurndal
2020-05-29 22:02:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
You even have the right to gather enough supporters of your position
to vote you into office, so you can propose legislation to change the
law, if you can get sufficent support from fellow lawmakers.

You don't have a right to ignore the law or not follow the law.
Dimensional Traveler
2020-05-29 23:01:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
You even have the right to gather enough supporters of your position
to vote you into office, so you can propose legislation to change the
law, if you can get sufficent support from fellow lawmakers.
You don't have a right to ignore the law or not follow the law.
I wasn't disagreeing with that last sentence.
--
<to be filled in at a later date>
J. Clarke
2020-05-29 23:10:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 29 May 2020 16:01:08 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
You even have the right to gather enough supporters of your position
to vote you into office, so you can propose legislation to change the
law, if you can get sufficent support from fellow lawmakers.
You don't have a right to ignore the law or not follow the law.
I wasn't disagreeing with that last sentence.
If Rosa Parks had obeyed the law where would we be?
Major Oz
2020-05-30 01:12:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 29 May 2020 16:01:08 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 28 May 2020 11:42:55 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Robert Carnegie
The way Australia does it is that there's a removable flap which has the details of the voter
That's verified against the electoral lists, removed and then the intact envelope is sent elsewhere to be counted as a vote.
Does that presuppose that the "voter" has registered, in person, ahead of time, with some election commission.....perhaps by providing a photo ID ?
The Electoral Commissions, one for each state and territory, and one
federal - which are independent governmental agencies, and not under the
control of any political party, even the one in power - do regular
door-knocks where identity and residence are verified.
It's not terribly difficult... Well, if you're USAian I suppose it must be.
"You got a warrant...?"
Our doors are usually farther apart.
A little internet search will show how some freak out when
the state or local commission responsible for keeping the
voter rolls send mail with an order to return if undeliverable,
in order to get names of those who have possibly moved or died.
This is considered "voter suppression" by some.
It relies on the loyalty to duty of the postal service, which as we know,
President Trump distrusts. He isn’t alone either.
Trump does not trust anyone who's loyalty is not to Trump personally.
His pattern of behavior indicates that he has a special dislike of
anyone who's loyalty is to the law.
The fact that so many others in the US share that same dislike is IMO a
great flaw in the American culture and mythology.
The problem with loyalty to the law is that the law is sometimes an
ass.
The law is the law, a donkey is a donkey. The two can never
be equivalent.
Because you don't _like_ a law, doesn't make it a "not-law".
And in the US you have the right to petition to have laws changed.
You even have the right to gather enough supporters of your position
to vote you into office, so you can propose legislation to change the
law, if you can get sufficent support from fellow lawmakers.
You don't have a right to ignore the law or not follow the law.
I wasn't disagreeing with that last sentence.
If Rosa Parks had obeyed the law where would we be?
Most likely in the same place.

Civil disobedience in liberal democracies is not only allowed, but encouraged........

BUT....it requires acceptance of the penalties for doing so.

If, as a result, it becomes recognized the law is "wrong"...it winds up being changed.

If it is done as MLK illustrated, no lives are lost, no cities are torched, and we, as a society, improve.

But.....if done a la Malcom, da revs, and BLM.....not only is reform delayed, but lives are put at risk.

Leadership helps....
I like the HST approach, when he desegregated the military.....(loosely paraphrased) : No more segregation bullshit, and any officer or NCO that doesn't like it can leave.
Quadibloc
2020-05-30 06:16:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
You even have the right to gather enough supporters of your position
to vote you into office, so you can propose legislation to change the
law, if you can get sufficent support from fellow lawmakers.
You don't have a right to ignore the law or not follow the law.
No, not in a functioning democracy. And there is never a _legal_ right to ignore
the law or not follow the law.

But of course, prior to the Civil War, people had *every* _human_ right not to
follow the Fugitive Slave Law, or indeed any law that categorized some people as
slaves, and they would have been entirely in the right to bring down the regime
which tolerated slavery - that is, the United States Government in addition to
the governments of the slave states.

Only an imbalance of power prevented that from happening.

Americans, whether they realize it or not, acknowledge this truth every time
they say that the People's Republic of China has "political prisoners".

Governments don't give people rights: they either choose to respect the rights
of people, or they choose to violate the rights of people. The Declaration of
Independence acknowledges this truth.

This, however, does not mean that people have a fundamental human right to
carelessly expose others to disease. Of course it is within the legitimate ambit
of government to outlaw conduct which causes injury to others! Some people may
think it's all right for governments to outlaw the poor robbing from the rich,
but wrong for governments to outlaw the rich filling the lungs of the poor with
poison, as an example, but such a position is sufficiently risible on its face
as not to even deserve to be taken seriously as defensible by rational argument.

On the other hand, that it is questionable whether governments should be allowed
to levy taxes, while clearly indefensible on _practical_ grounds, actually has a
very good case for it on _moral_ grounds, so here a serious debate with the
Right actually *is* needed.

John Savard
Moriarty
2020-05-28 21:38:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
<snip>
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan Rather.
You *are* Terry, AICMFP.
Well, the only other rasfw regular (that I recall) who used to parrot the line that we won the Vietnam War was Shawn Wilson. Maybe they're all the same person?

-Moriarty
Major Oz
2020-05-28 21:44:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan Rather.
You *are* Terry, AICMFP.
Well, the only other rasfw regular (that I recall) who used to parrot the line that we won the Vietnam War was Shawn Wilson. Maybe they're all the same person?
And.....accusations of parroting could never be called, itself.......parroting, could it ?
Dimensional Traveler
2020-05-28 22:01:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan Rather.
You *are* Terry, AICMFP.
Well, the only other rasfw regular (that I recall) who used to parrot the line that we won the Vietnam War was Shawn Wilson. Maybe they're all the same person?
And.....accusations of parroting could never be called, itself.......parroting, could it ?
I will both parrot the line that the US won the Vietnam war military AND
parrot the parroting of parroting being parroting.
--
<to be filled in at a later date>
Major Oz
2020-05-29 02:46:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Major Oz
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan Rather.
You *are* Terry, AICMFP.
Well, the only other rasfw regular (that I recall) who used to parrot the line that we won the Vietnam War was Shawn Wilson. Maybe they're all the same person?
And.....accusations of parroting could never be called, itself.......parroting, could it ?
I will both parrot the line that the US won the Vietnam war military AND
parrot the parroting of parroting being parroting.
Thank you for your consistency.
Gary R. Schmidt
2020-05-29 03:41:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Moriarty
<snip>
But you keep on living in your sad little world, where the USA won the
Vietnam War, and sundry other delusions hold sway.  :-)
    Cheers,
        Gary    B-)
Well said.
Point of order.....
The US military DID win the war.....it was lost by the US press.
Even Gen Giap admitted that.......and was damn grateful to Dan Rather.
You *are* Terry, AICMFP.
Well, the only other rasfw regular (that I recall) who used to parrot the line that we won the Vietnam War was Shawn Wilson. Maybe they're all the same person?
And.....accusations of parroting could never be called, itself.......parroting, could it ?
Nah, you're just another sock-puppet.

Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...
Chrysi Cat
2020-05-28 22:35:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
John, you ignore the fact that political action can kill people. So
far COVID-19 has killed about 350,000. The collapse of the elected
government in Germany ended up killing about 20 million. And that was
in a world with a much smaller population and much less capable
weapons.
So, is it really so wrong to put a risk to the US Constitution ahead
of a medical risk? How many people would a 21st Century American
Hitler kill?
Your point is entirely valid. I did choose an argument with a flaw.
That, however, state governors banning gatherings to limit the spread of
COVID-19 is indicative that they're up to something that will lead to war and
violence, is something I have a hard time seeing as worthy of consideration.
John Savard
Everything in the US has been leading to war and violence since at least
2009 and arguably the 1990s.

The only question is who finally decide that federal law is about to
impose another region's values on their home region for over a lifetime
FIRST, and thus secede.

Right now, my money would be that Terry's right that Trump keeps the
White House, and if he does, then while the preferable action would be
for the entire population of Pacifica and New England to flee to Canada,
the problem is Canada doesn't accept Americans who have less than 3
million dollars in savings unless they also have a 2-year job guarantee
(and no, I have no idea what happens if they then get fired for cause).

Indeed, every ("other?") industrialised country in the world holds
Americans to standards at least as high as are demanded of Third World
immigrants, including some where Americans are considered _less_ desirable.

So at that point the only way that the people in the
non-Confederate-friendly states don't get to live in a country where
people are free to discriminate against one another as long as their god
is the one they claim forbids them doing business with the targeted
party, among other reforms that will make the country look much more
like Russia than like England is, ironically, if THEY remove themselves
from Washington's purview just the way the Confederacy did.

And largely for the same reason; we can see that a lot of things we've
taken for granted are about to be ended, with the explicit statement
that only a constitutional amendment can recover them--in a country
where we know we can _never_ control 38 states at once for the
ratification, because a lot of them are places beset by terrible
brain-drain where they cling harder to the supremacy of religion over
secularity than XVI-century Europeans.

At this point, I'm just hoping that DC *lets* us go rather than trying
to keep hold, and that whether or /not/ DC lets us go, that my parents
don't decide that Newsom and Polis are tyrants, and that thus their
loyalty will be to DC whether they have to sabotage a new nation (should
there be war) or move to the rump US (should there be peaceful separation).

Because whether or not they get to have their 6-3 or 7-2 SCOTUS majority
by 2022, the GOP will likely get the country back someday and at that
point once again try to lock the New Deal and Great Society behind a
door reading "constitutional amendment required". Let alone anything
post-Stonewall, which I'm kind of attached to for ovbvious reasons.

At this point? I'm just hoping people understand the value of peaceful
separation rather than fighting to maintain a marriage that's probably
been toxic since the War of 1812 (which as we know marked the /first/ US
secession crisis. It would have seen New England invite George to take
them back, had the US not started turning the war around).
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Robert Carnegie
2020-05-29 00:05:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
John, you ignore the fact that political action can kill people. So
far COVID-19 has killed about 350,000. The collapse of the elected
government in Germany ended up killing about 20 million. And that was
in a world with a much smaller population and much less capable
weapons.
So, is it really so wrong to put a risk to the US Constitution ahead
of a medical risk? How many people would a 21st Century American
Hitler kill?
Your point is entirely valid. I did choose an argument with a flaw.
That, however, state governors banning gatherings to limit the spread of
COVID-19 is indicative that they're up to something that will lead to war and
violence, is something I have a hard time seeing as worthy of consideration.
John Savard
Everything in the US has been leading to war and violence since at least
2009 and arguably the 1990s.
The only question is who finally decide that federal law is about to
impose another region's values on their home region for over a lifetime
FIRST, and thus secede.
Right now, my money would be that Terry's right that Trump keeps the
White House, and if he does, then while the preferable action would be
for the entire population of Pacifica and New England to flee to Canada,
the problem is Canada doesn't accept Americans who have less than 3
million dollars in savings unless they also have a 2-year job guarantee
(and no, I have no idea what happens if they then get fired for cause).
Indeed, every ("other?") industrialised country in the world holds
Americans to standards at least as high as are demanded of Third World
immigrants, including some where Americans are considered _less_ desirable.
So at that point the only way that the people in the
non-Confederate-friendly states don't get to live in a country where
people are free to discriminate against one another as long as their god
is the one they claim forbids them doing business with the targeted
party, among other reforms that will make the country look much more
like Russia than like England is, ironically, if THEY remove themselves
from Washington's purview just the way the Confederacy did.
And largely for the same reason; we can see that a lot of things we've
taken for granted are about to be ended, with the explicit statement
that only a constitutional amendment can recover them--in a country
where we know we can _never_ control 38 states at once for the
ratification, because a lot of them are places beset by terrible
brain-drain where they cling harder to the supremacy of religion over
secularity than XVI-century Europeans.
At this point, I'm just hoping that DC *lets* us go rather than trying
to keep hold, and that whether or /not/ DC lets us go, that my parents
don't decide that Newsom and Polis are tyrants, and that thus their
loyalty will be to DC whether they have to sabotage a new nation (should
there be war) or move to the rump US (should there be peaceful separation).
Because whether or not they get to have their 6-3 or 7-2 SCOTUS majority
by 2022, the GOP will likely get the country back someday and at that
point once again try to lock the New Deal and Great Society behind a
door reading "constitutional amendment required". Let alone anything
post-Stonewall, which I'm kind of attached to for ovbvious reasons.
At this point? I'm just hoping people understand the value of peaceful
separation rather than fighting to maintain a marriage that's probably
been toxic since the War of 1812 (which as we know marked the /first/ US
secession crisis. It would have seen New England invite George to take
them back, had the US not started turning the war around).
Did we notice that the President-approved COVID-19 drug remdesivir,
or whatever, is made by a company named Gilead?

(Why did they name the drug after Aragorn’s horse though... I suppose
“horse” is drugs slang.)
Mike Van Pelt
2020-05-29 23:25:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Not really. Their imaginations are just a little overheated
when they equate Donald Trump with Adolph Hitler.
Those types have claimed that every Republican president
since Eisenhower is Hitler.
--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston
Loading...