Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[luee]

CORONAVIRUSPublished 2 hours ago
Iran men who licked holy shrine face prison, flogging, as troops ordered to fight coronavirus outbreak

 Poor primitive bastards are in a dither.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/coronavirus-iran-holy-shrine-licking-prison-flogging

[LarryBnDC]

In almost every jurisdiction the voting process has been liberalized to make it easier to vote.
Boards of elections have bent over backwards to accommodate people from all walks of life.

Yes, yes it has.

It's in several thousand places of heavy Black and Latino populations that it has not been liberalized.

Voter Turn out is consistently rising among all 10,000 voting jurisdictions in this country.

Shutting polling places with increased population, while not in places with reduced populations is not liberalized.

That’s why it doesn’t happen. No Board Election Board is making voting harder.

Requiring IDs and then making it harder to get those IDs is not liberalized.

Boards of Elections do not make rules on voter ids. Legislatures do.
Boards of elections do not make decisions on how to obtain those ids.

Forbidding buses for the elderly to vote is not liberalized.

Transportation for voters to get to the polls has increased not decreased.

Trying to block college students from voting is not liberalized.

college students are subject to residency rules, no one is trying to keep them from voting legally.

And no, Boards of Elections have bent over backwards to accommodate some people from some walks of life.

All walks of life.

You ignore data as if it were invisible to you.

You have presented no data to back up your silly accusations.
What’s more your oblivious to way elections are administered in the US.

By your own logic Repunlican legislatures pass rules that make it harder to vote and BOE merely enforce those laws. Meanwhile, despite the obstacles the turnout numbers are increasing and that is your rationale for ‘everything is fine.’

Asshole

[barton]

Shutting polling places with increased population, while not in places with reduced populations is not liberalized.

That’s why it doesn’t happen. No Board Election Board is making voting harder.

Woops.   You're painting the debate here as if it's specific to election boards.   The articles cited in the past couple years here are about voter suppression tactics often at the level of state legislatures.  And the MJ article posted yesterday was about suppression/bias both statewide and at the county level, which is just following the state.    Tons of evidence have been posted.   If you're too stupid and intolerant to absorb it,  at least stop trolling people and demanding endless repetition of citation dumps.   

And total turnout is another sophistry - total turnout is not the topic,  proportional turnout is.   You are spectacularly missing the point,  and I suspect doing so on purpose.   

[kiidcarter8]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/03/politics/supreme-court-immigration-garcia-kansas-decision/index.html

[josh]

You have presented no data to back up your silly accusations.

And this is why you are worthless to talk to and demonstrates how full of shit you are.

If you wanted to demonstrate the ways in which the THOUSANDS of shut polling places did not have a deleterious effect on the ability of people in those counties to vote, it would be great.

But instead, you repeat screed again and again, with nothing to support your position. You make claims about how voter turnout is up in every voting jurisdiction in the country, but you provide no source that says it.

If it were true, then the 2018 numbers would be higher than 2002 and 2016 higher than 2008, but they aren't.
Voter turnout rates in the United States, 2002-2018 (expressed as a percentage of eligible voters)
Year   Total ballots cast   Total ballots cast for highest office
2018   50.30%   49.70%
2016   60.20%   59.30%
2014   36.70%   36.00%
2012   58.60%   58.00%
2010   41.80%   41.00%
2008   62.20%   61.60%
2006   41.30%   40.40%
2004   60.70%   60.70%
2002   40.50%   50.10%
But perhaps you mean in raw numbers, which would be dumb. The population increases, the voting population increases. Duh.

Here's Texas:                 

                                              2008                        2016
Registered Voters                       13,575,062               15,101,087
Voting Age Population (VAP)   17,735,442               19,307,355
Percentage of VAP Registered   76.54%                    78.21%
Turnout                                   8,077,795                 8,969,226
Percent of Turnout to Registered   59.50%                    59.39%
Percent of Turnout to VAP           45.55%                    46.45%

But... from 2012 to 2016, the turnout percentage dropped in 82 counties. 61 counties had fewer voters show up in 2016.

So, no, Ward, your claim that "voter turnout is up in every voting jurisdiction in the country" is just plain wrong.

[barton]

But perhaps you mean in raw numbers, which would be dumb. The population increases, the voting population increases. Duh.
   

When I posted above,  I had the dismal feeling that this was the specious point he was making.   In any case, he posted no evidence,  so Hitchens Law applies.   

[Hairy Lime]

Boards of Elections do not make rules on voter ids. Legislatures do.
Boards of elections do not make decisions on how to obtain those ids.

Then why do you constantly point to the bipartisan make up of Boards of Election when defending against claims of voter suppression.  I mean, other than since you do not highly prize intellectual honesty you see no problem with seizing any argument convenient to the moment without any concern for consistency.

[Hairy Lime]

In almost every jurisdiction the voting process has been liberalized to make it easier to vote.
Boards of elections have bent over backwards to accommodate people from all walks of life.

Yes, yes it has.

It's in several thousand places of heavy Black and Latino populations that it has not been liberalized.

Voter Turn out is consistently rising among all 10,000 voting jurisdictions in this country.

Shutting polling places with increased population, while not in places with reduced populations is not liberalized.

That’s why it doesn’t happen. No Board Election Board is making voting harder.

Requiring IDs and then making it harder to get those IDs is not liberalized.

Boards of Elections do not make rules on voter ids. Legislatures do.
Boards of elections do not make decisions on how to obtain those ids.

Forbidding buses for the elderly to vote is not liberalized.

Transportation for voters to get to the polls has increased not decreased.

Trying to block college students from voting is not liberalized.

college students are subject to residency rules, no one is trying to keep them from voting legally.

And no, Boards of Elections have bent over backwards to accommodate some people from some walks of life.

All walks of life.

You ignore data as if it were invisible to you.

You have presented no data to back up your silly accusations.
What’s more your oblivious to way elections are administered in the US.

By your own logic Repunlican legislatures pass rules that make it harder to vote and BOE merely enforce those laws. Meanwhile, despite the obstacles the turnout numbers are increasing and that is your rationale for ‘everything is fine.’

Asshole

Report: Texas Rapidly Reduced Number Of Polling Sites In Black and Latino Communities
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/reports-show-texas-rapidly-reduced-number-of-polling-sites-in-black-and-latino-communities_n_5e5e942cc5b67ed38b397192

[FlyingVProd]

The ancient Joshua Tree forests in the Mojave Desert of Southern California need to be preserved, national parks can be formed, and people can camp, and ride horses, and hike, and they can walk their dogs, and ride bicycles, etc.

Salute,

Tony V.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Shutting polling places with increased population, while not in places with reduced populations is not liberalized.

That’s why it doesn’t happen. No Board Election Board is making voting harder.

Woops.   You're painting the debate here as if it's specific to election boards. 

Because that was the first post by Josh on the closing of Texas poll locations.

The articles cited in the past couple years here are about voter suppression tactics often at the level of state legislatures. 

Okay. So what?

And the MJ article posted yesterday was about suppression/bias both statewide and at the county level, which is just following the state.

local Boards of elections administer the elections based on managing election locations to best serve the voters. Why would any election board make it harder on the voters?  Voting locations move often because of changes in
land use, traffic patterns, lease and rental agreements, budgets and a host of other considerations, even altered voting districts resulting from Gerrymandering.

And total turnout is another sophistry - total turnout is not the topic,  proportional turnout is.   You are spectacularly missing the point,  and I suspect doing so on purpose.

I did not make any point beyond voter suppression at the Election Board level is a myth.
Josh’s charts were laughable. So take it up with him.

[josh]

I did not make any point beyond voter suppression at the Election Board level is a myth.
Josh’s charts were laughable. So take it up with him.

As ever, a non-specific claim with nothing to it.

You despise facts, Ward.

You can't address them, let alone disprove them.

Again, your claim about the ever-increasing voter turnout is bogus.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I did not make any point beyond voter suppression at the Election Board level is a myth.
Josh’s charts were laughable. So take it up with him.

As ever, a non-specific claim with nothing to it.

You despise facts, Ward.

You can't address them, let alone disprove them.

Again, your claim about the ever-increasing voter turnout is bogus.

Not by any argument you made.

[josh]

Meanwhile, while Ward plays village idiot, the CDC is being increasingly muzzled by the White House.

They used to tell us how many folks had been tested. That stopped, but they had a map that told us the count per state.

That has stopped, too:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-us.html#confirmed-cases

It says "Yes" if there is at least one case and "No" if there is not. But if you click the "plus sign" under the map, it gives the same information as a list. No breakdown.

[josh]

I did not make any point beyond voter suppression at the Election Board level is a myth.
Josh’s charts were laughable. So take it up with him.

As ever, a non-specific claim with nothing to it.

You despise facts, Ward.

You can't address them, let alone disprove them.

Again, your claim about the ever-increasing voter turnout is bogus.

Not by any argument you made.

Even your lame ass response doesn't actually make grammatical sense.

[josh]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/02/us/politics/esper-trump-military-coronavirus.html

Defense Secretary Warns Commanders Not to Surprise Trump on Coronavirus
Mark T. Esper directed overseas officers not to run afoul of the White House’s messaging and asked them to clear decisions on protecting their troops.

Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper has urged American military commanders overseas not to make any decisions related to the coronavirus that might surprise the White House or run afoul of President Trump’s messaging on the growing health challenge, American officials said.

Mr. Esper’s directive, delivered last week during a video teleconference call with combatant commanders around the world, is the latest iteration of Mr. Trump’s efforts to manage public fears over the disease, even as it continues to spread around the world.
[/size]