Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Kim Iversen" channel.

  1. I hope the pandering to the right is worth it to make disingenuous arguments ....
    4
  2. Katie Halper had Mike Prysner on * , and gave lots ot credit to Empire Files (Abby Martin). The Taliban were always ! in control except in the larger settlements. A high ranking US military officer travelled all of Afghanistan under Obama and saw what was going on and that the war could not be won. He reported home - but the Obama admin did not want to appear weak and be villified (which would have been the case - so that is on the electorate). His advice was ignored they tried to turn it into a "honorable retreat" (Vietnam and Pentagon papers 2.0). The many troops (and money) did not much, and Trump changed strategy and let the military bomb, which only killed a lot more civilians. and Status Coup also covers a whistleblower (might be him), check that out. And of course the Grayzone can be expected to be highly informative and relevant. Not sure what The Hill Rising and Breaking Point are up to. Tulsi Gabbard - bless her - made the regime change wars an issue, this is why the establishment hated her so much. She and Glenn Greenwald just signed a contract with an alternative video platform, I hope they are already on, to comment on that insanity. The U.S. military had enough technology and airpower to just keep the Taliban contained. US injuries and casualties spiked when Obama had 100,000 troops in Afghanistan (imagine the MONEY and what such a government workforce could accomplish in the U.S. if the government would pay them to serve the public. The U.S. had a surge under Obama (that was the preparation for the intended retreat). So the had 40 men in the middle of nowhere. Under fire during night. One patrol during day, they could not walk though poppy fields - then angry farmers called the commander.
    2
  3. 1 million people immigrated from Cuba to the U.S. that is a LOT for one state.
    2
  4. Context matters: .....but Trump did not mean anything bad (and Capitol Police leadership just happened to be unprepared) when he said that. Wink, wink. They also did not mean anything bad when they delayed to give the govenor of Maryland the authorization to deploy the National Guard to DC. He was asked in the press conference next day, what the Secretary of Defense said when he called him. (R) Gov. Logan: He said nothing, I did not reach him by phone, nor did he call back. Or anyone else down the chain of command (the president also could give the premission). Only NINENTY minutes later Logan got a call, from outside the chain of command (Army Secretary), he took what he could get.
    2
  5. I heard the opinion that Biden planned a modest "victory lap" in Sep. 2021, 20 years after (they had the war prepared before ! they were in Afghanistan mid. October 2001 !!). That may have been the vain reason to get serious about withdrawal. They did not expect it to fall apart, at least not as fast.
    2
  6. 9:00 Cuba - and Russia & China got away with dispossessing RICH people and nothing is wose than that. Forget about terrible dictators mass famine and what not. that is the worst offense ever. Haiti was the first slave colony that rebelled and got rid off the overlords. They had to pay off France (for "developing" the island) France threatened to retaliate against them (I think that was under Napoleon and after the Revolution. Liberte, egalite, fraternite .... ) Haiti - the population ! never really gave in to neoliberalism, and colonialism, they have to put up with the corrupt leaders, imposed on them by the U.S. they have the terrible storms and earthquackes, but somehow the U.S. and their corrupt leades know they are just waiting for their chance. And the plan was of course to regime change Cuba back, being an island helped them to control the infiltration and the JFK admin found out that Castro was genuinely popular, so it was hard to assassinate him - not that they did not have all sorts of harebrained plans. With the Cuban missile crisis Cuba lucked out - the end result was an international treaty that the U.S. would not invade, so economic war was the thing they still could do. The Soviets helped out Cuba they got cheap fossil fuel etc.
    1
  7. I disagree that the Afghans welcomed the Taliban or wanted them. Some did. That wasn't an impressive crowd. It was very quiet when the Taliban came into Kabul. - this is different than in Aleppo, when the Syrian government army and the Russian army got control back of all of Aleppo. The population had auto parades in the night (on the last day people in the government held part of the city were sitting in cafes and having toasts - they expected to see their relatives soon. Taxi drivers were in tears telling journalists / observers that had come to Aleppo, that they had phone call with relatives for the first time since a long time and expeced to see them soon.
    1
  8. She is ONLY on the voter rolls (if your claim is even true). A wannabe fraud would need to know that your relative is still on the voter rolls (not a very plausible assumption) and at this ! polling site. They would need to know your family (so they KNOW the person is dead). There are security cameras and I think they KNOW when a voter is entered into the database (got their ballot, so they are ticked off). In VERY rare cases MAIL ballots have been abused. Spouse died, the mail ballot came by default or the criminal energy went so far to ask for a ballot as if the person was still alive. The authorities handed out the mail ballot, the death had not YET been processed. (problem: even if the relative was on the rolls last year - and how would a fraudster KNOW ? in the months since then the rolls might have been cleaned up - and THEN they are in trouble. And foolish surviving spouse used the extra ballot. They must be signed so that is forging of a signature on top of it. Guess what: I know of that ONE case because that person was busted. Authorities processed the mail ballot, and by then they had processed the death and they got an alert. They kept the envelope and tested the saliva and matched it with DNA of the surviving partner. So no excuses. That was stupid and that person was not even smart enough to handle the ballot with gloves and glue it with water and a brush or some other glue. Well, a smart person would not have tried it in the first place What were the chances to not be busted - immediately OR later. They keep the data if they dig into it later, they see at least that someone did vote for a dead person. And of course that might implicate the spouse that has access. That is very rare btw, I know only of that case - the other alleged cases of "votes for dead persons" are voters that have the SAME name, but are different people. Which happens in a country with 330 million people.
    1
  9. Then there were the Trump voters that believed the lies of how D voters vote more than once all the time - so they thought they could do it too. One student voted by mail and than tried in person later (and got busted). On woman cast the normal vote, drove over to anothere polling station and tried to vote again. Was also busted.
    1
  10. People do not mess with the vote of STRANGERS. the very rare cases are: trying to abuse your own vote (voting double) OR they try to abuse the ballot of a close relative. - Voter IMPERSONATION (of dead or alive) people is VERY rare. It is risky for the individual, and does not even change the outcome, and one has to know the person well one wants to impersonate. The gender and age should be a good enough fit. A 30 year old male cannot impersonate a 60 year old woman. They have to know personal information. AND know where the person is registered to vote AND have the never to show up. That happens very, very rarely if at all. It would not only require a lot of stupidity to do that. And the rare cases of impersonation happen by a FAMILY MEMBER. Only they have the nerve to abuse the ballot and only they have access to the information.
    1
  11. Don't worry, only a member of your family would maybe, maybe commit election fraud with the still existing registration of your late relative, no one else. And usually - additionally to all the other obstacles - people shy away from being so disresepctful towards the deceased.
    1
  12. That is incorrect a LOT of people do not have an ID that their state would recognize as valid (for letting them vote. They do not accept a veteran's ID, or expired driver's licence. The person is what they claim to be and the old ID confirms that - but they can't vote with it). if you do not travel (money, age, disabled), you can get by w/o ID just fine. I guess at a certain age (if you do not look young) you can buy beer w/o being asked for the ID. If not - someone else can bring it, no big deal. It would be ridiculous but not really a time and money consuming effort to get beer.
    1
  13. One can have a valid driver's licence in one state and the (red) state will not allow you to register and to get the new driver's licence because there is a tiny difference between SS and ID or birth certificate data. Which can often happen - and back in the day in the South the poor black population had the babies at home. and not much effort was made to have consistent and meticulous files for them. A lot of people have problems because of that, and it gets worse if they then move to another state.
    1
  14. an ID FOR registration OR casting the vote makes no sense, it will not prevent any fraud (because for very good reason voter impersonation almost never happens). So they erect considerable obstacles for low income, low mobility citizens , 3 MILLIONS in the U.S. - for the extremely rare event of voter impersonation in person. . think it through ! And "no ID" can also mean EXPIRED driver's licence. Or that from the former state, when you moved.  Or a veteran - here are states that accept ID's from active personnel but NOT from veterans. Let's say that person was injured, has some PTSD going on, let's the driver's licence expire, because he has other problems and can't drive anyway. There you go: No ID that the petty state would accept as proof that he is who he claims to be.
    1
  15. There is not enough reward in casting extra votes (under your real name, so ID has no bearing) or to impersonate a person. Compared to the risks ! Many people would not do it for ethical reasons, while others - abstain from it out of justified fear, even if they are very tribal. There are considerable risks to be busted, plus some very significant practical obstacles. And it is completely pointless - the outcome will not be different. A person that is so stupid to even try that - most likely will not be able to pull it off.- Some Trump voters were stupid enough to believe the inflammatory narrative that many Democratic voters vote more than once. So 2 or 3 decided to vote double in 2016 under the motto: We can do it, too. Note: Close to 150 million votes were cast. They got busted. These are not even events that would have been prevented by showing an ID BUT it shows HOW rare it is that people are stupid enough to commit election related crimes. One woman drove to a second polling office after casting her Trump vote - likely tried same day registration or she used to live there. And got busted. One student cast a mail ballot (with her family) and later tried to cast a vote in person. They were Trump fans btw. She claims she meant no harm and just forgot that she voted already. ? ! ? Either a family member forged her vote (and signature !) on the mail ballot and she protects them - or she is severely disorganized - or that was a lame excuse and she tried to vote double. It is a federal crime with up to 5 years in prison ! people might have enough incentives to cheat for other gains like picking up a package and forging a signature - but not with identity fraud when it comes to in person voting. Think through the process, and the motivations for impersonating a legitimate voter at the right place, or inventing a person that does not exist !! (with papers to match that !! This is not Jason Bourne universe).
    1
  16. Registration - where all states require some paperwork: a) you invent a new persona - just for the sake of one more vote ??? - Good fake papers are expensive and hard to get - for a regular person and I doubt hard core criminals waste their time on election crimes. They have other fish to fry. No criminal will jeopardize good papers (that indicates organized crime and / or some sophistication) with an attempt to register to vote. A person with imperfectly forged papers runs considerable risks to be busted. - b) a person pretends to be someone else (a person that exists) to vote in their name. Let's assume that is a state that only demands ID for registration or has automatic registration And they have REASONABLE COMMON SENSE guidelines when there are small deviations between birth certificate and other papers. As happend often in the past espcialy for low income people in the South. Or inconsistent computers systems back in the day, and they had to use abbreviations for the middle name, because the number of charcters was limited. An abbreviated versus a full middle name can be a severe problem to register to vote - if the person does not need a drivers's licence they might chose to enter that battle, the ACLU often helps out with lawyers to gets cuh persons registered.
    1
  17. Dude has his name a tiny bit different in the driver's licence than in the birth certificate ? After the first visit he complies with their additional demands and he brings the school record, the vaccination card (his parents kept them, he kept them). He has a driver's licence from another state that is not as petty. He is a professional wanting to return to the state where he grew up. He has to fly in for every date with the DMV (likely also looking for housing, having job interviews). What are the chances that he is a liar and tries to impersonate a person that has almost the same name and happens to have the same birth date ?? I mean they could have given him the benefit of the doubt on the second date. Instead they changed the goal posts - and demanded more evidence that he is who he claims to be (as they seem to believe that he happens to have paperwork form the person he wants to impersonate). He flew home, collected what they asked for and called them and asked if he could send it with his signature so he would not have to fly in again. They refused. Only in person. And of course also no same day registration. He was so pissed that he did not move to that state. and handed the matter over over to his lawyer. Now imagine a person w/o money, affinity to adminstrative work, or they do not have the original papers. Parents or they were evicted, burned down, ... A person that just recovers from being homeless may not have a lawyer at their disposal.
    1
  18. And if you do not register, but just cast a vote in the name of someone else - you have to get a few things right. The correct polling station. The person you want to impersonate must be registered to vote at all. It is a gamble: the legit voters does nto vote in this election OR: You must come before the legitimate voter, or you will be busted. Even if the the legit voters comes after - the person will also get into trouble but they CAN justify themselves. The fraudulent vote cannot be prevented in this case - it is mixed with the other votes, thy cannot sort it out - BUT the legitimate voter AND the authorities know about the criminal act. That would be reported - if it WOULD happen. Only if the legit voter is registered BUT does not vote it would go unnoticed. But that is a gamble and if there would be 50 attempts (I am making a crazy high estimate), at least a few get caught and in a few other cases they know someone impersonated the legit voter (that came later or sent in a mail ballot). Hello surveillance cameras ! The database likely registers WHEN a person shows up for in person voting - and they are "ticked off" (= has voted). IF impersonation would happen, I would suspect it is done by a person that knows the legit voter. And with the camera footage and time stamps there is a good chance they find the fraud. WHO does that ? No one ! - I do not know of any case of voter impersonation to cast a vote in person. And only then the ID even plays a role. Forging papers for criminal purposes may give you a (financial or other) reward. But: the reward for the criminal effort to register under an invented name or the name of another person is: ONE additional vote. No direct benefit. Does not change the outcome of the election at all. In many states not even 10,000 or 50,000 such criminal votes would make a difference - the state is either safely red or blue.
    1
  19. Completely pointless meets Practical obstacles meets Hard to pull off without being caught& charged with a crime meets No tangible gain for the indivdual meets High individual risks. That is the reason why criminal voter impersonation must be extremely rare. I do not know of ANY case, and it would have been widely reported. Some idiots tried double voting in 2016 (2 or 3 cases compared to 150 million votes cast) and got busted, so OTHER safeguards prevented that, ID would not have any influnence on those cases. There are rare cases where a person still gets the mail ballot for a deceased family member and uses it. One person had used the ballot of the late spouse BUT that was found out.(the saliva on the cover proved it was the surviving spouse, they did a DNA test). Mandatory ID would not have prevented those UNSUCCESFUL ATTEMPTS - they had the safeguards in place that detected that a vote was cast for a dead person. Not a person that has the same name but actually dead.
    1
  20. 3 million U.S. citizens do not have an ID, at least not one their state accepts as valid to cast a vote. That can be even a veteran ID in at least one state. Quite common: expired driver's licence. Student ID. Even though the universities screen the applicants, and it costs serious money to be enlisted (so even IF the process could be abused at one college, who pays thousands of dollars only to get a student ID to cheat with in person voting ??). Red states carefully crafted a combination of criteria for student ID's that would in theory be acceptable - that no college meets. For instance how long they are valid. Colleges might issue them for only a year - well, that opens a chance to not let a democgraphic - that Republicans do not want to participate - vote. With a legit, STILL valid ID that expires too soon for the whims of Republican lawmakers. I would get that an expired student ID is not acceptable, but that is not how they set it up. The just invented an arbitrary criteria (for no practical reasons) knowing full well that the colleges prefer to restict the validity of the student ID's. That opened aan oppurtinity for "death by a thousand cuts". The whole reason for that arbitrary condition is to not kick out all student ID's (on principle - the ACLU might challenge that in court) while making sure that they cannot be used in practice. Unless the studen has a car and driver's licence so the young adults from wealthy households are covered. They often travel internationally (they can afford to, and accompagny the parents as teenagers), so they also have a valid passport. So far Republicans have not refused to accept a passport as suitable ID. The colleges do not have a unified approach regarding the data they give on the ID - but even if they would and would fulfill the details of the current ID laws - the Republicans would just introduce another carefully designed legal demand that makes the student ID again useless for voting.
    1
  21.  @elgatofelix8917  Vaccine passports are EASY to get. Every person that got the shots, got the documentation of that. (At least I am assumign that, if they were doing it in a sane manner). so unless you do not lose your CoVid-19 documentation you are good.
    1
  22.  @elgatofelix8917  CoVid-19 vaccination is for PRIVILEGES (entering public buildings, an airplane, federal buildings, cinemas). Whereas voting is a RIGHT granted by the constitution.
    1
  23.  @searose6192  there are 30 million people that have no ID - that means none that their state accepts. They may have let their driver's licence expire (elderly, disabled). They have inherited a little homestead and make their living there, are disabled, stay at home parent (no paid job), ....
    1
  24.  @searose6192  Some states do not even accept a veteran's ID. Students live on campus, often do not drive, and have no money for flights, and the employer (if the work a side gig) is fine with the student ID (the universities check identity). The student may have a drivers's licence from another state - which is not acceptable in Republican states as proof of identity. They do not have a car and do not bother to wait for 1 hour to get a new drivers licence. And Student IDs are also not acceptable, not even if issued by a state university, with signature and photo.
    1
  25.  @aquapendulum  No, other nations have their systems in order. The person is registered ONCE at birth or naturalization and 18 years later will be included in the voter rolls. Or they can ask for the mail ballot. NO ID needed. A call, mail, or letter and it comes by mail to the address they have in the database. The voter rolls are printed 1 week before the election from the CENTRAL (always up to date) register and they select with birth date for citizens IN the area that a certain polling station serves. There are also no purges necessary, dead people are entered into the data base so they will not be printed next time. And I mean PRINT. it is paper ballot, printed lists with some "double accounting functions" cubicle, no machines at all. Hand count. Unhackable and if there is a blackout they still can conduct the election.
    1
  26.  @lynnjacobs9885  the war against Afghanistan was already planned in SUMMER 2001, 9/11 was a convenient pretext,and their European allies must have known that. NATO for the first time ever was called in for the "defence" of the pact member - which is nonsense because this was a terror attack and not an act of war. and a terror act enabled (or gladly allowed to happen) by an inept / criminal government. There is a term, one would have assumed this would be the case if the Soviets would ever attack a European country or Canada or the U.S. and all other nations in the pact would be called to aid. The shock of the public made it possible to RUSH in. The Taliban offered to extradiet ObL the saudi (and former U.S. asset) IF they would provide proof that ObL had helped to plan the attack. (which I am not sure of either, seems he was quite limited - the Saudis moved freely in Europe and the US). Cheney / Bush wanted a distraction. War is a logistics operation, but since they had prepared the mission anyway, they were in around Oct. 17th, just 1 month after the attacks.
    1
  27.  @tigerlz8406  Al Qaeda had some Saudi support (not the government), maybe from other oil states, too. And under Obama they were gladly allowed to spread in Syria. (resp. their spin off Al Nusra) the U.S. even cooperated with them. Tulsi Gabbard had security clearance she was in a committee, she likely saw intel with even more atrocious things. And used the word regime change wars. She also spoke about it that the U.S. was involved now with Al Qaede - which were mainly responsible for 9/11 - at least we are told that. John Kerry in Sep. 2016: We wanted ISIS (another group again) to become stronger in Syria that would weaken Assad ..... Right: the terrorist will stay in Syria an only terrorize citezens there - it is not like they would spread in the region and even send and activiate people in Europe or the U.S. ISIS (and other groups) were not bothered by the NATO airforces when they extraced oil from occupied oil fields and sold it (most went to Turkey the brother of Erdogan in the middle of it). Nato was unable to find the trucks driving on streets or the extraction sites. But the Russians were able to find them, once they got in.
    1
  28. Senate acts as jury and has to deal with it when Congress hands them the task (and I do not think that it was wrongdoing in a former office frees Senate from that duty). The House voted to impeach while Trump still was in office. There is a precedent where someone was impeached while not in office anymore. (not a president, but then there were not many that were: Clinton, Trump, Nixon and Andrew Jackson). No president was ever sentenced - so far.
    1
  29. privileges - not constitutional RIGHTS. - An expired driver's licence or passport might be good enough in everyday life. 30 million citizens in the U.S. do NOT have an ID - at least not one that their state accepts as good enough. Think elderly people that let their driver's licence expire. Student IDs are not accepted in red states (even though the universities check the identity and they have photos on them). A State university issued the ID and it has a photo on it ? Still not good enough. Lower income students might have it easy to vote and they can sit on the fence and decide short therm if they even vote this time - the ability to decide short therem can increase turnout. Can't have that. Some states do not even accept a veteran's ID. Active duty, yes - but not vets.
    1
  30. privileges not constitutional RIGHTS. Notall gov. building require the ID, and an expired drivers's licence might be good enough in that case. - 30 million people in the U.S. do NOT have an ID - at least not one that their state accepts as good enough. Think elderly people that let their driver's licence expire. Student ID are not acceptable (even though the univesities check the identity and they have photos on them).  Some states do not even accept a veteran's ID. Active personnell but not vets.
    1
  31. privileges not constitutional RIGHTS. an expired drivers's licence or passport might be good enough for everyday purposes. Or the person lives very rural and very modestly. 30 million citizens in the U.S. do NOT have an ID - at least not one that their state accepts as good enough. Think elderly or disabled people that let their driver's licence expire. Student IDs are not acceptedin red states (even though the universities check the identity and they have photos on them. Not even from a state university). Some states do not even accept a veteran's ID. Active duty, yes - but not vets.
    1
  32. yes, and people can also VOTE w/o costs- except that they have the longest wait times for black people in the nation. Something that is "free" but has long wait times attached to it and it is a hassle for low income people to get - it sounds good and is an excellent tool of voter suppression.
    1
  33. Rural area, elderly or disabled, can't drive. No public transportation. Civil services hollowed out. So IF a bus goes there it is not only a long time, you are lucky if you get there when they are open. Normally a friendly neighbour could bring you - 30 minutes drive one distance, 30 minutes admin stuff and then home again. Could be combined with shopping. BUT: they are not open often, and then they are often overrun and wait times are much longer than 30 minutes. for a person that is not especially fit. The person can live independently but they can't go on expeditions. Neighbours or relatives drive them shopping once per week and they have a little garden (or a pantry).
    1
  34. The free ID is meaningless when they need an ACLU lawyer because back in the day civil servants and governments did not care to have all paperwork consistent. That is escpecially true for black folks in the South that were often born at home. (the process was better and more professonal if the child was born in a hospital). If the middle name is abbreviated in one doc and not in the other the voter is in major trouble already. Good luck with getting ANY ID - free or not. Some poeple faught that uphill battle decades ago because they needed the driver's licence or a passport and sorted out their birth certificate. Some only got hit with problems when they moved. If a person has lived all their life in a county they might have gotten a driver's licence, they were given a pass for slightly inconsistent paperwork in their home turf (where a certain set of deviations was common maybe it was the sigature still of one civil serant) - but not when they move. If the authorities back in the day have issued a flawed birth certificate the citizen is screwed. npr has a piece on that from ? 2011 or 2012. A then 84 year old woman had been able to vote until new ID laws came. She never had a birth certificate. She showed a church certificate how she was baptized, that probably got ther through life, marriage etc.  The civil servant said: that is not legal, how do I know you are not an ilegal immigrant ? That hit her in the gut. (she was part of a lawsuit in 2012 to fight the voter ID laws that pretend ! to cure a problem that does not exist, but put a burden on low income people that live very modestly - which means they do not need a passport or up-to-date driver's licence ). That women was born around 1930s. Great Drepession, likely she is black - or maybe white trash. Grew up poor, so birth at home and likely did not travel much. I am not joking about the ACLU lawyer either. There are NGO's that provide lawyers for more complicated * cases (the citizens are not to blame that the U.S. is organized as if there are no computers with streamlined, unified standards for a database. NATIONWIDE. Not every state did their own thing, did things inconsistently and now demand that the data has to be perfectly consistent. A person got homeless and lost all documents and were lost in another state. That is the kind of cases that can file boxes. The system tayed fractured, inconsistent, and user unfriendly even after they started using computers. The Republicans leverage those flaws against low income people. and others they do not want to vote. Death by a thousand cuts -thats voter suppression 2.0.
    1
  35.  @AshGreen359  It is very ! easy to get ID, the system is not a clusterfuck between the states, no one has to stand in line for hours at the equivalent of their DMV (or even 30 minutes). And I bet they can vote with a driver's licence that was issued 40 years ago (in another state) or a passport that has expired 5 years ago. It would not be necessary to show an ID (there are several reasons why voter impersonation hardly ever happens !) - but it is such a low requirement in other democracies that no one objects to it. I know that the long exprired ID's are accepted in Europe IF an ID is even necessary. Every person got one such ID in their life. When they retire they get another one for the reduced entry fees and lower costs for public transportation ;) That is an ID issued by a state agency so it counts. Europeans do not have to drive long to be in another country (with another language) so they tend to have more passports - at least one in their life. In small villages and towns it is not required to show ID, because people know each other in person (if half the election commission knows the voters they are good even w/o ID). Automatic voter registration from a central register of residency, so if they chose mail ballot they can vote w/o ID. And the rules to issue birth certificates have been very consistent in the country (everwhere and for many decades). In the U.S. a person from a low income family the South likely was born at home till the 1970s. - No consistent process and the files were kept in a sloppy manner for the people that did not count. Black folks but also "white trash". So it is enterly possible that a person has the birth certificate with a full middle name and someone got creative with the SS entry and abreviated it. With black folks the white civil servants were not overly worried about getting the name perfectly right. They were hindered to vote and were not supposed to drive or move to another state to improve their station in life ... so why bother. There are 3 million citizens now that have no ID in the U.S. and can live their daily life. - At least they do not have an ID that would count for voting (some states do not even accept a verterans ID, or student ID, many elderly let their driver's licence expire). If that person wants to vote now they are in trouble. Sometimes they are good in one state, and the trouble and red tape starts when they move to another state. Or county.  If they moved to another state or need new documents (burned down, lost them, parents or voter got homeless at some point in their life and lost documents like birth certificates ...) it is even more problematic.
    1
  36.  @lachlanbell8390  On the contrary: the idea that people would impersonate another voter is insane. (if that ever happens - 1 out of a million, or 1 out of 10 millions you can bet it would be a relative or former spouse who "pranks" a legit voter). Voters don't impersonate other voters, it would be just too pointless, stupid and risky. (if the legit voter was there already the cheater would have to explain who they are. THEN they would be asked for an ID - by the police). They do not show ID in many places also not in the U.K and are good, in most democracies the U.S. 2020 voter turnout record of 68 % would be considered a poor turnout. 80 - 85 % if the election is important and controversial. And people vote in person, which is easy and fast - and on a Sunday or holiday. So if there would be impersonations the legit voters would also show up (with 70 to 80 % likelyhood) - and in many cases AFTER the cheater. That would be noticed. They have MANY polling stations = nearby where the person lives (easy to vote also for neighbours !) so there is a chance if they are questioned ( the legit voter was there already )- someone would recognize them. IF that even happens it would be a relatie. But even If it is an outsider, there is a chance someone in the polling stations knows the legit voter, and realizes the impersonation. So there is a risk. That could end with the police coming. It does not happen. You normally need to know some details like birth date, address , SS number - AND have the right gender and about the right age - to impersonate another person AND know where they are registered to vote (the polling station). it is not only unethical and a hassle, it is also completly pointless (one vote does not change the outcome BUT is a risk for the individual cheater. That is a highly unappealing combination: unethical, risk to be busted by people that know you, hassle and no impact at all - so it does not happen.
    1
  37.  @NazAI  The states act like they are countries when it comes to civilan admin. But the voters move much more around. The systems are not consistent. And Republicans have found out that those weaknesses can be weaponized to deny low income people, or that do not drive (anymore).
    1
  38.  @NazAI  IF an ID is even required in most nations an OLD driver's licence is O.K. it does not automatically expire like in th U.S. And an expired passport will also be enough. Every person got at least one official ID in their life - and then they are good. Not for international travel but else. Most modern nations have a central register of residency and from there you can get a new birth certificate if you lost it, and whenever a person moves, dies, is born or becomes a citizen, that is entered in the ONE and only database. the updates are made locally but the system is uniform and centralized. One software, one set of rules how the files are kept, the civil servants have ONE kind of training how to do that. These days and with computers no problem at all. In the U.S. it is a big mess. They act like in the days of buggies and horses where files had to be kept locally, a centralized solution was not possible. every state or county still does their (slightly) different thing. I am sure the coders have fun if they work with them. Social Security IS an centralized and fedreral data base. so the IT specialists have to intergrate the islands (kinda - for certain uses). People must get a new driver's licence when they move to another state. And the services are so underfunded and the handling fairly complicated - so it can take 30 - 60 minutes wait time - and longer until a person get's the new driver's licence. In some states that adminstrative step can double as voter registration if the person is a citizen and wants it done in one setting. That saves at least a little time. Not in the Republican states - it would make it easier to vote if the hassle to get the drivers licence at least makes voter registration much easier. Black persons in the South were often born at home until the 1970s. In hospitals they had a consistent process to issue birth certificates (for mostly white babies), but there was no adminstrative effort wasted on the low income folks, especially not when they were of color. Then the U.S got the centralized Social Security system and number. SS is old age retirement - it exists since the 1930s, it was computerized in the early 1970s. With all the bugs of early adoption. (Imagine things like: they did not have the space for all the characters in long names, so a middle name was abbreviated for the Social Security entry - but in the birth certificate it is long. Fast forward a few decades and that little deviation causes a mess. Higher income folks can deal with the complications more easily, (they equate that with ineffective big bad government it reinforces the hostility for all public programs.) They complain but they get deal with it. they have cars to drive, so they reach the office w/o public transportation. They do not move as often, have more affinity to adminstrative tasks, .... They travel so they got a passport. When they once got a passport in the last 20 years they should be good, their data / more ecent data histroy should be consistent enough to master the "register to vote" challenge even in the most petty and obstructionist state. If they ever lose documents they have a path for recovery. Somewhere in the country, and with more modern software there is an agency with data on a server, and they can take it from there and unravel it from there. More people become homeless in the U.S. than in other nations. Tenant protection is weak, so low income people have to move more often, if the landlrod fires them. A German proverb: Moving 3 times is comparable to burning down once. if the birth certificate was inconsistent with other documentation OR it got lost and the process was not perfect back in the day - that person better have an NGO and a volunteering lawyer at their side. If a person loses all documents in France or Germany they can get them back. it costs and it is a nuisance, but it is not an uphill battle against hard to understand adminstrative hurdles. The process of retrieving all your documents is consistent and predictable, no matter where you were born (in the country) and where you live now.
    1
  39.  @TheGiantRobot  The idea is not theoretical. Republicans KNOW they can create another obstacle for certain voters they do not want to vote anyway. In some states they only have to shave off 1 to 1.5 % to win th state and they do death-by-a-thousand-cuts. Democrats are not too eager to hinder them (in general). Republicans do not want the elderly, low income and young to vote in the general election. And Corporate Democrats do not want those voters to participate in the primaires. One reason they have only fought half heartedly against voter suppression in the past. In the end they have the same big donors (industries but often even companies and persons) - Pelosie would rather have a normie Republican candidate win NY 14th district than AOC - but that ship has sailed. Most Republican states do not even recognize_ state university issued_ student ID's (all universities check identitiy and a sudent that lives on cmpus and has no car does not need any other ID). Some states (Republican run of course) do not even recognize veteran's IDs. Students and people that do not drive (anymore) are a main part of the 3 million U.S. citizens that do not have an ID that_Republicans have defined as acceptable ! Keeping turnout low for certain demographics at all costs: That is why they are against drop boxes that were a low cost, effictive and safe way to speed up transportation of mail ballots. That is why they badmouthed mail ballots when it became clea in summer 2020 the pandemic called for mail ballot for safety reasons. A few years ago a Republican run state had a series of special elections and it ate into their budgets. So the govenor uttered the idea to hold the latest special election by mail, that is a moe cost efficient way to organize and election. What a fool - it is also known to be a popular option for voters, because it is easy, and he was obviously unaware of the fact that it increases turnout (they have that in Oregon and are organized to count fast, too - and they improved turnout). Higher turnout = people participating in democracy does NOT help Republicans. So the party of small government and financial responsibility very quickly droppped that idea, someone updated the govenor ;) That is why the Republicans and Trump early on badmouthed mail voting and tried to derail that for 2020. It makes voting easier especially for those with long wait times at polling stateions, no cars, and no (still valid) ID. and increases turnout. The core Republican democgraphic: Financially well off or affluent voters - so they do have ID (they travel so they have passports and they have cars so they have a driving licence). They own homes so they do not move as often and burdensome voter registration does not affect them as much either. The live in areas where there are open and sufficiently staffed civil services or have the means to get there in the open hours easily. People that are criminals or have an investigation going on often have their passport taken away and airlines are not equipped to check the status. The passenger does have the passport (not confiscated) and it is valid: is a proxy for: it is O.K. to transport this person, the government does not hinder the movement of that person. That is why they accept expired IDs in other countries for elections If a person had to hand in their passport so they cannot flee from the country - they are still allowed to vote as long as they are not sentenced. And it is not easy to forge a passport and there are international rules for how they are issued so they are a good fit for checking out the identity of persons internationally. ID requirement suppresses turnout. and Republicans cannot win if turnout is high. A long waiting time (in certain areas) is one of the most effective tools of voters suppression and mail by vote very elegantly circumvents all obstacles Republicans invented in the last decades. So of course they hate on that. If a voter - that is for instance elderly or disabled and let their driver's licence expire because they do not drive anyway - sits on the fence about participating in an election or usually does not vote - they cannot decide one week or 2 days before election: I'll vote this time. It may be too late to arrange for an ID, bcause neither the act of in person voting nor the renewal of an ID is an easy process. If mail by vote is made easy they can order the mail ballot and mull over it ;) It is also helpful for the downballot choices. They can do research about the less well known candidates and ballot measures. 3 millions did not have an ID a few years ago in the U.S. - That is: an ID that their (Republican) state would recognize. The driver's licence that has expired is not acceptable anymore (although the person did not change identity just because the thing expired, it was proof of identity once - in Europe an expired passport is perfectly acceptable IFthey even ask for an ID. Voter registration is automatic from an functioning, central register of residency that is updated locally (births, deaths, people moving) but with the exact same training for civil services and software and laws, so it is UNIFORM over the decades. And since it is not a mess as soon as people move from one state or province to the next, they also do not have long wait times. Veghicle registration and dirver's licencess are only a mess in the U.S. In all other first world nations it is a 15 minute drive, you do your busines within 15 minutes and then you drive home. Even w/o car - you can find a friendly neighbour assisting you with that IF you ever need that and have no car. And it is common to have a "long evening" once a week, so civil services are open till 6 pm to make it easier for people with a job to get there during open hourse w/o having to take time off. Which means IF an European citizen for instance loses their birth certificate it is annoying having to replace it but it is not an uphill administrative battle. They would not even need it most likely unless they want a new passport for international travel - for driving around in Europe they would be fine with an expired passport. and the driver's licences do NOT expire. The process is logical, plannable and straightforward. And the same for everyone in the country no matter in what part of the country they were born or how long ago. There are no citizens ! that were born at home (hospital too expensive) that never even got a birth certificate, so they are literally incapable of ever getting a passport. But the U.S. has that situation for many now elderly black folks from low income background that were born in the South before the 1970s.
    1
  40.  @Garium87  you are right IF a person ever wants to IMPERSONATE another VOTER, it will be someone they know well - a neighbour or family member. It is a crime, unethical and pointless (does not change the outcome). But it is risky and even if you get away w/o being detected - there is no tangible gain for the individual but a risk. In the UK they do NOT ask for ID before voting. In Germany the Nazis introduced a mandate to have an ID on you (and obviously not for good reasons !), and it has become normal to have ID ever since (and many other nations have very easy access to an ID even if they do not have the ID mandate like Germany)
    1
  41.  @Garium87  In Germany a driver's licence that was issued 50 years ago is still a valid ID. If a person moves to another state they do not need a NEW state issued driver's licence. Vehicle registration will most likely change, but not the driver's licence that is widely used as ID. Most people got a driver's licence ONCE in their life and then they are good. So if an elderly person gives up driving, they stilll can rely on the old ID. Which does NOT have an expiration date ! And if they lose that they still can vote by mail. The voter registration is automatic, so as logn as they do not move they can vote that way very comfortably even if they lost their documents. An expired passport will be acceptable to show before getting the ballot.
    1
  42.  @thepropagandajurks1388  ? The voter is only on the voter rolls at ONE site and ONLY if they did not ask for a mail ballot before (the poll workers see that one was ordered, or that the person has already voted). It is impossible to vote at multiple polling stations or more than once. In all countries that deserve the name democracies or developed nations, even in developing countries they figured that out. ONE dumb Trump voter fell for the smears how Democratic voters allegedly vote more than once all the time - she tried that in 2016: first casting her legitimate vote, then drove to the next polling station and tried to vote there as well. - and got busted. She was lucky, she confesssed, no prison time, only probation, but the costs of a trial and a fine - and some national attention. In the U.S. even if 20,000 people per state would vote double (a completely bizarre assumption) - in most states it would not change WHO wins the state. And it does not matter if the double votes are R or D either. Most states are solidly Democratic or Republican. Only in swing states double voting or alleged voting of non-citizens could even make a difference.
    1
  43.  @thepropagandajurks1388  Voters with basic critical thinking skills that do not believe every nonsense would realize that they risk a lot on the individual level (up to 5 years in prison) and it is completely pointless, too. - Republicans pretend that states like California or New York make it easy for non-citizens to vote or for citizens to vote double. WHY would they do that ?? Some of the civil sevants are going to be Republicans, they would set themselves up for a scandal. And Democrats win the state anyway, so what would be the point ? It could only make a difference if many people do it AND only in the FEW SWING STATES. Those have almost always a Republican state legislature and a R governor, but candidates for the federal offices (president, Senate, Member of the House) have a chance to win elections. So (potentially) Democratic on the federal level, but Republican at the local level. Florida, Virginia, potentially North Carolina, Arizona, Georgia, and the feckless Democrats are also responsible for it tht Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvaniabecame kind of battleground states. Ohio used to be in reach for Democrats - Obama won it twice and then Trump won it twice with over 8 % margin each time. Republicans are in charge of the elections in almost all swing states (only exception Michiganif you count that as swing state, it has a D govenor but a Republican legislature). If they are so afraid that "illegals" are voting or citzens could vote twice - why don't they set up the processes so that is not possible ? (Hint: they do and voter fraud does not happen. That is why the dumb Trump voters were busted when THEY for real tried to game the system.) Only Republicans at the federal level spout that nonsense in order to make voting more burdensome for the democgraphics they do not want to vote. At the state level they now introduce a lot of "improvements" (why now, what did they do in the last decades when they were in charge of election security) to make sure they have low turnout for the state and local races - but they do not badmouth their own former arrangements !
    1
  44.  @thepropagandajurks1388  And the ID mandate was not necessary to expose the fraudsters tjhat tried to vote double - for Trump. One woman did in Iowa in 2016, which was projected to go for Trump anyway. An ID mandate to show before IN PERSON voting ONLY helps against voter IMPERSONATION. And there are a lot of reasons WHY impersonation is even more rare - if it exists at all. If a person could pull that off and would not get busted - the legit voter would notice - because they can't vote and the police would be called on them. Now they would not be prosecuted because they can prove their identitiy (with utility bills, relatives, no ID even needed) but it would be clear (and would be WIDELY reported) that someone impersonated them. We never hear of such cases, because they do not exist. It is like a person throwing their food on the ground and licking it up form there. Could it happen ? Sure. Does it happen in reality ? No - it is just too dumb and pointless.
    1
  45.  @thepropagandajurks1388  If impersonation of a registered ! voter would happen let's say 1000 times per election (a crazy assumption * - and it would only work IF a legit voter is registered and the fraud has to go to the right polling station !) a few legitimate voters would come after them to cast their vote (you know, with 60 - 68 % turnout that is going to happen) - and find out about the impersonation. And there would be media coverage, one would expect to have at least 150 annoyed legit voters (out of 1000 cases !) that had to justify themselves and are pissed that someone voted in their name - and authorities & media picking up on that. Not that it would change the outcome of elections, but it would be a good story. FOX would go into overdrive and the other networks would just go for the clickbait and the views. We are SURE to hear about it IF it ever does happen. And impersonation is sure to be detected in at least SOME cases. My assumption of 150 is very low. * out of approx. 150 million votes that are cast - and 1000 attempts to impersonate another voters is an extremely wild assumption !! There is no such media coverage - because there are no cases. IF impersonation would happen at all, it would be likely done by a person that knows the legit voter (and some of their data !) well. But that is also a strong deterrent. You would have to be very brazen and socially inept to impersonate your cousin, sibling or neighbour. You need to have the right gender and about the same age AND have access to the data of persons and be crazy enough to even do that. People do not impersonate folks they know well only to cast a vote (no tangible advantage). Not only out of fear of legal consequences, but also fear of the social stigma if that comes out. A student and her family voted by mail for Trump - and then she tried to vote by mail, later. That is not impersonation that is attempted double voting. The ID mandate did not hinder her to try. She too made it into the news ;) Like that idiot from Iowa, who also showed her ID in both places, so that did not bust them. And even those cases are very rare. 2 - 4 with 150 million votes cast. the student's lame excuse: that she forgot she had already voted before. The other woman at least immediately confessed once she was busted, that might have helped her to avoid prison. There are 3 million people in the U.S. w/o a ID Republican states recognize - that can be people with expired driver's licences ! or expired passports ! At least one state does not accept veteran's IDs, and most Republican states do not accept student IDs. They make up unrealistic demands how long the ID must be valid - colleges likely limit the validity to one year - and impose other criteria. So there does not exist ONE college in the state that has an ID that can be used to vote. But the Republicans have not on principle banned student IDs, that could be challenged in court. But with some sneyky death-by-a-thousand-cuts actions they ban student IDS in real life. Colleges do check the identity of their students. Not even IDs issued by state universities in R states are accepted. Students from affluent homes will have a passport (travelling as teenagers with parents) and a car (they can afford it) and Republicans do not want the other students to vote anyway. If they live on campus and have no car they can cope with college ID just fine, EXCEPT for voting. Even if they need a new student ID every year (as long as they are enrolled and pay tuition tey get it), it is easy to get it. So that means they could easily vote and even if they sit on the fence they could decide in the last days before the election to participate. Only people with cars & passports have that luxury in R run states. It is even better if they close down the polling station on campus (on campus voting is an effective service IF you would like to encourage turnout). A polling station that is harder to reach w/o car - it is a little more unecessary hassle for the students the Repubs want to vote - but a LOT of hassle for all the others.
    1
  46. Voter suppression 101. It is O.K.to inconvenience your own base (a little bit) as long as you inconvience the potential voters of the other parties a LOT. And it has to be a combination of burdensome rules. Shaving off 0.1 % of turnout for the other party here and 0.2 % there ... it adds up. Burdensome for the voters they want to suppress. Every obstacle could be overcome with a lot of dedication and effort by the voters, but in sum Republicans can prevent 0.5 to 2 % of the base of the other party to turn out. In many states that is enough to win elections. Georgia is really good with the death by a thousand cuts strategies. They put Florida to shame with their expertise in voter suppression. They get sued in court all the time, they lose the cases - but they do not mind (it is paid for by tax payers). They just pass a law if a court declared a procedure unlawful. They did with the insane provision of: EXACT match. if your registration has one tiny detail different (one hyphen or an extra blank compared to SS data) they will not accept it. And they are really good in purging people from voter rolls that still live in the same place as always. So it is easy to be kicked off the voter rolls and hard to get on again. Or they just invent a new obstacle, if the court hinders them to execute one strategy. They held 50,000 new voter registrations in limbo in 2018 >(the govenors#s race was decided by 70,000 votes !) - until the court forced them to allow those voters to vote. By then it was too late to add them to the voter rolls or for those voeres to ask for mail ballots (GA had generous provisions for maill ballots until after 2020 when the Democraic base used that a lot). But the votes that were kept pending weree told they would be allowed to cast a provisory ballot and that they had to bring ID, utility bills and they would get a provisional ballot. (those are almost never counted) Yep, that will please the voters. The beauty of it: it is more work for the poll workers who have to adminstrate that idiocy created for no good reason at all. Registration under "exact match mandates" A person has a SS card, number a name that is almost the same except for a hyphen or dot or something, and they also have other data that matches SS data except for the damn hyphen. 1) that could be a minor inconsistencies in the dat bases and the person is who they claim to be with or w/o hyphen and should be allowed to vote w/o court battles, provisory ballots. 2) that is an evil scheme by a person (well 50,000 persons), and the person happens to have the almost matching data (the name) and the birth date also happens to be the same (inthat case of course ! exact match). What are the chances the registration is not legitimate ? 1 : 10 millions ? 1 : 100 millions ? But for Republicans it is better to deny 50,000 voters the right to vote than to "risk" the very, very unlikely chance that the minor deviation has any significance. Checking utility bills and explaining provisory balltos because of hypheneated names costs time. That means longer waiting times in certain areas (the 50,000 registrations the Republicans refused to process further stemmed from a Democratic voter registration drive and of course that affected certain areas more than others). Wonderful - long wait times are an excellent tool of voter suppression. Georgia has the longest average waiting times for BLACK voters in the U.S. Up to 6 hours. Of course the Republican politicians are fiercly opposed to vote by mail. In Goergia only recently though. They had generous vote by mail provisions in the past 10 years. That was when the black folks prefered to vote in person or at church, out of fear their votes woud be sorted out and thrown away. So 10 years ago GA Republicans assumed vote by mail would make it easier for their white rural base to vote. Their argument then was that it is SAFER because there is a paper trail. So what have they been doing BEFORE they had easy vote by mail - and what did they get wrong in the past 10 years that would require a massive change of all election laws and arrangements NOW (the "reforms" are quite sweeping). They have been in charge all the time ! The new laws force counties to be open longer, some Saturdays open. Looks like an improvement ? No - of course not. That applies to OPEN stations. So it might get more convenienat for the voters in some regions. Poorly funded, rural counties will have to close down polling stations in order to cope with the financial burden. And they will make sure to close the stations where the Democratic base shows up. THAT measure allows for discrimination, and voters suppression does not work w/o tht. The processes for vote by mail have to be uniform for the whole state, so they cannot selectively put one democraphic at a disadvantge. Even IF counties do not intend to discriminate. They will have to close some, they are Republican run, which are they going to chose for closing if if they do not have the funding to run all of them under the new requirements ?? The new Georgia voter suppresson laws are expertedly crafted to promote (in sneaky and indirect) ways voter suppression. We have to give them credit, they are innovative, flexible in their approach, resiieltn (if the couts strike down one measure, they bounce right back) persistant and have never let up in their efforts for decades. Wonderful: fewer polling stations that makes it harder for some demographics to vote. There will be longer wait times, people w/o car have it harder to get there etc. Affluent aeas will not be affected at all (they have the funding) and self congratulory Republican voters will declare how they do not understand why anyone would would objedct to thees new measures. The vote by mail laws and processes that were lauded 10 years ago, all of a sudden have become unsafe (or so they say). Funny how the Republican run processes and safety measures are affected by the race, political affilition and income of the people USING the system which the state set up fro ALL voters. The safety measures are the same whether 100,000 or 500,000 or 2 million people vote like that.It is a PROCESS. So now - after the 2020 shock for GA Republicans) vote by mail must be severely restricted in order to make it impossible for voters to evade the sneaky obstructionism. Vote by mail is easy, does not require a LOT of effort, time, a car, or oney (a babysitter wiile being away for a few hours inorder to vote). Republcians cannot CREATE long wait times. If they mess up (intentionally delay) the printing and sending out of ballots that will become apparent a few weeks before the election, so there will be backlash, and they can be forced to fix it. Sending out ballots and handling them after they return is a MASS PROCESS. If you design it to prefer the ballots going to certain areas you have to do some selection (by using software). And teh coming in ballots are even harder to sort into preferential treatment, and will be processed later. There are people that would know of a software supported processes, that would steer the work of many people physically handling the ballots that are going out or coming in - it cant be hidden, so they can't pull that off. If the chaos is only created ! on election day it cannot be fixed, but slowly messing up things with help of specific (and new !) software and sorting of ballots into desirable and undesreable areas over 4 weeks is hard to pull off, they cannot maintain plausible deniability. Old equipment, defunding, and closed polling stations cannot create long wait times when people rely on a standard prodecure to ask for MAIL ballot, and the postal services or drop boxes to deliver them. With help of drop boxes in the densely populated areas even undermining the postal services (as Republicans tried in summer 2020) can be counter acted. So needless to say Republicans also declared war on drop boxes. They are a simple, cheap and effective measure to make voting and processing of ballots easier. Republicans are not having it. Voter suppression requires to treat areas differently - but those mail by ballot mass processes have to be the same for the whole state.
    1
  47.  @twatts1523  Georgia and Florida would like to have a word with you. Kicking people that still live in the state (and did not move at all) is an artform there.
    1
  48.  @MaynardCrow  Explain to me why California or New York would allow non citizens to vote when they are solidly blue states and do not need the votes (or a potential scandal). There are Republican voters in CA and they also work in civil administration. If that would be common there would be a lot of potential whistle blowers. People are likely asked if they want to update voter registration, too. Even if an immigrant because of language problems does not fully understand the question and would say yes - that does not mean they ever intend to use the registration, they likely would not even realze THAT this was the voter registration. In CA the CITIZENS can easily update the voter registration when they update at the DMV - that is called offering good services and streamlining the workflow.  If YOU had managed to get a green card, or a company sent you over to the U.S. to work in their branch, or you wanted to build a life in the U.S. - would YOU risk to criminally cast a vote ? ONE vote that does not change anything for the election and could get you into massive troubles ? If you managed to legally navigate the complicated U.S. immigration system - would YOU be stupid enough to register to vote ? Let alone - after some tought if you had the hare brained idea - acutally using the registration ? Shopping for trouble ? No one can legally vote in a foreign country that is not a hard to understand concept, it applies everywhere, the legal and undocumented immigrants understand that. There is Republican fear mongering about millions of non-citizens allegedly voting. No proof of course, they are just running their mouth. (The investigation committee for the 3 million illegal votes of 2016 was very quietly abolished. They never came up with a final report. That would have been: We have no proof for the claim of the rpesident and do not know how he got the idea. Even people with a green card and maybe little interst in politics hear that it is a crime to vote as non-citizen. Or to vote twice. Well, it is also a crime where they come from (if they have elections). If you were in the U.S. w/o having legal residency would you stick your neck out by registering to vote and then take another risk by voting illegally ?? They show up at the DMV because they MUST, and they likely sigh a breath of relief when they are done with the "authorities". i wouldn't risk that. I would keep a very low profile and be super inconspicuous. And I would not risk prison in the U.S. (or anywhere else). Over one effing vote that does not change the outcome one bit.
    1
  49.  @aquapendulum  Actually that is not true: Most modern nations that use computers manage to automatically register the voters - an no that is not with an ID, or that you get a card, it means you get an information letter where your polling station is and when it is open, and that you will be on the voter rolls there. Or you can ask for mail ballot and it will go to the address they have in the datbase. NO ID in that case. The young adults get an invitation letter when they come of age. Then it depends, some nations ask for ID when the voters show up in person to vote (but not for mail ballot). The ID is not necessary to secure the election - they have their files and the processes in order, and voter impersonation is a highly unlikely event. with 80 % turnout and nearby polling stations - how do you impersonate another person ? They are likely to vote, in the same spot, and people might know them (or you). It is more of a custom. it is so easy to get an ID and expired ID's are just as good to prove your identity - so that is not seen as a burden, so often it is shown - at least outside of villages and small towns where people know each other. I think every person gets onnce in their life an "official ID" - driver's licences do NOT expire. Passports are fine even IF they have expired.
    1
  50. privileges not constitutional RIGHTS. an expired drivers's licence or passport might be good enough in many cases. with credit cards impersonations happen - there is a gain possible and NO ID required (the stuf that comes by mail). 30 million people in the U.S. do NOT have an ID - at least not one that their state accepts as good enough. Think elderly people that let their driver's licence expire. Student IDs are not acceptedin red states (even though the universities check the identity and they have photos on them). Some states do not even accept a veteran's ID. Active personnell but not vets.
    1
  51. That's a joke. Some states do not accept veteran ID's even ! - there are acceptable forms of all IDs that affluent people tend to have. like passports, or driving licence that has not expired. Elderly people with money get the help needed to get that renewed - even if they do not drive anymore. So the affluent elderly still can vote. Students from wealthy households often have a passport even if they do not have a driving licence. They travel with their parents.
    1
  52. For student ID's red states invented requirments that NO college meets. That was carefully crafted, it is a feature not a bug. If they categorically exclude all student ID's that might be challenged in court. They just happen to demand a form of ID that does not exist in the real world. If nothing else is "wrong" or missing they can make unrealistic demands on expiry date.  The colleges do check the identity of the students but they do not issue them with a very long validity. So even if colleges react and put everthing on the card the law requires (full name, address, SS number, photo, space for signature) - Republicans can just demand absurdly long expiry dates (way beyond election date) - and if the ID does not have that (duh !) this ID cannot be used for voting. if people work their way through college they are smart to make do w/o car, and college towns and cities mightbe better regarding public transportation, or they live on campus. So the demographic of not rich College students has an obstacle in voting and easy and spontanuous access to voting. If they sit on the fence they cannot decide that they will vote this time after all. And it helps to close the polling stations at college campus, that also is an obstacle for easy votes. Again folks with car and a gun licence, driver's licence (of this state) or passport are good, for them it is easy. The Republicans do not mind of that subset of young people vote - they get more votes from them. It is known that time and effort to get ID or to get at the polling station suppresses turnout. That is a good thing in the eyes of Republicans - they cannot win if turnout is high. Corporate Dems have the same situation in primaries this is when they would rather not have the poor, disabled, eldery and young folks vote. I kinda get that the student ID would be required to be valid at the point when it is shown, at least that is not an absurd requirement (although that the person may have dropped out of college last year or a few months ago does not change who they are - in many European countries IF an ID is even required they can use a driver's licence that was issued DECADES ago, or a passport that has expired years ago. As long as the photo resembles the person somewhat .... ;) No one really objects to photos from 50 years ago. I mean, HOW would the person get their hands on that ID, and what are the odds that someone with criminal energy would use that for casting ONE more vote ??? The rare cases are mostly Trump supporters, they are gullible enough to believe the fairy tales how easy it is to cheat - and they are not used to thinking things through.
    1
  53. 4:00 "You shouldn't be an R or D but evaluate every election." - I would argue that having only ! 2 parties makes that impossible, there is not enough nuance possible if it is either black or white. And of course 2 parties are VERY easily captured by special interests. Spoilers and the lesser evil are not a thing in other countries. Or scolding blaming voters and outsider candidates for daring to use the most important rights in a democracy. Active and passive voting rights. To vote whom you like the best and to RUN for office no matter how likely it is that you will win (this time). To round if off nicely. Incensed Hillary Clinton might have remained the wife of the govenor of AK, had it not been for independent candidate Ross Pereot who got almost 19 % of the popular vote. Not measly 1 % like Jill Stein or 3 % like Garry Johnson (If we accept the logic that Stein may have cost HRC some votes - Johnston cost Trump MORE). In the U.S. the voters for small parties are scolded and blamed. Not the very numberous non-voters and also not the people that vote for the other party. THEY do not threaten the status quo and the grip of the 2 parties. Especially the Dems declare how the voters OWE them the vote, they literally villify voters for voting for a perfectly reasanble mild mannered, rational candidate (like Jill Stein), early on some even calcualted with the votes that they the Garry Johnson voters deprived them off (Dude was a former Republican I do not know where they even saw the affinity. O.K. they thought the more reasonable Republicans would not go with Trump and also "owed" HRC their vote.  They could as well have blamed all Trump voters for not voting for her. Democracy could be so nice without the pesky voters .... Such entitlement is UNTHINKABLE in other democracies. Whatever the losers think after the lost election, they will never, ever blame the voters for not supporting them. Usually it is a version of: Our bad, we did good in the past, but were not good enough to communicate our good work. Or there were outside influences (state or federal politics, if there are scandals it can do harm at races on other levels. Federal politics harming the race in a state / province. A local scandal influencing federal election results. The rich landowners, the 1 % of the colonies that had a quarrel with the 1 % of the British empire set up the new Republic after the model of the British parliament. They had a parliament - but NOT a democracy. The parliament represented the interests of the aristocrast, the crown and of course the rich merchants, financiers, industral leaders, coal barons. The parliament was the opposition of rich commoners to the aristorcracy. And for that 2 parties were good enough. The founders made sure to have a system that can be easily controlled by the rich and the status quo forces. In any other democracy * there would have emerged at least 2 other parties and they would chase the establishment. It shows in the policies. * The UK also has the First past the post system and it is also not possible for a party outside the 2 mainstream parties to win elections BUT even they have managed to have a few other parties, and 2 - 3 might play a role (after the snap election may only had the majority because of an obscure rightwing Irish party). In all other countries they have popular vote and even smaller parties can quickly become relevant (they need around 5 % to get funding and seats in parliament). Even a tiny party can become important as coalition partner, becoming the little hinge that swings big doors. So there is a tiny bit incentive even in the UK to throw a few bones to the voters. And in all other democracies they have to appease the voters more (not the other way round) because the voters do have alternatives. The alternatives can manifest quickly if the voters are really pissed.
    1
  54. It is not only the money but the insanely complex rules how to get a driver's licence. Let's say you have - for some reason that is not your fault - a driver's licence and there is atiny difference to the name as per a more current ID. And then you move to a red state. heaven help you. You might need a lawyer, 3 visits, the old school reports, vaccination card. I mean - what are the chances that a professional comes with a driver's licence from another state and they do not find that acceptable for small deviations. The voters have no influence how births were registered back in the day. In writing or digital. Even only the middle name in long form or abbreviated will get you into MAJOR trouble. Same for women that are divorced and have to change name. To make things worse the byzantine setup translates to long lines in underfunded offices. It is not I'll drive over, take the kids with me, we are done after 20 minutes. And if a person does not have a vehicle it gets difficult. The ID has to be applied for in person, no ? How do you get there if you do not have a car, so they do not have MOBILITY and no valid driver's licence Low income Disabled Old - safer not to drive anymore are able to cope with daily life but are not exactely in a good shape to travel for hours by bus and to wait for 30 - 60 minutes at the DMV office. If they thin out the offices in the areas where they do not want people to vote anyway, they can very effectively suppress the vote. These are persons that can master their daily life without an ID that the state finds acceptable (they might have one). And if you are old you likely can buy beer w/o having to show an ID. If they cannot shop anymore - someone can bring them groceries. or someone takes them when they drive to a shop. No waiting time and no undue demand on the time of others.
    1
  55. Germany has a FUNCTIONING central register of residency. No one has to register to vote, that happens automatically. It is not like every of the 16 states does their own thing, they are not consistent with the birth certificates and decades later they trip up citizens on those inconsistencies. I very much doubt that the residents of a lttle village in Bavaria show an ID when they vote. These are the areas where people traditonally made do w/o ID.
    1
  56. Does the driver's licence automatically expire in Germany after a few years ? Do people need a new one if they move to another state - not for the car but a new driver's licence ? If they show the ID before casting the vote - that might be the one driver's licence they got 5 decades before. Or the passport that expired 5 years ago. - At least it works like that in Austria.
    1
  57. It may cost (the mandatory ID is a Nazi relic, one reason the Brits refused to get it) - but the civil services in Germany are set up in a way that a person can replace documents with not too much hassle. It may be annoying and cost money, but it is a clear and plannable and understandable ! process. In the U.S. they try to top Kafka sometimes. In Germany there are no citizens that never got a birth certificate, but there a lot of elderly black folks in the south, that are in that situation. In Germany there are not as many homeless Germans, when a person loses everthing they often also lose their paperwork. When the birth certificate slightly deviates from the Social Secutiy data the are in trouble. that can be a middle name that is abbreviated in the driver's licence or the SS data set - but it is in full in the birth certificate. Major problems if such a person moves to another Republican state. They may have voted in the past - but not anymore. Even wrose if they lose documentation and have to start the process from scratch. there are NGO's where lawyers and volunteers try to get people their birth certificate (corks popping fireworks) and then they can register to vote.
    1
  58. @magicblanket In my experience "normal" people do not hold a generation long grudge against a regime that dispossessed their parents or triggered them to flee. Like Kims family. - Also see Europe after WW2, Germans had to flee and lost everything. Hungarians and Czechosolovacs fled their countries in the 1950s and 1970s (Soviets crushed reform attempts). These people built a new life mainly in Germany and Austria, they could - the economy was doing well - and if they made it into the (lower) middle class they were content. after the Soviet Union dissolved, and the Warsaw Pact states opened, there was a discussion if the German minorities (or their descendents) that were dispossessed back in the day, would / could ask for their property back (civilians were driven out at the end of WW2). The groups that represent them and preserve the culture also advised not to ask for restitution. People live now in these homes, they had been maintained, rebuilt, etc. It would have been a mess, not to mention the strife with the new nations that fromed (Czechia and Slovakia separated). It may not have been polictically feasible, but the people did not even ask for it, they were able to let go of that.
    1
  59. @magicblanket Only rich people that lost considerable wealth are super pissed that the peasants were able to take their property away. And that does not wear off over the decades. Even if they had capital in the U.S. and were able to rebuild their lives - and are at least affluent. They are pissed anyway. I am convinced many of the rich Cubans that fled in the EARLY stage had their nest egg in the U.S. - the mob ran the place before the Revolution and one mobster lost almost everything he had in wealth, for them Cuba was a safe haven for ill gotten gains and it was very close to America, and quite luxurious for those with money, so they had the best of both worlds. Until it wasn't a haven for the rich anymore.
    1
  60. @magicblanket The rich folks fled in the early stage, and I very much doubt THEY fled on rafts, more like on yachts ! or proper boats, they intended to lobby the U.S. government to fix that on their behalf and they intended to sit in out in the security of Miami. Those that came later (on rafts and what not) were likely middle class, professionals or regular (poor) peasants. That is not the group that holds a 60 year old grudge, they just rebuilt their life. In order to justify the imperial agenda they were accepted as immigrants (same now for Venezuelans) so if they had some bite they could work their way up. have hopefully done well for themselves AND give it a rest. - Sanders was villified by the media regarding Cuba and remarks on Fidel Castro (to harm him in Florida), but he acutally did very well among Cubans under age 40. And the affluent Cubans vote Republican anyway. I just read that 1 million people has immigrated from Cuba to the U.S. (of course some have died in the meantime) and the children will be less ideological about it.
    1
  61.  @robdez5628  It would be be logical that many American Cubans want the sanctions lifted, they care about their kinfolk, that stayed behind and want them to do well. Only the rich that are super pissed that they lost a lot or all, can't give it a rest. - I read just a PBS article, it seems some - many - rich or well off Cubans (the first wave) were surprised and did not have time to transfer any assets to the U.S. They were at least accepted as refugees (no doubt many of them now rail against immigration and are ardent Trump supporters. And Trump sucked up to them in order to win Florida. Obama had lifted some sanctions and Trump reinstated them). I seesm some of the wealthy and well educated had to take jobs as maids, gas station managers and what not. Quite a fall if your are used to having a splendid house, servants and can exploit bitterly poor people. They are still pissed ;) I guess it gets a little better when the old guard dies off, the young only know life in America, their frustration and hatred is not as deep seated, even if they might be fairly to the right. More like usual Republicans.
    1
  62. Good PBS article about the differnet waves. And how they differed (former wealth), education level, color. https://www.pbs (dot) org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/castro-cuban-exiles-america/ Replace (dot) with . - I am not sure if Kim allows links in her commet section.
    1
  63.  @yurigansmith  The Europeans should have known that the Bush admin already prepared a war against Afghanistan in SUMMER 2001, the 9/11 attack were a pretext. - Merkel - later when she was in charge (so not in 2001 or 2003) declared tjat Germany now has to be defended at the Hindukush. It was never defined as "war" it was always a "conflict" - German foundational law !! Germany is not allowed to engage in ANY wars unless it is to defend Germany and I think it would suspend all elections until the war is over. So that little NATO adventure would have needed much more explaining.The Germans would not have accepted it. They were in Afghanistan not even 1 month after the attacks - ignoring the Taliban offer to extradite bin Laden IF the U.S. would provdide evidence. ObL was Saudi and allowed to stay in Pakistan and also Afghanistan - but he was not worth the trouble of attracting the U.S. war machine. I think they would have made a deal provided that they could save face. ObL jeopardizing Afghanistan with war would have allowed them to extradite him w/o attracting to much fury from fellow Islamists. (I am not convinced ObL was instrumental in the planning of the attacks). When Merke was still opposition leader she travelled to D.C. to slobber over the the Cheney / Bush admin. She assured them that she would also support their war against Iraq. France and Germany (then under Chancellor Schroeder) refused 2 years later to go along with that insanity. The Bush admin was pissed. Fox News went to work to villify France. They left Germany alone - they are allowed to be skittish about war, although the ideological support would have been appreciated (and some cost sharing). But France had gotten help in the past for colonial adventures and now they balked .... No doubt the networks had gotten their marching orders how t comment on the refusal of close allies to support the new war. Which took away from the legitimacy. One reason the U.S. likes to have these countries on their side. For the unified war propagand. If layal allies balk, maybe the war is not a good idea ?? but the media covered for the war lusting admin and the voters are sheeple. Some "patriots" were inspired to rename french fries into "freedom fries" and a few wine and delicatessen shops with French food were vandalized. The offer of the Taliban to extradite Osama bin Laden (former US asset) if they would give them proof he was involved in planning the attacks. They wanted war and tehy needed a good distraction from the fact that they had been asleep at the wheel. Allegedly !! the hijackers had done that with box cutter. Allegedly they did not have any firearms they could smuggle onto board. A few men with knives can be disamred. And the admin kept getting warnings during summer - also from Russia and Israel. Ramping p security at the airports and the damn FBI and CIA doing their job would have sufficed (FBI got a hint of a man with Middle Eastern background that was not interested in learning how to land, just how to fly. They did not follow up, that could have unravelled the operation. That is the usual clusterfuck between two unaccountable agencies (espcially the CIA) that have rivalries going on. But a simple order for the airports to screen more, could have avoided the attacks. ObL was a "freedom fighter" from Saudia Arabia to bring the caliphate to Soviet occupied Afghanistan, he was in the group that the Reagan admin received in DC and in the Oval office.
    1
  64.  @bobb1138  This has nothing AT ALL to do with free speech. She is elected and can fulfill her role (Kim got that wrong she cannot "at least" vote and speak on the floor these are main features of her job, a lot of Congress people do NOT have any committee positions. She is not entitled to a committee position (or two). The constitution does not protect her right to have one. She is free to run her mouth in the awarded time on the floor on twitter and social media (if they will have her) and on her onw website and in interviews. Plus of cours on OAN, Fox and Newsmax. She is desperate to be in the limelight so she will continue to drag down the party and drive away the Corporate Donors. Will suppress R votes and will activate the D votes. Mitch the Obstructionist is no dummy, he detests her. He has just gotten rid of Trump and here is the next major problem ? The vote was more to force the Republicans to take a stand ;) They have pandered to the lowest instincts, made political hay of riling up people (The Dems at least go after a foreign nation and not citizens of their own country) - and now a part of them are out of control and they fear them. They are damned if they keep Moronic Marjorie and play nice with Trump and they are damned if they dont't. They have two voting blocks, need both to win and will offend either one of them. She is a certified moron and if the Republican grifters (the GA party knew, some of them were worried, but they were a little worried that Biden could do well, and even more worried about the 2 senate seats of Georgia. And in general to align her fans that are typically hardcore Trump supporters.  Allegedly her followers mobbed her opponent so he dropped out of the race and left the district. They did not have the good sense to kick her out from the primary race (she could have run as Independent, good luck with that) and now do not dare to kick her out from Congress (which they could do with 2 thirds or 70 % of the vote) - then they should at least not reward her with appointments to committees. Education to add insult to injury. And here we thought Betsy DeVos was a joke in her position. With good reason an elected representative should be hard to be removed from office - but it should be possible (scandals, ethically challenged, to enable prosecution, deranged behavior, mental illness that makes them unfit and they have no insight). Most nations have provisions to strip someone of immunity from prosecution and / or to force them to step down if they do not have the decency (for instance when a scandal breaks).
    1
  65.  @bossdog1480  There are no or hardly any "conservatives" in the Republican party. Greene isn't one.
    1