46th President of the United States, Joe Biden
Discussion
PRTVR said:
Byker28i said:
Meanwhile, GOP lawmakers just try to make up new rules in voting obstruction. 106 new bills in 28 states threaten to limit mail-in voting access, add voter ID requirements, and make voter rolls more elusive, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice. Compared to only 35 such bills in 15 states a year ago, this fervor is “grounded in a rash of baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud and election irregularities.”
Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
How is it racist to only have eligible people vote ?Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
vaud said:
The platform would become a massive target for a multitude of attacks from penetration to denial of service, etc
Not everyone has access to online.
I can view, file and pay my personal and corporate taxes online. I can access my bank and move money around. I can pay my council tax. Lots of targets exist already and we seem to live with it just fine.Not everyone has access to online.
People who can't vote online can go in person or postal vote, in any case.
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
vaud said:
The platform would become a massive target for a multitude of attacks from penetration to denial of service, etc
Not everyone has access to online.
I can view, file and pay my personal and corporate taxes online. I can access my bank and move money around. I can pay my council tax. Lots of targets exist already and we seem to live with it just fine.Not everyone has access to online.
People who can't vote online can go in person or postal vote, in any case.
Doesn't sound too bad until you discover that Harris County, which happens to tend to be less Republican than other counties, has 4 million people. All of whom were supposed to use a single location to drop off their votes. That change was imposed a month before the election.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/...
Or https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/u...
"On a local level, the changes can be stark. McLennan county, home to Waco, Texas, closed 44% of its polling places from 2012 to 2018, despite the fact that its population grew by more than 15,000 people during the same time period, with more than two-thirds of that growth coming from Black and Latinx residents.
In 2012, there was one polling place for every 4,000 residents. By 2018 that figure had dropped to one polling place per 7,700 residents. A 2019 paper by University of Houston political scientists found that after the county’s transition to vote centers, more voting locations were closed in Latinx neighborhoods than in non-Latinx neighborhoods, and that Latinx people had to travel farther to vote than non-Hispanic whites."
So Texas very obviously making it harder for minorities to vote..
Governments should make it easier to vote, not more difficult. The obvious caveat being protecting against fraud (I don't believe fraud is a widescale issue in western democracies).
In the US you have a system where States can set their own rules. It would be sensible to level the playing field in Federal elections so the rules were the same country wide. I wonder if Biden will seek to level up the rules to prevent the Republican attempts to limit voting?
In the US you have a system where States can set their own rules. It would be sensible to level the playing field in Federal elections so the rules were the same country wide. I wonder if Biden will seek to level up the rules to prevent the Republican attempts to limit voting?
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
Governments should make it easier to vote, not more difficult. The obvious caveat being protecting against fraud (I don't believe fraud is a widescale issue in western democracies).
In the US you have a system where States can set their own rules. It would be sensible to level the playing field in Federal elections so the rules were the same country wide. I wonder if Biden will seek to level up the rules to prevent the Republican attempts to limit voting?
They tried that before - there was a law passed requiring many of the Southern states (where voter suppression had been shown to occur before) to get Federal approval before changing voting rules. That was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional.In the US you have a system where States can set their own rules. It would be sensible to level the playing field in Federal elections so the rules were the same country wide. I wonder if Biden will seek to level up the rules to prevent the Republican attempts to limit voting?
Some of the gerrymandering of districts is astounding, usually, but not always, by Republicans.
HM-2 said:
PRTVR said:
Byker28i said:
Meanwhile, GOP lawmakers just try to make up new rules in voting obstruction. 106 new bills in 28 states threaten to limit mail-in voting access, add voter ID requirements, and make voter rolls more elusive, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice. Compared to only 35 such bills in 15 states a year ago, this fervor is “grounded in a rash of baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud and election irregularities.”
Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
How is it racist to only have eligible people vote ?Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
It's well known that ID laws discriminate against legal minorities as well as several other categories of voter including those from low income backgrounds, the elderly and disabled. In the 7 states that currently have stringent photo ID laws, every single form of accepted ID requires both payment and the navigation of significant bureaucracy just to apply. Thus poses obvious access challenges for non-native English speakers, those from low income socioeconomic groups, and anyone who may require assistance to complete requisite paperwork- especially in a time such as now.
The reason for the Republican push for more stringent voting regulations is specifically to try and depress votes amongst groups that vote predominantly Democrat. Proposed tightening of mail-in ballots, fyir instance, are designed predominantly to make it harder for students, who may be resident in one state but living in another to study, to vote. And measures which have seen huge numbers of polling stations closed in many rural counties are aimed at disenfranchising those too poor to avoid the cars required to travel to cast votes.
Edited by HM-2 on Sunday 21st February 09:52
Since taken office gas prices have increased in America and look to keep rising, who will that effect the most, the poor,
You cannot pretend to be looking after the poor whilst at the same time as you make them poorer.
The UK is introducing a similar requirement for voting, personally I think its a good idea.
https://www.fahrenheit211.net/2021/02/19/uk-govern...
Not to mention Republicans have placed non official ballot boxes that the authorities deemed illegal: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/12/us/politics/cal...
PRTVR said:
HM-2 said:
PRTVR said:
Byker28i said:
Meanwhile, GOP lawmakers just try to make up new rules in voting obstruction. 106 new bills in 28 states threaten to limit mail-in voting access, add voter ID requirements, and make voter rolls more elusive, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice. Compared to only 35 such bills in 15 states a year ago, this fervor is “grounded in a rash of baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud and election irregularities.”
Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
How is it racist to only have eligible people vote ?Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
It's well known that ID laws discriminate against legal minorities as well as several other categories of voter including those from low income backgrounds, the elderly and disabled. In the 7 states that currently have stringent photo ID laws, every single form of accepted ID requires both payment and the navigation of significant bureaucracy just to apply. Thus poses obvious access challenges for non-native English speakers, those from low income socioeconomic groups, and anyone who may require assistance to complete requisite paperwork- especially in a time such as now.
The reason for the Republican push for more stringent voting regulations is specifically to try and depress votes amongst groups that vote predominantly Democrat. Proposed tightening of mail-in ballots, fyir instance, are designed predominantly to make it harder for students, who may be resident in one state but living in another to study, to vote. And measures which have seen huge numbers of polling stations closed in many rural counties are aimed at disenfranchising those too poor to avoid the cars required to travel to cast votes.
Edited by HM-2 on Sunday 21st February 09:52
Since taken office gas prices have increased in America and look to keep rising, who will that effect the most, the poor,
You cannot pretend to be looking after the poor whilst at the same time as you make them poorer.
The UK is introducing a similar requirement for voting, personally I think its a good idea.
https://www.fahrenheit211.net/2021/02/19/uk-govern...
He's concerned about the changes there which aim to remove postal votes from many - he's voted by post for 20 years as he spends much of his time travelling, so never knows if he'd be in town to vote..(well apart from last year..).
One in Texas took 5 hours to vote last year - simply because of the lack of polling stations. Last time he voted, it took 20 minutes, but he since moved to a mainly black area and suddenly it's more difficult.
PRTVR said:
Driving is not considered a luxury in the USA its considered a necessity
8% of American households have no access to a vehicle. A good proportion of that are city dwellers with reasonable access to public transport but to pretend that everyone eligible to vote has easy access to a car and the ability to travel 50+ miles to do so is frankly absurd. PRTVR said:
Since taken office gas prices have increased in America and look to keep rising
So you always confuse correlation with causation, or is it only when its convenient for your arguments?rscott said:
My colleagues in Atlanta regularly queue for 2-3 hours to vote - simply because there aren't many polling stations. Their boss is understanding of the situation and allows them as much time as they need, but not everyone is that lucky.
He's concerned about the changes there which aim to remove postal votes from many - he's voted by post for 20 years as he spends much of his time travelling, so never knows if he'd be in town to vote..(well apart from last year..).
One in Texas took 5 hours to vote last year - simply because of the lack of polling stations. Last time he voted, it took 20 minutes, but he since moved to a mainly black area and suddenly it's more difficult.
Yep it's so much of a problem that my company gives US workers 4 hours VTO (Voting Time Off).He's concerned about the changes there which aim to remove postal votes from many - he's voted by post for 20 years as he spends much of his time travelling, so never knows if he'd be in town to vote..(well apart from last year..).
One in Texas took 5 hours to vote last year - simply because of the lack of polling stations. Last time he voted, it took 20 minutes, but he since moved to a mainly black area and suddenly it's more difficult.
It's utterly alien to them that I get my vote done in 15 mins before or after work.
captain_cynic said:
rscott said:
My colleagues in Atlanta regularly queue for 2-3 hours to vote - simply because there aren't many polling stations. Their boss is understanding of the situation and allows them as much time as they need, but not everyone is that lucky.
He's concerned about the changes there which aim to remove postal votes from many - he's voted by post for 20 years as he spends much of his time travelling, so never knows if he'd be in town to vote..(well apart from last year..).
One in Texas took 5 hours to vote last year - simply because of the lack of polling stations. Last time he voted, it took 20 minutes, but he since moved to a mainly black area and suddenly it's more difficult.
Yep it's so much of a problem that my company gives US workers 4 hours VTO (Voting Time Off).He's concerned about the changes there which aim to remove postal votes from many - he's voted by post for 20 years as he spends much of his time travelling, so never knows if he'd be in town to vote..(well apart from last year..).
One in Texas took 5 hours to vote last year - simply because of the lack of polling stations. Last time he voted, it took 20 minutes, but he since moved to a mainly black area and suddenly it's more difficult.
It's utterly alien to them that I get my vote done in 15 mins before or after work.
rscott said:
PRTVR said:
HM-2 said:
PRTVR said:
Byker28i said:
Meanwhile, GOP lawmakers just try to make up new rules in voting obstruction. 106 new bills in 28 states threaten to limit mail-in voting access, add voter ID requirements, and make voter rolls more elusive, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice. Compared to only 35 such bills in 15 states a year ago, this fervor is “grounded in a rash of baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud and election irregularities.”
Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
How is it racist to only have eligible people vote ?Well they think they lost because of mail in voting, so its only to be expected after years of voting restrictions imposed on anyone that doesn't vote GOP.
It's well known that ID laws discriminate against legal minorities as well as several other categories of voter including those from low income backgrounds, the elderly and disabled. In the 7 states that currently have stringent photo ID laws, every single form of accepted ID requires both payment and the navigation of significant bureaucracy just to apply. Thus poses obvious access challenges for non-native English speakers, those from low income socioeconomic groups, and anyone who may require assistance to complete requisite paperwork- especially in a time such as now.
The reason for the Republican push for more stringent voting regulations is specifically to try and depress votes amongst groups that vote predominantly Democrat. Proposed tightening of mail-in ballots, fyir instance, are designed predominantly to make it harder for students, who may be resident in one state but living in another to study, to vote. And measures which have seen huge numbers of polling stations closed in many rural counties are aimed at disenfranchising those too poor to avoid the cars required to travel to cast votes.
Edited by HM-2 on Sunday 21st February 09:52
Since taken office gas prices have increased in America and look to keep rising, who will that effect the most, the poor,
You cannot pretend to be looking after the poor whilst at the same time as you make them poorer.
The UK is introducing a similar requirement for voting, personally I think its a good idea.
https://www.fahrenheit211.net/2021/02/19/uk-govern...
He's concerned about the changes there which aim to remove postal votes from many - he's voted by post for 20 years as he spends much of his time travelling, so never knows if he'd be in town to vote..(well apart from last year..).
One in Texas took 5 hours to vote last year - simply because of the lack of polling stations. Last time he voted, it took 20 minutes, but he since moved to a mainly black area and suddenly it's more difficult.
I see in the UK the proposal is for the council to provide free a card that permits one to vote if you do not have a photographic means of identification.
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
I can view, file and pay my personal and corporate taxes online. I can access my bank and move money around. I can pay my council tax. Lots of targets exist already and we seem to live with it just fine.
People who can't vote online can go in person or postal vote, in any case.
And those targets are attacked continuously with many fraud attempts. Cyber crime is at an all time high.People who can't vote online can go in person or postal vote, in any case.
I’m not sure what online voting buys us (it would be expensive) versus postal and in person.
vaud said:
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
I can view, file and pay my personal and corporate taxes online. I can access my bank and move money around. I can pay my council tax. Lots of targets exist already and we seem to live with it just fine.
People who can't vote online can go in person or postal vote, in any case.
And those targets are attacked continuously with many fraud attempts. Cyber crime is at an all time high.People who can't vote online can go in person or postal vote, in any case.
I’m not sure what online voting buys us (it would be expensive) versus postal and in person.
The costs of architecting something sufficiently secure and resilient but yet accessible from every home laptop or mobile device in the country at the same time would be astounding.
HM-2 said:
To my eye the biggest problem is probably denial of service rather than fraud. If someone knocks your bank offline for a day then it's normally no big deal. If someone knocks an online voting system over for a day, you suddenly can't have an election.
The costs of architecting something sufficiently secure and resilient but yet accessible from every home laptop or mobile device in the country at the same time would be astounding.
I'd argue that it might not be possible for voting on the day.The costs of architecting something sufficiently secure and resilient but yet accessible from every home laptop or mobile device in the country at the same time would be astounding.
It might be possible to architect a system that allowed online voting as a first preference up to one week before the election but then required a postal vote if you hadn't yet voted.
Make it less time sensitive.
Still, would be one heck of a target. Sometimes paper and snail mail beat a system.
By comparison - just as a car boot full of hard drives is still quicker than a fat internet pipe for data transfer over short - medium distances.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff