# (US-Election) So howsabout voting by mail?



## Taleweaver (Aug 7, 2020)

Okay, I'm curious again...I think it was @Xzi who mentioned somewhere "mail in voting" is the same thing as "absentee voting", which would be pretty embarrassing for Trump if that was true, because he loathes the first and thinks the second is fine.

And after some google-fu, I gotta say that @Xzi is mostly right. This page explains the difference, but I can barely summarize their conclusion any further:


An _absentee ballot_ is generally used in every state to refer to a ballot filled out by a voter who cannot, for various reasons, physically make it to a voting location on Election Day.
A _mail-in ballot_ is used more broadly to refer to ballots sent through the mail, including in all-mail voting states and some forms of absentee voting.
Meaning: Trump is perfectly okay with voting by mail you're physically unable to get to the voting station, but thinks there's massive fraud involved if you want to vote by mail because e.g. a covid-19 pandemic. And...okay, I'm about most of the time in the critics camp so I can just call "this makes no sense " and be done with it...but usually his dumb controversial remarks have at least a political, malicious and/or divisive narrative. I can name (plenty of) examples, but that's not the point. What I'm getting at: this makes no sense for republicans either.


TL;DR news is often a good source of inspiration (IMHO, of course), but this piece is great even to their standards. Not only does it neatly packages the conflicting information and debunks Trumps lies, but also points out that veterans and elderly are both groups often voting by mail AND voting republicans. In other words: he's actively busy sabotaging his own re-election.

The weird thing is that this goes beyond his usual "controversy of the week". Suing Nevada for making it easier for everyone to vote...really?  All a judge (apparently) has to do is point out that their neighboring state Utah has done it for centuries without a hitch and dismiss the entire case (and that's even before the arguments "it's been done since the civil war" and "there's a pandemic out there" make it to the table).

Oh, and of course I cannot not mention Trump's suggestion to ignore the constitution and delay the election. That obviously hinges on the idea that "mail in voting is bad" is accepted, which is a common staple. Worse: his own petty argument against it ("we might not know the results of the election on election day itself") is countered by the fact that he replaced the US postal service direction, resulting in more delays on letters being delivered.

Now...as a European, I'm very well aware that me setting up this poll and framing it like this (assuming you read this rant before casting your vote) might rub you the wrong way. I'm sorry about that, but I really want to know how US residents are seeing their election chances(1). Hence this poll. With a "I'm not from the US so my opinion's really irrelevant" option.

Thanks for voting. 



(1): in case anyone's curious - and the umpteenth Belgian attempt at forming a government since last year fail - I'll make a blog or even a thread about what'll happen then. But for the moment, we Belgians aren't summoned to cast our votes anytime soon.


----------



## CallmeBerto (Aug 7, 2020)

I'm all for absentee voting because of the following -

"To get an absentee ballot, a registered voter must request one through their state government, which accepts or rejects the application."

In fact that should be the gold standard; though I'm not sure how many people know about this method as it is something I've been doing since I could vote.


----------



## alevan (Aug 7, 2020)

Vote by mail gives the possibility of fradulent voting. This is a fact. My country is also debating it. 

Online voting is the future. But for it to work, every old analog ID card needs to be changed to one with and DIC (digital indentification chip), so at least fraud can be stopped on the user side.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Aug 7, 2020)

I am a dual citizens. So, no vote for me. Corrupt politicians, that's why. Don't trust the world. NONE.


----------



## ghjfdtg (Aug 7, 2020)

Not from the US but gave my opinion anyway. Voting by mail has always been allowed (in my country too) and should still be this time. Everything else is manipulation.


----------



## slaphappygamer (Aug 7, 2020)

I “mail-in” my “absentee” ballot all the time. They are the same fucking thing. I don’t know why some would risk spreading this god forsaken disease to do things “the traditional way”. Voter fraud, if it happens again, will happen regardless of mail in/absentee ballot or in person. Probably more likely if voting by online, though.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 7, 2020)

https://nypost.com/2020/08/05/84000-mail-in-ballots-disqualified-in-nyc-primary-election/

Not saying it can't be done. Just saying it can't be done in the USA on short notice like this and expect a reliable, uncorrupted result.

And as CallMeBerto explained above, an absentee ballot is not exactly the same. It must be specifically requested, with good cause for needing it, by a specific individual voter. A universal mail-in election in the USA would require mailing a ballot to every registered voter (not even sure if that would satisfy the Democrats), and we already know the voter rolls here are very, very full of incorrect, duplicate, and dead names. Every attempt to purge the voter rolls of inaccuracies is met with litigation warfare. Add to that the inefficient and unreliable performance shown by the USPS in the NY primary (see link above) .... it would be a clusterfuck of mammoth proportions.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 7, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> https://nypost.com/2020/08/05/84000-mail-in-ballots-disqualified-in-nyc-primary-election/
> 
> Not saying it can't be done. Just saying it can't be done in the USA on short notice like this and expect a reliable, uncorrupted result.
> 
> And as CallMeBerto explained above, an absentee ballot is not exactly the same. It must be specifically requested, with good cause for needing it, by a specific individual voter. A universal mail-in election in the USA would require mailing a ballot to every registered voter (not even sure if that would satisfy the Democrats), and we already know the voter rolls here are very, very full of incorrect, duplicate, and dead names. Every attempt to purge the voter rolls of inaccuracies is met with litigation warfare. Add to that the inefficient and unreliable performance shown by the USPS in the NY primary (see link above) .... it would be a clusterfuck of mammoth proportions.


USPS was kneecapped by the president, he removed (more) funding for it. So when you remove funding for it, obviously it's going to perform worse. Which then they begin to say "they don't need the money, look they are doing bad" and start axing more out of it. That's essentially what happened to USPS. Second, the cause of absentee reason can be from corona virus, and some states don't even ask for a reason.
Third, voter fraud by absentee happens only about 3-7 cases (not a %, CASES) per election year.
Fourth, you do know people check ballots right? Is it really that hard to check if a dead guy is dead? No, not really.
fifth
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elect...able-14-how-states-verify-voted-absentee.aspx
there are forms of verification. I would presume that all the bills with vote by mail, uses the same verification by a state by state bases (it would make more than plenty sense to do so) It's not like people are getting nameless ballots, and able to just chuck them in without any way to verify it was them. Which conveniently goes back to needing to be registered to vote


----------



## Taleweaver (Aug 7, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> https://nypost.com/2020/08/05/84000-mail-in-ballots-disqualified-in-nyc-primary-election/
> 
> Not saying it can't be done. Just saying it can't be done in the USA on short notice like this and expect a reliable, uncorrupted result.
> 
> And as CallMeBerto explained above, an absentee ballot is not exactly the same. It must be specifically requested, with good cause for needing it, by a specific individual voter. A universal mail-in election in the USA would require mailing a ballot to every registered voter (not even sure if that would satisfy the Democrats), and we already know the voter rolls here are very, very full of incorrect, duplicate, and dead names. Every attempt to purge the voter rolls of inaccuracies is met with litigation warfare. Add to that the inefficient and unreliable performance shown by the USPS in the NY primary (see link above) .... it would be a clusterfuck of mammoth proportions.


It's a good reply. Better than I had anticipated, even. Thanks for that. 

I gotta play the criticaster and say that it doesn't address some important points I mentioned (as well as @monkeyman4412 ), but at least it shows a reason.

You say it can't be done in the USA on a short notice. Okay...but the election day's still three months away. Even with lockdown measurements in place, I can't really say that's way too short notice. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough earlier, but most of the system is already in place. And for the government workers, simply sending one ballot to every registered voter in the state is an easier task than individually checking who should get one and who doesn't.



Hanafuda said:


> Every attempt to purge the voter rolls of inaccuracies is met with litigation warfare.


Erm...in a normal democracy, I honestly don't see how this would be a problem(1). But I'll give you this: I believe you that this will be a hurdle because it CAN be a hurdle. Hmm... 

If I'm honest: I've heard of voter suppression stories before Trump rode into town, which always struck me as a bit off. All Trump really did was make it more blatantly obvious. If democrats would certainly win if everyone would be able to vote (I'm not making this up: Donald actually said this very thing almost literally when attacking the Nevadan law change)...then any outcome where they don't actually win is a blame against democracy(2). To circle back on your earlier remark: in a normal situation, I'd certainly agree that any absentee ballot should be requested and granted on an individual level(3). But a global pandemic that killed over 150'000 citizens is something I would call worthy of an exception. Voting shouldn't be a matter of life and death. Perhaps if there isn't an alternative, but there IS an alternative. Not one without its own share of problems (I hear ya, man  ), but IMHO problems that can be fixed. Or are you really saying that what they're doing in Utah is just too far out of reach for the peasant other states?



(1): an election is held by the government. The same government that oversees births, deaths, immigration and emigration (among other things), so de facto knows who is elligible to vote. If those population charts aren't allowed to check on voter registrations, then there's a problem in THAT department
(2): the 'popular vote' not always providing the president is the obvious example here.
(3): that's how normal election absentee situations are solved in Belgium as well, btw. Well...the exact opposite, really (voting's obligated here...so you need an excuse NOT to vote), but the same principle


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 8, 2020)

https://freebeacon.com/2020-electio...k-mail-in-primary-ballots-to-wrong-addresses/


----------



## CallmeBerto (Aug 8, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> https://freebeacon.com/2020-electio...k-mail-in-primary-ballots-to-wrong-addresses/




An important note from the article

""These numbers show how vote by mail fails," said J. Christian Adams, PILF's president and general counsel. "New proponents of mail balloting don’t often understand how it actually works. States like Oregon and Washington spent many years building their mail voting systems and are notably aggressive with voter list maintenance efforts. Pride in their own systems does not somehow transfer across state lines. Nevada, New York, and others are not and will not be ready for November.""

One day? I think so but not this round.


----------



## notimp (Aug 9, 2020)

CallmeBerto said:


> These numbers show how vote by mail fails





> One-sixth of Clark County mail-in ballots were sent to outdated or undeliverable addresses


Jebus...

You send mail in ballots to people who registered, that way you get current living addresses, you make sure they need an id document to receive the letter (or to 'order' it), otherwise it goes back to the sender.

If that happens to one sixth of your ballots, you used an old address database, probably because you cant have people registering and also have a high adoption rate at short notice (?). That doesnt mean, that the system is broken (still no voter fraud possible, ballots go back to the sender), or 'will never work'.

Means, you need to work on your address databases. No?

Hence, this is not at all a structural reason how vote by mail fails. More a 'Bob in administration was sleeping for the past five years' issue.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 10, 2020)

notimp said:


> Jebus...
> 
> You send mail in ballots to people who registered, that way you get current living addresses, you make sure* they need an id document to receive the letter *(or to 'order' it), otherwise it goes back to the sender.
> 
> ...




The left vehemently opposes any kind of ID requirement associated with voting here. They claim it is racist and suppresses the vote.

The left takes the government to Court anytime there is an attempt to audit, update, or cleanup the voter registration rolls. And in most large cities, the left runs the local government so there is rarely any attempt to do anything.  We have scores of dead people registered to vote here, people registered in multiple jurisdictions, illegal aliens registered ... there are basically no controls, no checks on names getting put on the lists. Hypothetically with mail in voting you could set up a dummy address, register hundreds to that address, and get ballots sent there. There will be rules against this of course, but the local government clerks and election officials will rarely enforce or investigate. And once the election's over, nobody wants to hear about it anymore.

https://justthenews.com/politics-po...allot-applications-sent-dead-people-and-wrong

If you read the article above, besides many other errors, apparently an absentee ballot application was sent to someone's pet.

https://alexandrialivingmagazine.com/news/absentee-voter-mailings-cause-confusion-across-virginia/


Neither CallmeBerto or me have said it could never work. But for it to work, it have to be a different system where ID is required and some connection to the community and physical address to which the ballot is mailed is shown for each election cycle to ensure one counted vote per each live person voting.


----------



## Lacius (Aug 10, 2020)

There's no evidence for substantive voting fraud comitted via mail-in voting in the United States, and there's no reason why main-in voting shouldn't be accessible to every American.

If Republicans thought mail-in voting benefited them, they'd be championing it right now.


----------



## notimp (Aug 10, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> The left vehemently opposes any kind of ID requirement associated with voting here. They claim it is racist and suppresses the vote.


Bring the full argument.

https://www.wired.com/story/voter-id-law-algorithm/

In the US a comparatively high percentage of the black population doesnt own an ID. (In Europe none of this is even thinkable as you need an ID for basically every essential step in setting up a 'normal' life.)

All of this is mostly legacy:


> At the federal level, the Help America Vote Act of 2002 requires voter ID for all new voters in federal elections who registered by mail and who did not provide a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number that was matched against government records.[1]


src: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws_in_the_United_States
New system still is stupid, but better.

The key is, that you get a way to do 'two factor authentication', so 'address and ID' to prevent easy manipulation.

If you only have one factor (we be sending mail ballots to addresses), that could be abused. As 'one sixth' of mail ballots in the article above were undeliverable - I'm now curious what that meant.

Surely - mail ballots were only sent out to people that requested them, and during that request procedure, someone at least checked an ID, or a drivers license? (It doesnt matter so much if you check identity at delivery, or at the 'order' stage.)

I'd be veeeeeery suprised if not.

edit: Ok, the postal service designated them as 'udeliverable'. So postal service checks ID in that situation right?
-

Regardless, you could still keep the 'vote without an ID' option at the ballot box, and have lets say a third, or half of your votes via mail ballots, and it would help during the corona crisis. If you send out vote ballots per mail, you _need_ a two factor something (matching person to address) - you cant just send them out to addresses and not care who picks them up. From the article you posted - that happened (postal service marked 200k ballots 'undeliverable').

Thats still not a structural issue going against mail ballot voting. Thats still just a what a horrible database are you managing issue. 


Structural issue is, that people voting per mail in ballots could be pressured to vote a certain way - and you dont have 'cast your vote in a public space' to prevent that.

A 'sell me your vote' culture shouldnt develop the first time around though. So if you pull the 'lets make an exception for covid' card, it should still be ok, It would become an issue, if more people start to do that regularly during elections.


----------



## Glyptofane (Aug 15, 2020)

And it will only cost $25 billion to have the election stolen, what a deal!


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Here in Blighty, we've had postal voting for a while and it'll probably be promoted more for next year's elections. I've only voted via postal despite a polling station being less then five minutes from my house.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 15, 2020)

Glyptofane said:


> And it will only cost $25 billion to have the election stolen, what a deal!


Nah it's only going to cost the post office for the president to rig the election in his favor. (or attempt to) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/13/donald-trump-usps-post-office-election-funding
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-admits-he-wants-block-usps-funding-sabotage-mail-voting-2020-8


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 15, 2020)

emigre said:


> Here in Blighty, we've had postal voting for a while and it'll probably be promoted more for next year's elections. I've only voted via postal despite a polling station being less then five minutes from my house.



Have you ever been concerned about corruption within your postal service influencing the outcome of the election? Because the postal workers' union here in the USA just endorsed Joe Biden. That pretty much taints the whole deal for me.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Have you ever been concerned about corruption within your postal service influencing the outcome of the election? Because the postal workers' union here in the USA just endorsed Joe Biden. That pretty much taints the whole deal for me.


Hmm idk. Maybe it's the fact Joe wants to put funding back into the post office after republicans kneecapped their job twice in a row? once in 2006, and now recently?
And I would be concerned about that, especially from the president who put a pundit there to slow down the post office. Why? Oh well he admitted that he's trying to boost his election chances. It's a statistical fact that most democrats take the pandemic seriously. And will guess what? vote by mail, rather than going to a poll.There is already data showing that difference between the two parties. So effectively by trying to axe the post office, Trump is trying to boost his own election chances.


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Have you ever been concerned about corruption within your postal service influencing the outcome of the election? Because the postal workers' union here in the USA just endorsed Joe Biden. That pretty much taints the whole deal for me.



No. The research into fraud into our elections are showing there's a small amount which IIRC is focused a lot in Northern Ireland. The main postal union here (CWU) affiliated with the Labour party here and have been for many years and there's been no question of any attempt of fraud. There have been accusations of 'widespread' postal fraud (not at the CWU) but on so-called community leaders and students from right-wing politicians. No one has actually provided anything credible to provide those. Local Government also do checks between elections to keep track of this.

Basically, trust your post workers.


----------



## PiracyForTheMasses (Aug 15, 2020)

Sorry not sorry, anyone that thinks mail in ballots are okay are uneducated individuals that have no knowledge on the subject. What most people here fail to realize is people have been buying other peoples votes for decades. Sure, it was not physical, you gave them your word that you would vote how they wanted you to vote. Well now you can buy the physical vote. On top of that USPS workers have been caught before committing voter fraud and they are incompetent like every other shipping service in USA. Do NOT put the future of USA in the hands of USPS.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 15, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> Hmm idk. Maybe it's the fact Joe wants to put funding back into the post office after republicans kneecapped their job twice in a row? once in 2006, and now recently?
> And I would be concerned about that, especially from the president who put a pundit there to slow down the post office. Why? Oh well he admitted that he's trying to boost his election chances. It's a statistical fact that most democrats take the pandemic seriously. And will guess what? vote by mail, rather than going to a poll.There is already data showing that difference between the two parties. So effectively by trying to axe the post office, Trump is trying to boost his own election chances.




You're missing the point. If we vote by mail, the postal service controls the election if they want to. And they just announced that they want to.

As for your concerns about the Trump vs. the USPS thing, the postal service should be operating at a profit and competing against commercial services, not operating at a constant deficit on taxpayer funding. Charge for a stamp what a stamp actually costs, instead of charging 55 cents but then getting another 55 cents or whatever it takes from funding. I should only have to fund the postal service to the extent I use it. The current system overwhelmingly benefits mass mailers and corporate mailers by keeping their costs down, while people who only use the postal service to mail in their bills, personal correspondence with family/friends, and receive purchased goods are subsidizing the mass mailers through these hidden expenses (tax revenue). It's bullshit.




emigre said:


> Basically, trust your post workers.



They've already taken a side. Public announcement. So NOPE.


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> They've already taken a side. Public announcement. So NOPE.



Looks like you've made your mind up without reading what I wrote about the CWU. Whatevs.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 15, 2020)

emigre said:


> Looks like you've made your mind up without reading what I wrote about the CWU. Whatevs.



I think you're too easily convinced of what you want to believe. Sorry, but corruption is a reality. The people telling you there isn't any are the most corrupt of all.


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> I think you're too easily convinced of what you want to believe.



Or I base it off on our Electoral commission says.

EDIT: just seen your edit .If you're going to get corruption, you're going to get from politicians doing shit like gerrymandering and 'donations.' Posties at best would be small time. 

Next time I speak to the Head of Electoral Services at work, I'll put this out to him as I'm sure I'll enjoy his reaction.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 15, 2020)

emigre said:


> Or I base it off on our Electoral commission says.
> 
> EDIT: just seen your edit .If you're going to get corruption, you're going to get from politicians doing shit like gerrymandering and 'donations.' Posties at best would be small time.
> 
> Next time I speak to the Head of Electoral Services at work, I'll put this out to him as I'm sure I'll enjoy his reaction.



Would you feel comfortable with your Head of Electoral Services endorsing one candidate over another?


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> You're missing the point. If we vote by mail, the postal service controls the election if they want to. .


...
Wow, your an idiot beyond recognition. I am honestly about to have a laughing fit. Quick question hun, who verifies the ballots?
I'll tell you now, it's not the post office.


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Would you feel comfortable with your Head of Electoral Services endorsing one candidate over another?



In the most polite way possible, that's an amazingly stupid question as you're comparing a trade union to the people who run the election. Post Workers deliver shit. My homeboy, the Head of ES organises and verifies the election for the area.

However, for shits and giggles, I'll answer it, H of ES like myself work in local government cannot endorse political opinion in our roles. However, in private, we can and I know multiple people who that. Should he send emails to all staff from his work email telling us he's voting one way, he's fucked. If we have a private conversation in the pub and he tells me how he's going to vote, fair enough.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 15, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> ...
> Wow, your an idiot beyond recognition. I am honestly about to have a laughing fit. Quick question hun, who verifies the ballots?
> I'll tell you now, it's not the post office.



No but the postal workers will have control over which ballots are delivered. Do I think there'd be enough of that going on to actually influence outcome(s)? Probably not, but the Presidential election in the US in recent years has been very tight. Like 50/50 tight. They've shown their hand with this announcement endorsing one side, because whether there's tampering or not they've cast a shadow on the credibility of the results. I don't trust US postal workers not to keep a few bags from one district off the truck, or to add a "special" bag or two. So it's not so much that I think it WILL happen, but that I don't TRUST them not to, because they've taken a side in advance.

*If any of you have a Trump sign in your yard or bumper sticker on your car (no, I don't, I don't want my house or car vandalized) ... don't mail in your ballot from your own mailbox. Take it to a public mailbox and drop it in there. If the mailman sees you're a Trump supporter, your ballot might not reach its destination.*




emigre said:


> In the most polite way possible, that's an amazingly stupid question as you're comparing a trade union to the people who run the election. Post Workers deliver shit. My homeboy, the Head of ES organises and verifies the election for the area.
> 
> However, for shits and giggles, I'll answer it, H of ES like myself work in local government cannot endorse political opinion in our roles. However, in private, we can and I know multiple people who that. Should he send emails to all staff from his work email telling us he's voting one way, he's fucked. If we have a private conversation in the pub and he tells me how he's going to vote, fair enough.



As I explained above there, mail-in voting puts the postal service in the chain of custody of the ballots. So they control the election as much as those who count the votes. And as Stalin wisely observed, it's not who votes but who counts the votes. Now it's not just who counts the votes, but who plays middle man delivering the votes that will be counted.


----------



## VartioArtel (Aug 15, 2020)

I'll believe in the crappy system if I get my mail-in ballot. If they conveniently 'forget' while the rest of my family gets theirs (and they aren't listed as 'no party affiliation' like I am), you can expect a shitstorm. It's not like I haven't voted the last 2 presidencies, and a ballot not showing up for me would be a giant red flag.


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> No but the postal workers will have control over which ballots are delivered. Do I think there'd be enough of that going on to actually influence outcome(s)? Probably not, but the Presidential election in the US in recent years has been very tight. Like 50/50 tight. They've played their hand with this announcement endorsing one side, because whether there's tampering or not they've cast a shadow on the credibility of the results. I don't trust US postal workers not to keep a few bags from one district off the truck, or to add a "special" bag or two. So it's not so much that I think it WILL happen, but that I don't TRUST them not to, because they've taken a side in advance.
> 
> 
> 
> As I explained above there, mail-in voting puts the postal service in the chain of custody of the ballots. So they control the election as much as those who count the votes. And as Stalin wisely observed, it's not who votes but who counts the votes. Now it's not just who counts the votes, but who plays middle man delivering the votes that will be counted.



I mean this in the nicest way possible, this sounds like good ol' fashioned American paranoia. A similar setup has been happening here for years and honestly, I cannot comprehend this thought process.

I will end with this though, from my experiences when things go wrong, it's not because someone is corrupt, it's cos someone fucked up.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> No but the postal workers will have control over which ballots are delivered.



How? No really how? Are these guys just opening up envelopes like Christmas day? pretty sure you would get fired for it. So no, they can't choose one over the other. Pretty sure anyone who is working in that position and likes their job, will rather not risk it, and if they do, pretty certain they would be caught.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 15, 2020)

emigre said:


> I mean this in the nicest way possible, this sounds like good ol' fashioned American paranoia. *A similar setup has been happening here for years and honestly, I cannot comprehend this thought process.*
> 
> I will end with this though, from my experiences when things go wrong, it's not because someone is corrupt, it's cos someone fucked up.



There is fixing in every election in both our countries and if you choose to believe them when they tell you they investigated themselves and found no evidence of it, well good for you.


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> There is fixing in every election in both our countries and if you choose to believe them when they tell you they investigated themselves and found no evidence of it, well good for you.



Where do you our elections are fixed?


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 15, 2020)

emigre said:


> Where do you our elections are fixed?



It's human nature. There is no government anywhere on Earth that is not corrupt. Just how corrupt is mostly a function of the size of the bureaucracy, how absolute is its authority, how widespread is its invasion into the lives of the people. By that measure the USA is bad and getting worse, our Federal bureaucracy is openly aligned with one political party and works through their official authority to kneecap & destroy office holders from the opposition party. It may be the same in the UK? I do know that the UK has, if anything, an even more pervasive bureaucracy than in the US.

If that engenders your trust, more power to you. I'm more of a "Murphy's Law" type person when it comes to government corruption.


----------



## emigre (Aug 15, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> It's human nature. There is no government anywhere on Earth that is not corrupt. Just how corrupt is mostly a function of the size of the bureaucracy, how absolute is its authority, how widespread is its invasion into the lives of the people. By that measure the USA is bad and getting worse, our Federal bureaucracy is openly aligned with one political party and works through their official authority to kneecap & destroy office holders from the opposition party. It may be the same in the UK? I do know that the UK has, if anything, an even more pervasive bureaucracy than in the US.
> 
> If that engenders your trust, more power to you. I'm more of a "Murphy's Law" type person when it comes to government corruption.



So you can't point out anything. 

Btw there are many many issues with the British political systems, to imply I have complete trust in our institutions is laughable.


----------



## notimp (Aug 16, 2020)

German news media (dw.com) analysis on the topic, mail voting laws and systems in the US are differing by states. In some states every registered voter gets a mail ballot, in some states only ones that request one. In some states ut only can be requested, if you are out of country for election day, in some states you just have to signal intent that youd want to. MIT research says no significantly increased voter fraud potential, if states would switch to primarily voting per mail short term.

Ballots are printed on special paper sealed and signed, so those fraud prevention meassures are in place. So whats all the fuzz about?

DW says, that Trump is making it a public issue to increase distrust in voter populations.

Why? Hes preparing to pull another Bush 2.

Early voting results will come in from lower populated areas, with a lower percentage of mail votes. (I.e. not large cities), which will favor Trump. Mail votes will be counted and come in later in bulk. So, if Trump is in the lead early on, he is expected to declare having won the election and then bank on popular voter support to cut off counting of mail votes eventually.

This also goes hand in hand with the current chief postal officier being an outspoken Trump supporter and having cut funding for on time delivery and fired the two heads of domestic delivery recently.

So better not make the electoral difference too small this time around... 

src: https://m.dw.com/de/wird-die-briefwahl-in-den-usa-ein-desaster/a-54570937
(german)


----------



## Xzi (Aug 16, 2020)

Republicans have been trying to kneecap the USPS for decades, but the fact that they're just now taking definitive actions such as removing hundreds of high-volume sorting machines, mere months away from an election amid a pandemic, is obviously no coincidence.  Not only is Trump attempting to rig the election in his favor, he's sewing doubt in the election results ahead of time, just in case he somehow loses despite his best efforts to suppress voter turnout.  This shit is straight out of the autocrats' playbook, and it's precisely the type of thing that will turn a first-world democratic nation into a third-world banana republic overnight.

Perhaps the worst part about it is that if the USPS gets privatized or dismantled, nobody's gonna deliver to the most rural parts of America any more because it's simply not profitable to do so.  Yet the majority of people living in those areas are so infested with brainworms that they'll gladly vote red and shoot themselves in the foot with a smile on their faces anyway.


----------



## notimp (Aug 16, 2020)

There is no immediate downside to it though, even if they loose, they loose by a smaller amount which favours reps next time around... 

So I doubt that this is only Trump...


----------



## Xzi (Aug 16, 2020)

notimp said:


> There is no immediate downside to it though, even if they loose, they loose by a smaller amount which favours reps next time around...
> 
> So I doubt that this is only Trump...


Assuming there is a coronavirus vaccine available by early 2022, it wouldn't have nearly as big an impact on future elections, but it would still pay dividends where their investments in private USPS competitors are concerned.  Only Mitt Romney on the Republican side has spoken out against the sabotage of the USPS, so the vast majority of them have made it clear that they prioritize profits over people.


----------



## vincentx77 (Aug 16, 2020)

Jesus H Christ... If you live in the South, there are plenty of postal workers who are Republicans and pro-Trump, despite the fact that it's probably not in their own best interests. The post office doesn't count the votes. There's no fucking conspiracy to use the USPS to steal the election. Even Republican members of congress are backing away from Trump's insanity on this one. Trump even said about a week ago that mail-in voting was a great thing in Florida because they had a Republican governor who would make sure they did the right thing. Trump is the asshole who is trying to steal the election. He's doing it by damaging our postal system. His doing it by disenfranchising PoC, the elderly, and others for whom voting at a poling station could be dangerous. He is disgusting. What he's doing is disgusting. There's no excuse for the behavior that he's exhibiting. 

And for what it's worth, no one is mailing ballots to every citizen. You have to send in an application for a mail-in ballot. I would have opted to do this. I have an auto-immune disease and going to a polling place is risky for me. This election is too important, so I feel like I have no choice but to risk it.


----------



## notimp (Aug 16, 2020)

> Voters may not have their votes counted in time for the November election after the US Postal Service chief warned of delays. Postmaster Louis DeJoy, a Donald Trump ally, has come under scrutiny over his financial ties.





> DeJoy's warning comes as the postal service's watchdog steps up efforts to look into how the organization is run.
> 
> The US Postal Service Office of Inspector General is investigating reports of service disruptions and other concerns raised by lawmakers, the office of Senator Elizabeth Warren said on Friday.


https://m.dw.com/en/us-postal-servi...ot-be-counted-in-time-for-election/a-54577917


----------



## Xzi (Aug 16, 2020)

vincentx77 said:


> There's no fucking conspiracy to use the USPS to steal the election.


It's not a "conspiracy," no.  That would require some level of secrecy and/or subversion.  Both Trump and DeJoy have openly admitted to their part in sabotaging USPS' ability to operate efficiently and effectively.

Nobody's suggesting postal workers are going to change your vote.  The issue is that they might not be capable of delivering ballots on time, and during a pandemic, that's an issue which can be exploited to suppress the overall voter turnout.



vincentx77 said:


> And for what it's worth, no one is mailing ballots to every citizen.  You have to send in an application for a mail-in ballot.


A number of states do have universal mail-in/drop-off ballots and have for some time.  A number of others have been pushing for it for this election specifically.  Frankly it should've been the standard across the country for decades now.


----------



## Glyptofane (Aug 16, 2020)

What is even the problem when Fauci says there's no reason Americans can't vote in person in November? What happened to "listening to the experts"? Does that only apply when it completely aligns with some lunatic, preconceived Democrat agenda? 

You may recall both Fauci and his boss, Bill Gates, saying schools could reopen and there doesn't seem to be much of that going on either. 

The entire manufactured crisis stemming from the response has gone completely off the rails from when they originally said the lockdown was just to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed. It became quickly evident that was never going to happen and here we still are months later. 

Lastly, USPS has been running itself into the ground for a very long time. That's hardly the fault or responsibility of Trump.


----------



## crimpshrine (Aug 16, 2020)

If people can go to the store without issue,  get gas without issue,  get carry out food without issue, and many other activities without issue. 

They should easily be able to create an environment that people can vote in person without issue. "Experts" have already said there should be no problem with in person voting.  

Some level of election fraud is a factor everywhere in the world. 

Discussions usually center around the strengths of the voting equipment.  That they are exploitable, that they are weak, etc.. Even then in many places alleged fraud is made at times.

There is already ample evidence of voter fraud from in the past when tied to the use of mail.  Over 1000 criminal convictions associated with it.

How many criminal convictions tied to in person voter fraud?  I am sure that happens too, but likely mail use is the path of least resistance as far as fraud goes.

Seems like some people are trying to make an issue out of something that really should not be an issue.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 16, 2020)

The problem with mail-order ballots is that conservatives want a fair election while liberals are only in it to win it. Ultimately, regardless of the people, governors in liberal states will make sure that all votes are for the white rapist and the cop.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 16, 2020)

crimpshrine said:


> If people can go to the store without issue, get gas without issue, get carry out food without issue, and many other activities without issue.
> 
> They should easily be able to create an environment that people can vote in person without issue. "Experts" have already said there should be no problem with in person voting.


It absolutely wouldn't be an issue if every voter could be trusted to wear masks and socially distance as they're required to in all the other scenarios that you listed.  Instead we're stuck with a whole lot of chuds and troglodytes who will go to the polls and refuse to do either of these things because, according to them, COVID-19 is either a "hoax," or "no worse than a cold."

Regardless of this election in particular, the idea behind democracy is that you get as many people involved as possible.  A party that can only win by means of suppressing voter turnout is a party in favor of oligarchy, not democracy.



crimpshrine said:


> There is already ample evidence of voter fraud from in the past when tied to the use of mail. Over 1000 criminal convictions associated with it.


A thousand out of what?  Billions of votes cast?  Don't just give half of the statistic.  We're talking about a hundredth of a percentage point or less.  Besides, if they were caught, then that means the safeguards are working properly and there's nothing to worry about.  If anything, it's easier to catch fraud via mail-in voting than it is with in-person voting where electronic machines can be hacked without a trace.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 16, 2020)

Xzi said:


> View attachment 221728​


It's about the context. There's no cure for government mismanagement.


----------



## crimpshrine (Aug 16, 2020)

Xzi said:


> It absolutely wouldn't be an issue if every voter could be trusted to wear masks and socially distance as they're required to in all the other scenarios that you listed.  Instead we're stuck with a whole lot of chuds and troglodytes who will go to the polls and refuse to do either of these things because, according to them, COVID-19 is either a "hoax," or "no worse than a cold."
> 
> Regardless of this election in particular, the idea behind democracy is that you get as many people involved as possible.  A party that can only win by means of suppressing voter turnout is a party in favor of oligarchy, not democracy.
> 
> ...



I don't know about all other states, but my state has rules regarding masks and social distancing.   And outside of the occasional social media post/news report about people that can't handle it and fight (for whichever side you are on), everything works.  All stores I enter have a mask required policy.  Pretty much EVERY business has adjusted their way of doing business to account for these changes.   I have never seen outside what is reported on the Internet with problems with social distancing/mask wearing issues.  I would have to guess like most things, what is reported on and publicized is the rarity in the grand scheme of things. 

When I say thousands of convictions.  I am not only talking about single incidents impacting one vote, but incidents that impacted multiple votes. 

And that is just those who they have caught in the past.    If you believe there is not a greater risk of fraud here, don't know what to tell you. It is the path of least resistance for creating fraud.  When you go to vote where I am, you are verified and you have to present ID.  There is a verification process that occurs.  And a process has been placed on the polling place so me showing up and following the process creates a high chance that my vote and others that vote will be accounted for without fraud.  When you decentralize that, the chance for fraud increases dramatically I believe.

Again I think more is being made of this that needs to be.  People are actively doing things outside in stores and all kinds of other activities that are part of "daily" life safely, this is no different in my opinion. 

Whatever the method is, there should be as much verification as possible to help prevent fraud to the process.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 17, 2020)

crimpshrine said:


> Whatever the method is, there should be as much verification as possible to help prevent fraud to the process.


In addition to being registered to vote, you have to provide _more_ information when it comes to mail-in/drop-off ballots than you do for in-person voting, not _less_.  The process of verifying a person's eligibility to vote is the same either way.  So by default we would agree on that point.

Again, it simply comes down to whether you want to encourage participation in the process by the largest segment of the population possible, or you want to exclude certain groups for the purpose of ensuring that only the voices of the rich and powerful truly count.  Not only do most first-world democracies make it easy and convenient to vote by mail, they also made election day a national holiday so that there are a lot fewer barriers to in-person voting.



UltraSUPRA said:


> It's about the context. There's no cure for government mismanagement.


In the sense that this administration has grossly mismanaged the federal response to coronavirus, and is now purposefully mismanaging the USPS, we certainly agree there.


----------



## osaka35 (Aug 17, 2020)

There are so many standards for voting in the states, bereft with errors and easy manipulations. but these are after-the-fact behind-the-scene things. not front-end things like whether you do it in person or mail it in. so it's not like mail-in-voting is going to do anything differently than voting in-person. 

Perhaps they're worried this could undermine highly immoral gerrymandering? Or make it easier for people to vote? republicans do have a track record of passing laws which aim to inhibit free elections (with the do-nothing support of democrats), and this would make voting more accessible and free.


----------



## Taleweaver (Aug 17, 2020)

Wow...I had limited PC support last weekend, but I don't think I've ever seen a mental breakdown this bad... 



Hanafuda said:


> Have you ever been concerned about corruption within your postal service influencing the outcome of the election? Because the postal workers' union here in the USA just endorsed Joe Biden. That pretty much taints the whole deal for me.





Hanafuda said:


> I think you're too easily convinced of what you want to believe. Sorry, but corruption is a reality. The people telling you there isn't any are the most corrupt of all.





Hanafuda said:


> There is fixing in every election in both our countries and if you choose to believe them when they tell you they investigated themselves and found no evidence of it, well good for you.





Hanafuda said:


> As I explained above there, mail-in voting puts the postal service in the chain of custody of the ballots. So they control the election as much as those who count the votes. And as Stalin wisely observed, it's not who votes but who counts the votes. Now it's not just who counts the votes, but who plays middle man delivering the votes that will be counted.





Hanafuda said:


> If any of you have a Trump sign in your yard or bumper sticker on your car (no, I don't, I don't want my house or car vandalized) ... don't mail in your ballot from your own mailbox. Take it to a public mailbox and drop it in there. If the mailman sees you're a Trump supporter, your ballot might not reach its destination.


Man...are you okay? I know we seldomly agree on a political level, but this is worrying. Do I really need to tell you that the same US citizens you've been living with since forever without issue (well...not since the civil war) aren't somehow out to get you? There's probably one or two bad democrats out there who screw things up for the rest of 'em (just 

Look: I'm very willing to admit that there's a potential fraud chance by the mailmen. But for all your posts, you have always dodged the question on "how" or "why". A union endorsing a candidate doesn't mean he gets a free pass somehow, if not for any reason that they don't control the workers (as mentioned, plenty of workers just support Trump).

You're also ignoring the fact that Trump shot first. Since he openly admitted sabotaging the mail funding for HIS idea that usps MIGHT fraud, I'd argue he brought on the endorsement himself (what do you expect? Them being happy of being attacked without provocation?  ).
Oh, and of course the elephant in the room: Louis DeJoy has at least as many opportunities, and probably more, to sabotage the mail. And as the postmaster's CEO he was never politically neutral to begin with. Worse: on top of a top Trump contributor, he also has shares in the competition. Meaning: he has more to gain with the USPS' downfall than by actually leading it. So I don't get why you don't search for conspiracy theories on that front...or is that too much in the open for you?



Glyptofane said:


> What is even the problem when Fauci says there's no reason Americans can't vote in person in November? What happened to "listening to the experts"? Does that only apply when it completely aligns with some lunatic, preconceived Democrat agenda?


I googled where he said that and found two links.
Fauci defends voting by mail if you don't want to take the chance in person
Dr Anthony Fauci insists there is 'no reason Americans shouldn't be able to vote in person' in November after Trump said mail-in voting would create chaos
The interesting part is that they both come from the exact same interview. So this isn't a matter of discrediting Fauci, but of context. He isn't talking about banning voting in person, which is what NOBODY HERE IS DISCUSSING. But you make it out like he's perfectly okay with voting in person, whereas he really is at least as much okay as voting by mail.



Glyptofane said:


> The entire manufactured crisis stemming from the response has gone completely off the rails from when they originally said the lockdown was just to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed. It became quickly evident that was never going to happen and here we still are months later.


Erm...the lockdown should be to prevent the virus from spreading, thus reducing the amounts of seriously ill. I'm not sure if you're uninformed or if that's how the government laid it out to you. Hospitals getting overwhelmed was (at least in Belgium) a doom scenario where, if breached, would lead to far worse situations than we've had. Luckily, we've recovered (our second wave now seems to stabilize around 1/3rd of the first one, which was also - albeit not as comfortable as should have been - within limits of the hospitals). You didn't. But when you say that US hospitals aren't at all in danger of being overwhelmed, you're just uninformed.



Glyptofane said:


> Lastly, USPS has been running itself into the ground for a very long time. That's hardly the fault or responsibility of Trump.


I'll take your word for the first sentence. And Trump - agreed - isn't responsible for covid-19 reducing postal packages(1). But I'll remind you that the job of the president isn't whatever he wants it to be. The state of the US national postal service was, and still is, the president's responsibility.


(1): sure, people buy more stuff online. But the large chunk of US postal service was in businesses, so the net result is still a loss.


----------



## notimp (Aug 17, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Have you ever been concerned about corruption within your postal service influencing the outcome of the election? Because the postal workers' union here in the USA just endorsed Joe Biden. That pretty much taints the whole deal for me.


This one is easy to clear up.

Its the postal workers UNION. *duh*

So how do you prevent them doing 'something'? Well, you have them work together with other workers who arent union (check), you make them transport ballots in unmarked envelopes (check), that become void when you open them (check), and you scare the living bejebus out of them that they are out of a job if they are ever caught... (check). How do you ensure thats enforced? Idk, you assign them randomly, but if possible have them take the same routes for years (partly check), so they develop a sense of community, you create an independant agency (check), thats preoccupied with being the best at their type of bureaucracy (check on checklists  ) - and it turns out that you can have per mail voting.  Oh and you have an independent watchdog organization that looks into assertions of problematic behavior (also check).

(If it werent for the 'vote solicitation issue' (thats why you never can have the default be 'vote at some place', majority always has to vote in private in a public place (you basically have to make sure it remains a public ritual), or you'd get a culture change (bosses expecting to have a say in their employees votes...)).)

(Many eyes looking at this to ensure impartiality where it matters. This is the individual postman, this is the guy at the sorting plant, this is the whistleblower that tells media, that if dems dont put forward funding, people would have a few sorting machines less come voting season.)

But furthermore, US is not a direct democracy by a long shot (one person one vote), so turns out,  in the end the entire voting process is almost always more about framing the narrative. Meaning "how do you tell a story that makes you 'the winner' with more people agreeing than revolting (actually it only needs a critical mass at the revolting stage..  ) - you do that by changing the narrative of what 'mail voting means'.

This year apparently its dangerous, because, evil forces.
(Russians on facebook, spending 300k on political ads..  )

Can you bring a statistical argument for why? Trump is criticized, that he cant.

Finish your own picture from there. Preferably one thats not afraid of the evil individual postman opening up envelopes, and presorting.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

Taleweaver said:


> Man...are you okay?






 


Mail-in voting was a disaster in the primaries in states that tried it*, will be a disaster in the general election if tried again. I'm not talking about absentee voting where a specific voter requests a single ballot to their registered address. I'm talking about universally mailing ballots to all registered persons on the voter rolls. That will result in a catastrophic clusterfuck. Maybe that's the actual Democrat goal here though ... a messed up election, unreliable tally, errors upon errors. Because 

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/13/8897...nds-of-mail-in-ballots-rejected-for-tardiness

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...-york-election-failure-mail-in-voting/614446/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-19-vote-by-mail-ballot-counted-election/

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/...ginia/65-94c4847c-63fb-4a93-bac5-9bb45df00a8d



Also, there's this to consider (there are pages and pages of results like this, but hey trust them!). As I saw someone else on twitter say a couple days ago, if you don't trust the postal service enough to send cash in the mail, why would you trust them with your vote??

https://postalnews.com/blog/2019/07...me-that-stole-nearly-240000-from-usps-trucks/

https://www.postal-reporter.com/blo...firearms-and-scopes-for-rifles-from-the-mail/

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2019/08/29/postal-worker-stealing-mail-englewood/

https://abcnews.go.com/US/postal-worker-pleads-guilty-stealing-money-6000-greeting/story?id=57909445

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/au...gainst-postal-worker-accusing-her-of-stealing

https://www.wfmj.com/story/41284510...early-five-years-for-stealing-1500-gift-cards

https://patch.com/maryland/silverspring/postal-worker-charged-stealing-pricey-coins-mail-police

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/postal-worker-charged-stealing-packages-containing-narcotics


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 17, 2020)

notimp said:


> you scare the living bejebus out of them that they are out of a job if they are ever caught...


If.

It's a natural instinct to want to get away with doing stuff. Plus, liberals have a history of underhanded tactics (Jeffery Epstein comes to mind). They'd probably pay everyone there to throw away all Trump votes, and secure them another job if they get caught.


----------



## notimp (Aug 17, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> If.


Yes, but on the other hand - jobloss.

So if ever John at work comes to you to talk to you about his plan to do this thing - you tell someone higher up that you think will not be sympatico to Johns plans, what Johns plans are, and you will be promoted. While John gets fired. 

Bureaucracy it will alway do whats in the book (if book isnt rewritten at a higher level.  ).

Individual risk for John should be too high. Even to 'form a conspiracy'.

And even if they do form a conspiracy, see Chigaco Police Department example. Higher up section will swipe in and replace the entire headoffice, to set up 'rule by the book' again. Thats how thats meant to work.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 17, 2020)

notimp said:


> Yes, but on the other hand - jobloss.





UltraSUPRA said:


> Plus, liberals have a history of underhanded tactics (Jeffery Epstein comes to mind). They'd probably pay everyone there to throw away all Trump votes, and secure them another job if they get caught.


----------



## notimp (Aug 17, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Plus, liberals have a history of underhanded tactics


Circumstantial. Vague. 

Not a reason to all of a sudden believe, that the postal service stopped working as an agency (corruption from the bottom up).

The entire thing is structured, so that doesnt happen. (Private mail delivery firms may count more on surveilance (packet and driver tracking), I guess, which also works...   But is more single point of failure than an agency.)


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

notimp said:


> Not a reason to all of a sudden believe, that the postal service stopped working as an agency (corruption from the bottom up).




USPS controllable costs almost doubled from 2018 to 2019, from $1,9 billion to $3.4 billion. One year. They're a self-sabotaging entity. And their answer to all the union-leveraged liabilities and bloat is always "more money, please."

https://www.insidesources.com/time-to-admit-it-the-postal-service-has-a-union-problem/


----------



## notimp (Aug 17, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> USPS controllable costs almost doubled from 2018 to 2019, from $1,9 billion to $3.4 billion. One year. They're a self-sabotaging entity. And their answer to all the union-leveraged liabilities and bloat is always "more money, please.


I dont know, why that happened (structural investments (think roads) always have a tendency to bunch up costs at certain intervals (if its a one time cost issue on things that are then used for twenty odd years I wouldnt be bothered is what I'm saying).

But the answer to the question is, then do it after the election. It almost all is about public image (in the political game). And not that many people think, that their postman is overpayed...

Agencies also usually arent self sabotaging, because the effect would be exactly what 'seemed' to have happened in this case - agency would try to self correct, so new head honcho is voted in to cut costs. (In this case its more likely political influence .... (The current one is not an agency 'type' wife disclosed, that they hold major stock in USPS competitors.))


----------



## notimp (Aug 17, 2020)

This happened to the USPS:
https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-usps-rural-packages-deliveries-2020-5?r=DE&IR=T

(Why costs exploded.)


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 17, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> USPS controllable costs almost doubled from 2018 to 2019, from $1,9 billion to $3.4 billion. One year. They're a self-sabotaging entity. And their answer to all the union-leveraged liabilities and bloat is always "more money, please."
> 
> https://www.insidesources.com/time-to-admit-it-the-postal-service-has-a-union-problem/


Guess we aren't going to acknowledge the polices republicans passed that caused this issue in the first place.
Oh well, I'm out of here at this point, thread is a dumpster fire


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> Guess we aren't going to acknowledge the polices republicans passed that caused this issue in the first place.
> Oh well, I'm out of here at this point, thread is a dumpster fire




No I guess we're not because you're not specifically backing up what you claim with a cause - effect nexus analysis.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 17, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> No I guess we're not because you're not specifically backing up what you claim with a cause - effect nexus analysis.


https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis-and-how-to-fix-it/
"In 2006, Congress passed a law that imposed extraordinary costs on the U.S. Postal Service. The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) required the USPS to create a $72 billion fund to pay for the cost of its post-retirement health care costs, 75 years into the future. This burden applies to no other federal agency or private corporation."
that's your first major issue of cash loss.
Here's some bullet points as well for the other issues that were put on the USPS
https://cms-colorado.com/why-usps-not-profitable/


btw fun fact, both house and senate was controlled by republicans 2003-early-mid 2006


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis-and-how-to-fix-it/
> "In 2006, Congress passed a law that imposed extraordinary costs on the U.S. Postal Service. The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) required the USPS to create a $72 billion fund to pay for the cost of its post-retirement health care costs, 75 years into the future. This burden applies to no other federal agency or private corporation."
> that's your first major issue of cash loss.
> Here's some bullet points as well for the other issues that were put on the USPS
> ...




Thanks for the Progressive Think Tank Thinking. It's just outrageous that the postal service should have to budget for things like employee post-retirement healthcare costs


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 17, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Thanks for the Progressive Think Tank Thinking. It's just outrageous that the postal service should have to budget for things like employee post-retirement healthcare costs


congrats, you just proved to me that your not worth talking to anymore. I point out the exact issue "75 years into the future" which no one does, and you ignore then try to put me into a box/category. Right out of the alt-right playbook. Honestly to anyone else on this thread, talking to this person isn't even worth the damn time. He's just here to refute his own arguments, not to have an honest discussion with facts.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> congrats, you just proved to me that your not worth talking to anymore. I point out the exact issue "75 years into the future" which no one does, and you ignore then try to put me into a box/category. Right out of the alt-right playbook. Honestly to anyone else on this thread, talking to this person isn't even worth the damn time. He's just here to refute his own arguments, not to have an honest discussion with facts.



You're the one quoting biased sources. As if that healthcare-security act is the only reason the USPS is a wasteful money pit. The law you're using as the scapegoat of all woes was so bad that is passed through Congress on a unanimous vote in the Senate (all R's _and_ all D's), and a voice vote in the House. It was introduced by a Republican in the House, but co-sponsored by 1 other Republican and 2 Democrats. It was, unlike most legislation and despite attempts now to portray it as the Republicans' prescient demonseed for the 2020 election, actually bi-partisan. And considering how postal volume decreased drastically in the 14 years since, it probably shouldn't have ever been enacted, yeah. But did Democrats try to reverse or fix it when they held both Houses during Obama?? Nyet.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

Self-sabotaging. Election sabotaging.

https://www.engadget.com/usps-mail-sorting-election-ballot-160058157.html

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...g-mail-sorting-machines-ahead-of-the-election


----------



## Xzi (Aug 17, 2020)

The USPS is a public service, it doesn't _lose_ money, it _costs_ money and still retains a 91% approval rating.  We don't say that the military loses us $750+ billion a year, now do we?



Hanafuda said:


> Self-sabotaging. Election sabotaging.
> 
> https://www.engadget.com/usps-mail-sorting-election-ballot-160058157.html
> 
> https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...g-mail-sorting-machines-ahead-of-the-election


So then you agree that Trump's appointee for Postmaster General, who has investments in several USPS competitors, is purposefully sabotaging the USPS?


----------



## Mythical (Aug 17, 2020)

Shit is dumb. Let people vote by mail. Most of the people who don't believe in the virus are republicans. Having a no home voting would only benefit republican votes and prevent democratic ones. This would change the votes MUCH MORE than any bunch of fraudulent votes would. Plus people could already vote via male so why stop now?


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

Xzi said:


> So then you agree that Trump's appointee for Postmaster General, who has investments in several USPS competitors, is purposefully sabotaging the USPS?



I know that's what liberals think and are trying to sell to everyone else.

It's a moot point to me, because we shouldn't be voting by mail in the first place.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 17, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> I know that's what liberals think and are trying to sell to everyone else.


You're the one who just posted evidence of it happening, but I guess you want to retain some cognitive dissonance in the sense that you want to believe some other magical entity besides the Postmaster General has the authority to order such operations.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

Mythical said:


> Shit is dumb. Let people vote by mail. Most of the people who don't believe in the virus are republicans. Having a no home voting would only benefit republican votes and prevent democratic ones. This would change the votes MUCH MORE than any bunch of fraudulent votes would. Plus people could already vote via male so why stop now?




Why shouldn't the election work exactly the same as any election in the past? I'm ok with social distancing and masks being required, but it's an election, not a poll. Too much opportunity for fuckery and everyone knows it. Of course, fuckery inures to the benefit of Democrats. Everyone knows that too. Everyone knows this push for universal mail-in voting is a bullshit smokescreen to steal the election.




Xzi said:


> You're the one who just posted evidence of it happening, but I guess you want to retain some cognitive dissonance in the sense that you want to believe some other magical entity besides the Postmaster General has the authority to order such operations.



No, I did not post evidence of it happening. Because the postal service shouldn't have anything to do with the casting of ballots in an election, other than specifically requested absentee ballot requests that are granted for good cause. No mail-in voting, no problem. The Democrat argument sounds a lot to me like, "We think Trump is fucking up our plans to eliminate him by trickery!!" And I'm about as sympathetic for that as I am for Antifa twerps who want police protection when they're outnumbered.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 17, 2020)

Mythical said:


> Plus people could already vote via male so why stop now?


I don't support absentee voting, either. If you can't make it, don't vote.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 17, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Everyone knows this push for universal mail-in voting is a bullshit smokescreen to steal the election.


Steal the election...by having more people vote for them than the other party.  Pretty sure that's just called _winning_ an election.

It's no secret that when voter turnout is high, Democrats generally win.  So just say what you mean: you need to ensure that fewer people vote so that the party you prefer has a shot.  No need to keep tap dancing around the point.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 17, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> I don't support absentee voting, either. If you can't make it, don't vote.




There are good cause exceptions. I voted absentee in '92 when I was working in Japan. Overseas military too.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Steal the election...by having more people vote for them than the other party.  Pretty sure that's just called _winning_ an election.
> 
> It's no secret that when voter turnout is high, Democrats generally win.  So just say what you mean: you need to ensure that fewer people vote so that the party you prefer has a shot.  No need to keep tap dancing around the point.


That doesn't make sense. Reducing the population won't alter the ratio. 3:4 is the same as 12:16.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> That doesn't make sense. Reducing the population won't alter the ratio.


There are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans.  Cities and urban areas lean heavily toward Democrats, rural areas lean heavily toward Republicans.  Thus the winning formula for Republicans in the past has been to reduce the number of polling places in densely-populated areas, forcing people to wait 7+ hours in line to vote.  Obviously that's pretty effective at repelling many Democrats who work for a living, since election day isn't a holiday in the US.  Such a tactic no longer works if every registered voter has access to a mail-in ballot.

I've been around long enough to remember a time when "get out the vote" efforts were bipartisan.  At some point though, Republicans figured out that fewer voters gave them a better chance of success, and voter suppression has been their primary MO ever since.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> There are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans.


Let's find out why.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Why shouldn't the election work exactly the same as any election in the past? I'm ok with social distancing and masks being required, but it's an election, not a poll. Too much opportunity for fuckery and everyone knows it. Of course, fuckery inures to the benefit of Democrats. Everyone knows that too. Everyone knows this push for universal mail-in voting is a bullshit smokescreen to steal the election.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


fuckery benefits both parties. Ain't no way that large a group of people is going to social distance properly either.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

and smokescreen? It's p obvious that trump supporters don't believe in the virus more than most people ergo they'd feel just fine going in person while there are other people who could and will die if they get covid


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Let's find out why.


The "why" is obvious.  Republican leadership makes no qualms about being anti-weed, anti-LGBTQ, anti-video games, anti-immigrant, anti-healthcare, anti-first amendment, anti-science, etc and so forth.  Basically the only thing they aren't against is straight, white, Christian males.  Democratic leadership, OTOH, goes for a "big tent" strategy, and thus appeals to a much larger segment of the population in a country as diverse as the US.

Not to say there aren't problems with the way the Democratic party operates, or that there aren't big problems with any two-party system in general, but that's the gist of it.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> anti-weed


Because God forbid we keep people from getting stoned.


Xzi said:


> anti-video games


No.


Xzi said:


> anti-immigrant


Correction: we're against _illegal_ immigration.


Xzi said:


> anti-healthcare


We're against people not getting paid for their labor.


Xzi said:


> anti-first amendment


I didn't hear about that time Trump decided to censor bigots on Twitter.
Wait a minute, that was Twitter themselves.

Did you even see my links?


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Snip


I said Republican leadership, not you personally.  Though if you disagree with them on so many topics I have no idea why you would remain a registered Republican.  I changed my own registration to unaffiliated a good while back (there was no option for Independent in my state).



UltraSUPRA said:


> Did you even see my links?


I did, though I'm not going to waste my time reading opinion pieces from blatantly partisan sources.  Like I already said, the reasons why there are more registered Democrats than Republicans are obvious to anybody with at least two brain cells to rub together.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Though if you disagree with them on so many topics I have no idea why you would remain a registered Republican.


1. The problem is that you aren't doing your own research and are instead relying on the (highly biased and false) media.
2. I'm not old enough to register.


Xzi said:


> I did, though I'm not going to waste my time reading opinion pieces from blatantly partisan sources.


At least read the names of the articles.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> The problem is that you aren't doing your own research and are instead relying on the (highly biased and false) media.


I can easily find video/audio examples of Republican leaders denouncing each of the things I listed, media analysis is irrelevant when it comes to direct quotes.



UltraSUPRA said:


> I'm not old enough to register.


Ah I see.



UltraSUPRA said:


> At least read the names of the articles.


What good does that do if the sources themselves can't be trusted?  The titles of the articles aren't going to be any more accurate than their content.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

Being not old enough to register but getting super heated on politics and voting when you haven't even lived out in the real world (atleast you probably haven't) is super cringe


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> I can easily find video/audio examples of Republican leaders denouncing each of the things I listed, media analysis is irrelevant when it comes to direct quotes.


Post up those quotes, then.


Xzi said:


> What good does that do if the sources themselves can't be trusted?  The titles of the articles aren't going to be any more accurate than their content.


I guess I don't have to read any of _your_ "reliable" sources, either.


Mythical said:


> Being not old enough to register but getting super heated on politics and voting when you haven't even lived out in the real world (atleast you probably haven't) is super cringe


Yet you support highly flawed voting practices.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Here's a hivemind of people protesting against voting in person.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Post up those quotes, then.
> 
> I guess I don't have to read any of _your_ "reliable" sources, either.
> 
> ...


The whole system is flawed, and that picture proves just how much of a mess voting in person would be. If you don't realize we should adapt to this pandemic we don't have a cure for you're stupid.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> If you don't realize we should adapt to this pandemic we don't have a cure for you're stupid.


What about Sweden?


----------



## notimp (Aug 18, 2020)

Ups bad journalism, according to a medium reporter:


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> What about Sweden?


We're not talking about sweden. Wtf does sweden have to do with anything!? This conversation is about us politics in reference to mail in voting.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> We're not talking about sweden. Wtf does sweden have to do with anything!? This conversation is about us politics in reference to mail in voting.


I'm saying Sweden isn't doing anything differently.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> I'm saying Sweden isn't doing anything differently.


I'm not from Sweden, You're not from Sweden, Sweden isn't relevant to this topic.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> I'm not from Sweden, You're not from Sweden, Sweden isn't relevant to this topic.


I'm using Sweden as an example of how to respond to the Coronavirus.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> I'm using Sweden as an example of how to respond to the Coronavirus.


Bad example. It's a different culture, different country, different size (which matters a hell of a lot), different population, different political focuses, and once again unrelated


----------



## notimp (Aug 18, 2020)

notimp said:


> Ups bad journalism, according to a medium reporter:




Content:
Sorting Machines are not decomissioned to impact mail voting.
Postal agency head honcho might not have been a political pick (?).

Trumps statement, that hed want to defund the postal office, also seems to be instigating bravado, but not rooted in fact.

(edit: Was meant to be an edit and not a quote, sorry.)


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> Bad example. It's a different culture, different country, different size (which matters a hell of a lot), different population, different political focuses, and once again unrelated


So all countries have different cultures that don't work in other countries. How interesting.


----------



## sarkwalvein (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> So all countries have different cultures that don't work in other countries. How interesting.


What did you mean?
Are you trying to say all countries have different cultures, so what works in a country may not work in another?
Or are you trying to say something else?
Not clear.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> So all countries have different cultures that don't work in other countries. How interesting.


You make it sound like cultural diffusion has been so widespread that all cultures are the same OR that implementing cultural behavior and comparisons to another country is valid, WHICH IT ISN'T. People from the USA act very different from other countries and vice versa. This is just derailing the conversation by trying to bring in obtuse unrelated information that you feel is valid but isn't once you think 5 seconds past the surface.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 18, 2020)

Postmaster General just suspended all USPS "operational changes" till after the election. Won't be enough for Democrats. Watch.

Meanwhile, President Trump delivered an historic peace deal between Israel and UAE a few days ago, got only cursory coverage by the press.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Postmaster General just suspended all USPS "operational changes" till after the election. Won't be enough for Democrats. Watch.


All _further_ operational changes.  He's already done quite a bit of damage and should commit to undoing it.  Regardless, this is a positive development.  I do find it funny how he's basically outright admitting that if Trump gets re-elected, USPS is guaranteed to be dismantled or privatized.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> You make it sound like cultural diffusion has been so widespread that all cultures are the same OR that implementing cultural behavior and comparisons to another country is valid, WHICH IT ISN'T. People from the USA act very different from other countries and vice versa. This is just derailing the conversation by trying to bring in obtuse unrelated information that you feel is valid but isn't once you think 5 seconds past the surface.


You just figured out why immigration is bad.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> You just figured out why immigration is bad.


The irony of saying this as a white person in North America...


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> The irony of saying this as a white person in North America...


Our founding fathers were pioneers, not immigrants.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Our founding fathers were pioneers, not immigrants.


Porqué no los dos?


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Porqué no los dos?


Because you can't immigrate to a country that isn't a country.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Because you can't immigrate to a country that isn't a country.


About as racist and moronic as statements can possibly get.  So I guess par for the course for a child radicalized by the internet's alt-right pipeline.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

OMG you're so dumb, get your 15 year old ass in a politic and government course before you trounce around in a topic you clearly don't understand


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> The irony of saying this as a white person in North America...



The "stolen land" trope is baloney. All land has shifted between ethnic groups through warfare and migrations for the entirety of human history. If it was wrong for whites from Europe to come here 500 years ago before we understood the world as a whole, and these almighty 'progressive' concepts you worship even existed, then it's doubly wrong for anyone else to be coming here now. Unless you also start insisting that all Muslims & Asians immediately leave Europe, Turkey, & North and South America and go back NOW to "where they came from," spouting this drivel about white people is just hypocrisy.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> About as racist and moronic as statements can possibly get.  So I guess par for the course for a child radicalized by the internet's alt-right pipeline.


If all you can do is spew insults and buzzwords, then you've lost.


Mythical said:


> OMG you're so dumb, get your 15 year old ass in a politic and government course before you trounce around in a topic you clearly don't understand


Have you?


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

bringing up sweden, immigration, and the pioneers, dumb shit


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> If all you can do is spew insults and buzzwords, then you've lost.
> 
> Have you?


nice comeback, but I really don't take your opinion to be valid. I try to listen to people of all ages, but you clearly haven't read up on anything and will recite any facebook bullshit or propaganda you've heard from the adults and world around you without a second thought


----------



## sarkwalvein (Aug 18, 2020)

Several generations raised on tabloid talk shows and reality tv. It shows.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> nice comeback, but I really don't take your opinion to be valid.


It's mutual.


Mythical said:


> I try to listen to people of all ages, but you clearly haven't read up on anything and will recite any facebook bullshit or propaganda you've heard from the adults and world around you without a second thought


So you _haven't_ been trusting the Communist News Network?


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> The "stolen land" trope is baloney. All land has shifted between ethnic groups through warfare and migrations for the entirety of human history.


In other words: people have the right to immigrate, and there's nothing innately wrong or immoral about immigration?  Imagine that.  



Hanafuda said:


> Unless you also start insisting that all Muslims & Asians immediately leave Europe, Turkey, & North and South America and go back NOW to "where they came from," spouting this drivel about white people is just *hypocrisy*.


Gee, it's almost like I was hoping UltraSUPRA could draw that conclusion for himself, and you came along and just hit him over the head with it instead.  Spouting anti-immigration drivel about *any* race is hypocrisy.  Guess I should be less esoteric next time.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> It's mutual.
> 
> So you _haven't_ been trusting the Communist News Network?


Okay everything you say is unrelated or related to something previously said that is unrelated, WHAT DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE USA MAIL IN VOTING SYSTEM!?!?!?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

You've brought immigration, pioneers, sweden, and more yet all you seem to be doing is back pedalling by adding more useless info


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> Okay everything you say is unrelated or related to something previously said that is unrelated, WHAT DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE USA MAIL IN VOTING SYSTEM!?!?!?
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> You've brought immigration, pioneers, sweden, and more yet all you seem to be doing is back pedalling by adding more useless info


Sure. Let's go back to the main topic.

How long does it take to tear up a piece of paper?


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> In other words: people have the right to immigrate, and there's nothing innately wrong or immoral about immigration?  Imagine that.



I actually did NOT say that, no. I guess I would say that people have the right to try to immigrate. If they’re welcome, or tolerated, or able to force their way, then that’s that. History. To the victor go the spoils.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

I was on topic until you brought up sweden and shit went down from there. Can you remind me again why sweden was your counterpoint? Or give me an actual good counter point instead of sweden


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> I was on topic until you brought up sweden and shit went down from there. Can you remind me again why sweden was your counterpoint? Or give me an actual good counter point instead of sweden


Sweden handled the Coronavirus the right way by not doing anything differently from how it was beforehand.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> I actually did NOT say that, no. I guess I would say that people have the right to try to immigrate. If they’re welcome, or tolerated, or able to force their way, then that’s that. History. To the victor go the spoils.


Ah, so "stringent rules and regulations regarding immigration for thee, not for me."  Wholly expected, but still exhausting knowing that there is no consistency left in conservative ideology whatsoever these days.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Ah, so "stringent rules and regulations regarding immigration for thee, not for me."  Wholly expected, but exhausting knowing that there is no consistency left in conservative ideology whatsoever these days.


America was not a country before the Founding Fathers. There was no government.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> America was not a country before the Founding Fathers. There was no government.


The "government" was made up of localized tribes.  Just like there was no centralized government at the time of America's conception, only individual colonies.  One is no more legitimate than the other, you're simply scrambling to justify blatant hypocrisy at this point.

Regardless, this is quite far off-topic.  That's all the more I have to say on the matter.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Ah, so "stringent rules and regulations regarding immigration for thee, not for me."  Wholly expected, but still exhausting knowing that there is no consistency left in conservative ideology whatsoever these days.



So the Russians should have welcomed their new Nazi overlords?

Saxons should have surrendered utterly to the Danes?

Chinese should have built some nice cottages for the Japanese cool dudes, from which to watch the rape of Nanking?


Sure.

Now, you're going to say the 21st century sudden mass migration of Islam into Europe and North America isn't the same. Well, that's your opinion. And I have my own. So we'll just disagree about that.

You asked me if I thought there was a right to immigrate. I'd say generally, the right to defend against invasion takes precedent. But don't worry -- the USA and Europe are barely trying to slow it, let alone stop it. Western Culture is fucked.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Sweden handled the Coronavirus the right way by not doing anything differently from how it was beforehand.


Not true at all. You can't compare sweden and usa either way and this has been mentioned before.
Either way that related to the voting syste. Viruses are multiplicative and the impact of in person voting in sweden would be bad but usa would be 10x worse. Also the culture is different many people in the usa are blatant deniers. I've seen cops on duty without masks. Regardless doesn't matter because SWEDEN ISN'T THE USA.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> Not true at all. You can't compare sweden and usa either way and this has been mentioned before.
> Either way that related to the voting syste. Viruses are multiplicative and the impact of in person voting in sweden would be bad but usa would be 10x worse. Also the culture is different many people in the usa are blatant deniers. I've seen cops on duty without masks. Regardless doesn't matter because SWEDEN ISN'T THE USA.


Calm down. I understand. Some cultures are incompatible with each other.
However, if you can go outside and burn down a building with a large group of friends, you can vote in person.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Calm down. I understand. Some cultures are incompatible with each other.
> However, if you can go outside and burn down a building with a large group of friends, you can vote in person.


Please, just read what you just said. Then think on it.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> Please, just read what you just said. Then think on it.


What is it?


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> So the Russians should have welcomed their new Nazi overlords?
> 
> Saxons should have surrendered utterly to the Danes?
> 
> ...


Don't be so childish.  You know as well as I do that there's a clear difference between soldiers and immigrants.  As well as a clear difference between being an immigrant by choice or a refugee by circumstance.



Hanafuda said:


> You asked me if I thought there was a right to immigrate. I'd say generally, the right to defend against invasion takes precedent.


Someone watches too much Fox News.  Your thought process has been entirely too clouded by irrational fear and ignorance if you're this quick to associate these things with each other.


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 18, 2020)

seeing that that bastard trump is fixing the election by crippling the USPS still wouldn't be supprised that this move ends his political career cause many people (like myself) would risk getting Covid by going to city hall/electoral office to drop off my absentee in person rather than trusting USPS getting my vote in on time


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Your thought process has been entirely too clouded by irrational fear and ignorance if you're this quick to associate these things with each other.


It's irrational to be scared of the flu.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> It's irrational to be scared of the flu.


Seems like you didn't think enough. Also the Flu was actually VERY dangerous back in the day. It was a scary thing for all and the only reason it seems not scary is because we have a cure for the flu. We don't have a cure for the corona virus.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Mythical said:


> Seems like you didn't think enough. Also the Flu was actually VERY dangerous back in the day. It was a scary thing for all and the only reason it seems not scary is because we have a cure for the flu. We don't have a cure for the corona virus.


We don't have a cure for the flu. Why else do you think you have to take annual flu shots?


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> It's irrational to be scared of the flu.



dude stop being off topic....yeah a "flu" that killed 5+ mil and still counting in the USA shit i'm still supprised I havent died since I'm high risk for death hopefully i can see trump being carted off to prison directly from the WH before i kick the bucket and yet i feel i'll survive far longer than that


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> It's irrational to be scared of the flu.


If we had no vaccine for it and the flu killed 170,000+ citizens of all ages per year, it'd be irrational _not_ to fear it.  "Only" about 3,000 died on 9/11, and the country came to a standstill.  You only downplay COVID deaths because your handlers want you to.  It's rather Orwellian.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> We don't have a cure for the flu. Why else do you think you have to take annual flu shots?


BRUH we have vaccines that prevent the flu, the flu changes, we make new vaccines. We don't have vaccines for the corona virus. ONce again off topic, the flu isn't the corona virus and if you did 5 min of research you would know why that comparison isn't valid.


----------



## sarkwalvein (Aug 18, 2020)

What is the point of this derailed thread?
Why do people keep going round and round in this excuse for a discussion? Is this a joke?
I only see obtuse people in here that really want to throw shit on the table, dirty any topic and confuse the conversation, and avoid any type of valid discussion.
Why not to abort this thread already if these are the conditions? It is futile.
This thread is a joke.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> If the flu killed 170,000+ citizens of all ages per year, it'd be irrational _not_ to fear it.  "Only" about 3,000 died on 9/11, and the country came to a standstill.  You only downplay COVID deaths because your handlers want you to.  It's rather Orwellian.


170K/365=466
3000/1=3000
3000>>>>>466


----------



## sarkwalvein (Aug 18, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> 170K/365=466
> 3000/1=3000
> 3000>>>>>466


I forgot 911 was highly contagious.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

sarkwalvein said:


> What is the point of this derailed thread?
> Why do people keep going round and round in this excuse for a discussion? Is this a joke?
> I only see obtuse people in here that really want to throw shit on the table, dirty any topic and confuse the conversation, and avoid any type of valid discussion.
> Why not to abort this thread already if these are the conditions? It is futile.
> This thread is a joke.


Yeah it's gone quite a bit off-topic now, though I do suppose COVID is fair game since that's a big part of what initiated the discussion on mail-in ballots.  Really though they should be two completely separate topics, as any properly-functioning democracy shouldn't need an an active pandemic to encourage access to the most convenient and secure method of voting available in the modern day.


----------



## notimp (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Postmaster General just suspended all USPS "operational changes" till after the election. Won't be enough for Democrats. Watch.


Actually the issue is distrust in email voting being sown, to be able to declare himself the winner prior to all mail votes being counted ('because it takes so long'). Thats the fear he played with (''i dont want to fund the postal system so we can have more mail voting'), I think as long as thats not happening, everybody is good..  Watch. 



> Meanwhile, President Trump delivered an historic peace deal between Israel and UAE a few days ago, got only cursory coverage by the press.


Ask the palestinians on how 'historic'. Palestinians, you know, the reason for Banksys original baloon girl:






and the "Walled off" hotel installation?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/03/banksy-opens-bethlehem-barrier-wall-hotel

'Historic deal' is basically bringing the two main US allies in the region, Israel and UAE (United arabic emirates) closer together to strongarm everyone else into submission. Historic deal entails, saying over and over again, that now, that israels illegal settlement projects have matured, there really is no way for a two state solution anymore.

In further news, the Empire just called to announce historic solution for Alderan under project name "No more Alderan." Later, maybe in about two years, to be renamed "Alderan, whats that - did that exist?".

edit: Also who can remember the historic peace deal proceedings where palestinians werent even invited:


Great music. Was that composed for the occasion?


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Someone watches too much Fox News.



I've hardly watched American commercial TV since 1987. I snag the odd HBO or Netflix show that I'm interested to binge, but network TV nope, and cable ... well the last cable channel I spent time watching was Cartoon Network in 90's. Space Ghost Coast to Coast, MST3K.

I do watch a good bit of Japanese TV though. Maybe they're the ones brainwashing me.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> I've hardly watched American commercial TV since 1987.


Ah, so you tuned out toward the end of the Reagan era.  Makes sense that that might lead you to the same thought processes as modern mainstream conservative media, in a roundabout sort of way.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 18, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Ah, so you tuned out toward the end of the Reagan era.  Makes sense that that might lead you to the same thought processes as modern mainstream conservative media, in a roundabout sort of way.



Never said I tuned out. I just stopped watching the idiot box. 

Worry about yourself.


----------



## notimp (Aug 18, 2020)

Also lets watch the new 'historic' propaganda video for a bit:


edit: Btw. saying that this one was built out of a US presidents great leadership and bonding skills is like saying that state promises are promises born out of of honor, fulfilled by duty... Entirely BS. 

UAE needed to basically shift business models, US said - great, how about you talk it over with Israel, and then we help you two rule the region for the forseeable future?

All the leadership and skill needed to broker that. So much WOW!

edit2: (First great achievement mentioned by Jared in the new video diddy?
"We talked with Saudi Arabia to found and build two Counter Terrorism Centers in the holy land, whose main job will be to combat "online radicalization" which is such a problem in the region."

This one is so bizarre, you cant even make a joke out of it. Saudi Arabia was a major terror founder in the region as well. (Part of warfare.) Also thanks Jared, for thinking about the online. And calling 'online censorship' an important part of work at Saudi funded Counter Terrorism Centers.

Fudge....)

edit:
Evidence of Financial Links Between Saudi Royal Family and Al Qaeda
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...links-between-saudi-royal-family-and-al-qaeda

They must think americans are stupid, or something...


----------



## Xzi (Aug 18, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Never said I tuned out. I just stopped watching the idiot box.


It's all just been variations on the same shit since then anyway; Southern Strategy, "greed is good," etc and so forth.  Trump is conservative narcissism and close-mindedness personified, so you definitely haven't missed anything of importance in the years in-between.  Only difference is that the dog whistle has been replaced by a bull horn.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 19, 2020)

notimp said:


> Also lets watch the new 'historic' propaganda video for a bit:
> 
> 
> edit: Btw. saying that this one was built out of a US presidents great leadership and bonding skills is like saying that state promises are promises born out of of honor, fulfilled by duty... Entirely BS.
> ...



unfortunately a half a quarter of the country genuinely is. (back on topic) Think the discussion is over, mail in voting is needed.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

If you can gather around and protest in public against in-person voting, you can vote in person.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> If you can gather around and protest in public against in-person voting, you can vote in person.


God forbid you ever stop to think for a moment that maybe these people aren't protesting solely on their own behalf, but also on behalf of friends and/or family members who are immuno-compromised or have other pre-existing conditions.


----------



## Captain_N (Aug 20, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> https://freebeacon.com/2020-electio...k-mail-in-primary-ballots-to-wrong-addresses/



I know to people that got 3 ballots......The post office like every other government agency sucks. Thats why we have ups and fedex. If the USPS was so epic then those two companies could not exist.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> If you can gather around and protest in public against in-person voting, you can vote in person.


thanks for assuming those overlap, and that those are the majority of people. For half a second I thought you realized you should read up


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

Captain_N said:


> Thats why we have ups and fedex. If the USPS was so epic then those two companies could not exist.


Yes, that's why those two companies, which deliver only packages and not actual mail, to only certain profitable locations within the US, and at a higher price, exist.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> God forbid you ever stop to think for a moment that maybe these people aren't protesting solely on their own behalf, but also on behalf of friends and/or family members who are immuno-compromised or have other pre-existing conditions.


God forbid you ever stop to think for a moment that maybe people like me aren't embracing tradition solely on our own behalf, but also on behalf on those who would be affected by people who aren't serious/can't choose muddying up the election. If you don't care about this country, or you believe that the outcome will be bad no matter what, don't bother. A "lesser of two evils" approach is still voting for an "evil".


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> God forbid you ever stop to think for a moment that maybe *people like me* aren't embracing tradition solely on our own behalf


You mean kids who get radicalized by Ben Shapiro memes and Dennis Prager's Youtube videos?  I'd hardly call that "embracing tradition."  On the flip side, the USPS is almost as old as this country itself, and has always been relied upon to deliver messages of the greatest importance, by both our leaders and our citizens.  About as traditional as you can possibly get.



UltraSUPRA said:


> people who aren't serious/can't choose


Give me a break.  You're not worried about people on the fence voting, you're worried about people who have made their choice (but made the "wrong" choice in your view) voting.  If they've taken the time to register to vote and fill out the necessary forms to receive a mail-in/absentee ballot, they're more than serious enough.


----------



## Coto (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> A "lesser of two evils" approach is still voting for an "evil".



This is what the far left in Chile (disguised as right, independent in some parties) have exploited to death, and Chile is being sold to Human Rights Watch / Sao Paulo Forum / radical left terrorist organizations. We are going to protect our country by the same beliefs carried by your words.

The mail in ballot fraudulent course is the one our government offers to us chilean citizens currently, being biased horrendously towards a new constitution. Since the new chilean constitution is being written by radical left. 

Biased chilean news will say there is nothing wrong in our country, so you can guess where USA is heading to, and Trump is making the RIGHT assertions.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

Coto said:


> This is what the far left in Chile (disguised as right, independent in some parties)


Lol what?  So you have three different parties, but they're all just the "far left" in disguise?  Maybe they are exactly who they say they are, and they're all simply corrupt.  Seems a much more likely scenario.



Coto said:


> Since the new chilean constitution is being written by radical left.


Ooh, does that mean you're getting nationalized healthcare?  Employment and housing as a human right?  A living wage as the minimum?  Partial ownership of businesses/corporations by their workers?

If so, I know where I plan to move next after all this COVID shenanigans is settled.  If not, I don't think you have any idea what the political left actually represents.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> You mean kids who get radicalized by Ben Shapiro memes and Dennis Prager's Youtube videos?  I'd hardly call that "embracing tradition."


Radicalized? How are the traditional American values that have held our country together for centuries radical?


Xzi said:


> Give me a break.  You're not worried about people on the fence voting, you're worried about people who have made their choice (but made the "wrong" choice in your view) voting.  If they've taken the time to register to vote and fill out the necessary forms to receive a mail-in/absentee ballot, they're more than serious enough.


So if you can take a minute out of your day to write down information about yourself, you're every bit as serious as someone waiting, possibly for hours, in the harsh winter of November, to decide the fate of our country.
Makes perfect sense.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Radicalized? How are the traditional American values that have held our country together for centuries radical?


If we're talking about centuries, then these "values" were the same ones that the Confederacy shared, and they split the country apart rather than held it together.  In a more modern sense, Trump has never made any attempt to extend an olive branch to the Democratic party, let alone anybody left of them.



UltraSUPRA said:


> So if you can take a minute out of your day to write down information about yourself, you're every bit as serious as someone waiting, possibly for hours, in the harsh winter of November, to decide the fate of our country. Makes perfect sense.


Polling places in rural areas don't get overcrowded like that.  They wait in line thirty minutes at most.  *Nobody* should have to wait longer than that, though I'm sure it does make you happy to see voters who disagree with you suffer in that manner.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Ooh, does that mean you're getting nationalized healthcare?


Taxes?


Xzi said:


> Employment and housing as a human right?


Taxes?


Xzi said:


> A living wage as the minimum?


No small businesses?


Xzi said:


> Partial ownership of businesses/corporations by their workers?


No small businesses?


Xzi said:


> If we're talking about centuries, then these "values" were the same ones that the Confederacy shared, and they split the country apart rather than held it together.


Ah, yes, the time when the liberals believed that black lives _didn't_ matter.


Xzi said:


> Polling places in rural areas don't get overcrowded like that.  They wait in line thirty minutes at most.  *Nobody* should have to wait longer than that, though I'm sure it does make you happy to see voters who disagree with you suffer in that manner.


Why not drive to one of those?


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Ah, yes, the time when the liberals believed that black lives _didn't_ matter.


Just like what modern conservatives believe.  Almost like the parties flipped at some point or something.  

Pro tip: you don't need to play dumb when there's already so much genuine ignorance radiating from your opinions.



UltraSUPRA said:


> Why not drive to one of those?


You can't vote in person at a polling place outside of your district.  Otherwise Republicans would have to get a lot more clever and creative with their voter suppression tactics.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Just like what modern conservatives believe.  Almost like the parties flipped at some point or something.


What was that thing we were all saying? "All lives matter" was it?


Xzi said:


> You can't vote in person at a polling place outside of your district.  Otherwise Republicans would have to get a lot more clever and creative with their voter suppression tactics.


Oh.

Even still, people should be more serious about voting than they are about Black Friday.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Let me just say that you can't trust the USPS if they're endorsing either candidate.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> What was that thing we were all saying? "All lives matter" was it?


Saying it is one thing, but if conservatives actually believed it, they wouldn't be flying the confederate flag, or even the "thin blue line" flag for that matter.  They'd be protesting for police reform along with everybody else, because cops kill a whole lot of innocent/non-violent people from _every_ racial and ethnic group on a yearly basis.



UltraSUPRA said:


> Even still, people should be more serious about voting than they are about Black Friday.


That's the sad part: a lot more workers are given the day off for Black Friday than election day.



UltraSUPRA said:


> Let me just say that you can't trust the USPS if they're endorsing either candidate.


They aren't and they can't.  There are multiple different postal workers' unions, however, that are free to endorse whoever they want to.  Should be pretty obvious which of the two candidates they're gonna prefer when one is threatening their jobs and thus their livelihood, though.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Saying it is one thing, but if conservatives actually believed it, they wouldn't be flying the confederate flag, or even the "thin blue line" flag for that matter.  They'd be protesting for police reform along with everybody else, because cops kill a whole lot of innocent/non-violent people from _every_ racial and ethnic group on a yearly basis.


Despite being 13% of the population...


Xzi said:


> That's the sad part: a lot more workers are given the day off for Black Friday than election day.


So there's only one election day?


Xzi said:


> They aren't and they can't.  There are multiple different postal workers' unions, however, that are free to endorse whoever they want to.


Those unions shouldn't be handling the votes.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Despite being 13% of the population...


See, this type of thing really doesn't help to prove that modern Republicans have actually moved on from from the Confederate values of old.  Not only do you not care about black lives, I present to you the fact that police murder plenty of Caucasians, Latinos, and others, and you don't care about them either.  You only care about scapegoating others so you can feel a sense of superiority.  No lives matter to the modern conservative, it's all about being self-centered.



UltraSUPRA said:


> So there's only one election day?


One day where all the votes are counted, sure.  Those who are proactive vote ahead of time to make sure their votes are counted.



UltraSUPRA said:


> Those unions shouldn't be handling the votes.


Guess what?  Nobody is free from bias, including the people that count your votes at in-person polling places.  It's not about trust, it's about having enough redundancy and security in our laws and regulations to ensure that votes can't be tampered with.  Mail-in ballots come with a tear-off code that you can input online to see if your vote has been counted, and counted properly toward the candidates of your choice.  Some electronic voting machines print off a receipt in similar fashion, but a whole lot of them don't as well.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> See, this type of thing really doesn't help to prove that modern Republicans have actually moved on from from the Confederate values of old.  Not only do you not care about black lives, I present to you the fact that police murder plenty of Caucasians, Latinos, and others, and you don't care about them either.  You only care about scapegoating others so you can feel a sense of superiority.  No lives matter to the modern conservative, it's all about being self-centered.


Often times, these unarmed "innocents" being killed by the police tried to steal their guns.


Xzi said:


> One day where all the votes are counted, sure.  Those who are proactive vote ahead of time to make sure their votes are counted.


Exactly. You can vote in advance. Therefore, there's not much of an excuse for not showing up if you intend to vote.


Xzi said:


> Guess what?  Nobody is free from bias, including the people that count your votes at in-person polling places.  It's not about trust, it's about having enough redundancy and security in our laws and regulations to ensure that votes can't be tampered with.


Because criminals don't exist.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Often times, these unarmed "innocents" being killed by the police tried to steal their guns.


Which is something police can and should be trained to handle without killing the suspect.  Oftentimes though, local police are jumpy high school dropouts with fewer training hours than barbers or hair stylists.  Again, if conservatives cared about "all lives," they'd be protesting this nonsense.  In reality, they only care about continuing to enforce the systemic racism and classism which has benefited them in one way or another.



UltraSUPRA said:


> Exactly. You can vote in advance. Therefore, there's not much of an excuse for not showing up if you intend to vote.


Voting in advance requires a mail-in or absentee ballot.  I thought that was obvious...



UltraSUPRA said:


> Because criminals don't exist.


The second half of my quote addresses the possibility of a criminal tampering with your vote, which is why you chose to omit it I'm guessing.  The likelihood of a long-time postal worker or civil servant suddenly turning malicious criminal for the purpose of changing a few votes seems low, but again, there's a reason we have redundancy and safeguards throughout the entire election process.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Which is something police can and should be trained to handle without killing the suspect.  Oftentimes though, local police are jumpy high school dropouts with fewer training hours than barbers or hair stylists.  Again, if conservatives cared about "all lives," they'd be protesting this nonsense.  In reality, they only care about continuing to enforce the systemic racism and classism which has benefited them in one way or another.


No. If somebody is trying to steal your gun, it's likely that they're trying to kill you. The only way to handle a murderer is to give then a taste of their own medicine.


Xzi said:


> Voting in advance requires a mail-in or absentee ballot.  I thought that was obvious...


Okay. How long are those places open?


Xzi said:


> The second half of my quote addresses the possibility of a criminal tampering with your vote, which is why you chose to omit it I'm guessing.  The likelihood of a long-time postal worker or civil servant suddenly turning malicious criminal for the purpose of changing a few votes seems low, but again, there's a reason we have redundancy and safeguards throughout the entire election process.


Okay, then I'll go on that section of your last post.


Xzi said:


> Mail-in ballots come with a tear-off code that you can input online to see if your vote has been counted, and counted properly toward the candidates of your choice.  Some electronic voting machines print off a receipt in similar fashion, but a whole lot of them don't as well.


Watch as that website gets hacked by supporters of the pedophile.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> No. If somebody is trying to steal your gun, it's likely that they're trying to kill you. The only way to handle a murderer is to give then a taste of their own medicine.


In other words, murderers can find a safe haven for their psychotic tendencies within the police force?  Sounds about right.



UltraSUPRA said:


> Okay. How long are those places open?


Polling places?  Depends on what state/city we're talking about specifically.  Sometimes they're shut down without any advance notice on the day of the election.



UltraSUPRA said:


> Watch as that website gets hacked by supporters of the pedophile.


You'd have to be more specific, there have been accusations of pedophilia levied at both candidates, though only one of them has actually had a lawsuit filed against him to that effect.

Regardless, hacking the website that reports on the status of ballots being counted would have little to no effect on the election in the long run.  Hacking one of the electronic voting machines used for in-person voting is both a lot easier and can potentially do a lot more damage.


----------



## Mythical (Aug 20, 2020)

I'm convinced they're just trolling at this point


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> In other words, murderers can find a safe haven for their psychotic tendencies within the police force?  Sounds about right.


I never said that.


Xzi said:


> Polling places?  Depends on what state/city we're talking about specifically.  Sometimes they're shut down without any advance notice on the day of the election.


If you're not serious enough to build up enough vacation hours to take one day off, you're not serious enough.


Xzi said:


> You'd have to be more specific, there have been accusations of pedophilia levied at both candidates, though only one of them has actually had a lawsuit filed against him to that effect.


When was Trump accused of pedophilia?


Xzi said:


> Regardless, hacking the website that reports on the status of ballots being counted would have little to no effect on the election in the long run.


A man on the inside counting the votes and doing the hacking could do major damage.


Xzi said:


> Hacking one of the electronic voting machines used for in-person voting is both a lot easier and can potentially do a lot more damage.


It's easier to hack a remotely located machine than a readily-available website?


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

Mythical said:


> I'm convinced their just trolling at this point


More likely than not, but his counter-points, however weak they might be, did present an opportunity to get the thread back on-topic and cover ground that hadn't already been covered.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> If you're not serious enough to build up enough vacation hours to take one day off, you're not serious enough.


A lot of service industry jobs don't do vacation hours at all.  It's not a question of "seriousness" here, it's a question of how many barriers you want to put in place to prevent certain groups of people from voting.



UltraSUPRA said:


> When was Trump accused of pedophilia?


Informally, rumors have been swirling since the 80s or 90s when he was palling around with Jeffrey Epstein on a regular basis.  Formally, a lawsuit accusing Trump of raping a 13-year-old girl was filed against him, though later dropped for unknown reasons (possibly a pay-off or death threats).  Several witnesses saw him enter a "Miss Teen USA" dressing room while underage girls were half-dressed or undressed.  And he's made public, sexually-suggestive comments about his underage and/or baby daughters in the past.  Kind of hard not to draw conclusions.



UltraSUPRA said:


> A man on the inside counting the votes and doing the hacking could do major damage.


That's why there's never just _one_ man who counts the votes, but instead several counters and several spotters for every district.



UltraSUPRA said:


> It's easier to hack a remotely located machine than a readily-available website?


You've got that reversed: a person can walk in to cast their own vote and hack the local electronic machine within a matter of five to ten minutes.  The website is remote, and again, has no actual voter data on it, so it's a far less valuable target.  Not to mention it's a separate website for each state and sometimes even each district, so hitting just one of them would do virtually nothing in the long run.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> A lot of service industry jobs don't do vacation hours at all.  It's not a question of "seriousness" here, it's a question of how many barriers you want to put in place to prevent certain groups of people from voting.


Surely those jobs would have breaks.


Xzi said:


> Informally, rumors have been swirling since the 80s or 90s when he was palling around with Jeffrey Epstein on a regular basis.  Formally, a lawsuit accusing Trump of raping a 13-year-old girl was filed against him, though later dropped for unknown reasons (possibly a pay-off or death threats).  Several witnesses saw him enter a "Miss Teen USA" dressing room while underage girls were half-dressed or undressed.  And he's made public, sexually-suggestive comments about his underage and/or baby daughters in the past.  Kind of hard not to draw conclusions.


The only one with hard evidence is merely speech.


Xzi said:


> That's why there's never just _one_ man who counts the votes, but instead several counters and several spotters for every district.


That's why the DNC never only bribes _one_ man.


Xzi said:


> You've got that reversed: a person can walk in to cast their own vote and hack the local electronic machine within a matter of five to ten minutes.


Perhaps so, but that keeps track of only one county, rather than the USPS having access to the whole country.


Xzi said:


> The website is remote, and again, has no actual voter data on it, so it's a far less valuable target.  Not to mention it's a separate website for each state and sometimes even each district, so hitting just one of them would do virtually nothing in the long run.


But a large group of people on the inside could throw away votes that they didn't like, and hack the databases to say that they were counted correctly.


----------



## TheCasualties (Aug 20, 2020)

Talked to my dad still in the USA and he's been waiting on a late shipment of meds for 5 days now.

Still don't understand how it's ok for this administration to gut the USPS. Why would you get rid of automatic sorting machines and overtime? I know they 'promised' to not gut it anymore but they already did plenty of damage.

I just don't get how everyone isn't outraged.

E:


UltraSUPRA said:


> But a large group of people on the inside could throw away votes that they didn't like, and hack the databases to say that they were counted correctly.



Have you looked into gerrymandering? That shit is absolutely disgusting not matter what side you are on. Whoever is in power controls who's vote counts. Not to mention voter purges.

The system if fucked. Doesn't matter what "side" you are on. They don't give a shit about you. It's all rich assholes that know nothing of the common  person's plight.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Surely those jobs would have breaks.


You mean fifteen minute breaks or thirty minute lunches?  You've already pointed out that it can take up to seven hours or more in line to get your vote counted in person.  Obviously breaks aren't sufficient.



UltraSUPRA said:


> The only one with hard evidence is merely speech.


There's no hard evidence for either candidate, that's why I only stated that both have been _accused_.



UltraSUPRA said:


> That's why the DNC never only bribes _one_ man.


You think a Republican election official bribed by the DNC wouldn't immediately report that to the media?  Or a Democratic election official bribed by the RNC?



UltraSUPRA said:


> Perhaps so, but that keeps track of only one county, rather than the USPS having access to the whole country.


Okay?  The Postmaster General is a Republican who donated to Trump's campaign.  That doesn't make me so paranoid as to believe that he (or anyone else) controls every individual postal worker, or that tampering with sealed ballot envelopes wouldn't be obvious upon arrival.



UltraSUPRA said:


> But a large group of people on the inside could throw away votes that they didn't like, and hack the databases to say that they were counted correctly.


If by "large group," you mean the Illuminati, then sure.  But in that case, they'd have no problem manipulating in-person votes without being detected either.  There's no need for such a massive, multi-faceted and ultra-complex scheme when election tampering can be done right in front of our faces in the form of voter suppression and social media manipulation.


----------



## notimp (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Taxes?
> 
> Taxes?
> 
> ...


Taxes can be structured to be progressive so you can have poorer people still play less, while you have the  middle classes, or god forbid the the affluent pick up the slack.

Its called 'how can a rich country like the US still make itself look like a third world outfit, when it comes to healthcare and homelessness? Your affluent classes all have their minds in business ventures in india mexico or china, and you are playing 'but i can work a barista job in the service industry still, while stepping over the homeless in california?

The american dream is dead. (Social mobility.) But you are content fighting over scraps, while ignoring the people having fallen out of the system, as long as you can still have it better than the immigrant in a border town close to you?

Minimum wage doesnt mean no small businesses, it means less viable business models in precarious sectors, so pressures for upward movement are created again (you have to innovate to keep your low income businesses viable).

That results in more people out of work short term, but the idea is, that you dont ignore them as you have more state income short term as well.


Dont be so stiff, that you can be held in line with the simple 'taxes' argument. I mean, if you are living in a rural environment and your day consists of looking at other peoples houses, and talking about credit paybacks all days congratulation. Did you enjoy the refinancing benefits (credit rates fell - as there is more money looking for return than viable concepts producing economic growth in country). But there are people out there that would benefit immensely from projects/dynamics started off with pooled tax money.

You have a society, where the poor are getting poorer, and the rich have no connection to your countries real world economy anymore (if you arent talking about the energy sector (fracking, cole) where automation eats your jobbase) - and you are actively voting for 'dont change anything state - I have to make morgage paybacks'?

That stance is cowardly.


The reason it apparently "always" worked for the US was, that you exploited your hegemony and always pepped up key industries in country to create jobs. That was free money - that came out of other countries, so you didnt have to talk to your own citizens about higher tax rates.

Those times are over.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

Xzi said:


> You mean fifteen minute breaks or thirty minute lunches?  You've already pointed out that it can take up to seven hours or more in line to get your vote counted in person.  Obviously breaks aren't sufficient.


If they're not sufficient, then how have we been using the electronic ballot system for so long?


Xzi said:


> There's no hard evidence for either candidate, that's why I only stated that both have been _accused_.










Xzi said:


> You think a Republican election official bribed by the DNC wouldn't immediately report that to the media?  Or a Democratic election official bribed by the RNC?


The DNC would know who would report them.


Xzi said:


> Okay?  The Postmaster General is a Republican who donated to Trump's campaign.  That doesn't make me so paranoid as to believe that he (or anyone else) controls every individual postal worker, or that tampering with sealed ballot envelopes wouldn't be obvious upon arrival.


We have machines do it to avoid human error.


Xzi said:


> If by "large group," you mean the Illuminati, then sure.  But in that case, they'd have no problem manipulating in-person votes without being detected either.  There's no need for such a massive, multi-faceted and ultra-complex scheme when election tampering can be done right in front of our faces in the form of voter suppression and social media manipulation.


I'm talking about the unions.


notimp said:


> Taxes can be structured to be progressive so you can have poorer people still play less, while you have the  middle classes, or god forbid the the affluent pick up the slack.


Progressive taxes hurt poor people because they'll want to stay poor rather than having to pay more taxes.


notimp said:


> Its called 'how can a rich country like the US still make itself look like a third world outfit, when it comes to healthcare and homelessness? Your affluent classes all have their minds in business ventures in india mexico or china, and you are playing 'but i can work a barista job in the service industry still, while stepping over the homeless in california?


People are in poverty because they're reliant on the government.


notimp said:


> The american dream is dead. (Social mobility.) But you are content fighting over scraps, while ignoring the people having fallen out of the system, as long as you can still have it better than the immigrant in a border town close to you?


The American Dream is immortal.


notimp said:


> Minimum wage doesnt mean no small businesses, it means less viable business models in precarious sectors, so pressures for upward movement are created again (you have to innovate to keep your low income businesses viable).


"Less valuable business models"? You mean like reasonable prices and good staff?


notimp said:


> That results in more people out of work short term, but the idea is, that you dont ignore them as you have more state income short term as well.


But at the same time, if you've secured a job for years, and then you're fired because you're too expensive, what are you supposed to do?


notimp said:


> Dont be so stiff, that you can be held in line with the simple 'taxes' argument. I mean, if you are living in a rural environment and your day consists of looking at other peoples houses, and talking about credit paybacks all days congratulation. Did you enjoy the refinancing benefits (credit rates fell - as there is more money looking for return than viable concepts producing economic growth in country). But there are people out there that would benefit immensely from projects/dynamics started off with pooled tax money.


The people that benefit from high taxes need to get a better job.


notimp said:


> You have a society, where the poor are getting poorer, and the rich have no connection to your countries real world economy anymore (if you arent talking about the energy sector (fracking, cole) where automation eats your jobbase) - and you are actively voting for 'dont change anything state - I have to make morgage paybacks'?


No, I'm only fifteen. The way to get out of poverty is to get a good job.


notimp said:


> The reason it apparently "always" worked for the US was, that you exploited your hegemony and always pepped up key industries in country to create jobs. That was free money - that came out of other countries, so you didnt have to talk to your own citizens about higher tax rates.
> 
> Those times are over.


The reason why it always works for the US is that people can get better jobs and not have to rely on tax-funded programs. My thoughts are we should raise taxes by 2% for ten years while slowly cutting back on government programs. Once those ten years are up, decrease taxes dramatically.

Still don't believe that these programs are bad? Look at this.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 20, 2020)

@UltraSUPRA your responses are hilarious. Thanks for giving me a chuckle today, I needed that.


----------



## notimp (Aug 20, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Progressive taxes hurt poor people because they'll want to stay poor rather than having to pay more taxes.


But you are raising the floor. So poor jobs get better.

Transitioning is always problematic, but usually people will want to take better jobs, even for low payment increases, if they get them more prestige or decision space, or personal freedom. Also - there are many different jobs with different payment increase curves - so if thats (more money - I can 'feel') what you are interested in, there are those jobs as well. (Maybe less so than before.)

Usually the argument given is, that people would not want to get into the workforce if you dont put up 'existential pressure' (valid, but also mostly untrue.. ). And not that people wouldnt want to grow on a job.


UltraSUPRA said:


> The American Dream is immortal.


The story? Sure. But what it stands for (if you work hard you can get a good life, because your earning 'upwards', in a growing economy) isnt active in american society anymore. Statistically. For most, it has changed to "The american dream of just getting by."



UltraSUPRA said:


> "Less valuable business models"? You mean like reasonable prices and good staff?


Viable. Dude has a business, hires another dude at low cost, scraps by. If that business doesnt produce 'living wage' for the other dude (lets say incl health insurance), if you raise minimum wage - those business either have to 'become better' or die out. In most cases, bosses cut a little less of the top to keep the business running, in some cases they will make the business leaner (but that leads to reliability problems), so eventually they end up innovating to get back on level (or get an even more viable business). And the ones that cant - die out.


UltraSUPRA said:


> But at the same time, if you've secured a job for years, and then you're fired because you're too expensive, what are you supposed to do?


Yes, looking at individual cases sucks. But remember - the idea is, that none of the promises of structural growth are working, service industry accounted for most of new jobs, automation is threatening even more good jobs down the road, and wage growth flatlined. So in the 'do nothing' model you end up with fewer and fewer people being employed, wages still not going up, everyone working taskrabbit and UBER jobs, and then falling out of the system, when a crisis like corona hits ("pseudo" self employed business models you chose between health and livelyhood).
So the idea is, that if you get fired, because you are working a business model that cant afford to pay higher minimum wage - you hopefully get picked up by investment projects that that tax money is supposed to go into. You get retrained. On the other side, you have to get retrained, because there are less 'low qualification' jobs around.


UltraSUPRA said:


> The people that benefit from high taxes need to get a better job.


There arent any around (in quantity).

Thats the key to all of this. Reps say - give tax brakes to companies, companies took tax breaks, invested money in stock buybacks, or in foreign ventures, but almost not at all in domestic production/innovation/wealth creation (wages).

In the past this (sometimes) did work. Currently it mostly does not, as projected growth potential is mostly seen outside of country, so thats where the investment goes.

How do you get investment back into domestic projects (not by doing PR stunts and giving grants to some companies, that will change 'voice' as soon as the grant runs out), but by funding new economies through state investment. Private sector had the chance (and will get it again). But currently they are down on investment potentials within the US.

Most of the jobs created since the financial crisis of 2008 (afair more than 2/3s) were low paying jobs in the service industry. Even if you work that job for 10 years, you are getting no where.


UltraSUPRA said:


> No, I'm only fifteen. The way to get out of poverty is to get a good job.


Unless you dont get education, got sick, got stuck in a service sector job and all 'good jobs' are creating projects in foreign countries (where the growth is).  This is not either or. You are correct also - I'm just showing you another scenario. Both are true at the same time. But again, the chances to get a 'good job' (stable, well paying, fullfilling, ..  ) have become smaller.


UltraSUPRA said:


> The reason why it always works for the US is that people can get better jobs and not have to rely on tax-funded programs. My thoughts are we should raise taxes by 2% for ten years while slowly cutting back on government programs. Once those ten years are up, decrease taxes dramatically.


What do you do with the money then? 

Three points.

- If you are raising taxes, you better should have a good plan, and a need for that money to go to. Otherwise I'm in your camp - don't raise taxes. 

- Tax raises that are only time limited and then 'taken back' never work out that way.  If you got the money, you are spending it (as government, intelligently or not..  ) to get back tax cuts, you'd have to vote in a different government, but thats ok. Thats fine. That works. 

- Some of the changes we are talking about are structural changes (universal health insurance), so if something like this would get esablished, that means sustained higher taxes, but getting something for it in return (better health insurance, or a more pleasant more stable society (f.e.)).

If you can get away from the 'corporate always means more efficient' thinking, you should get it pretty quickly. If the corporate sector doesnt pick up the slack and performs (produces growth, or good stable (meaningful  ) jobs, you pool in money in government, create new investment projects where needed, and if they take off you produce more market competition, forcing the corporate sector to perform (or pay better, or ....) and therefore innovate.

Again, tax rates were much higher in the US way back when - its just post war, when earnings from all around the world got syphoned back to the US producing a long lasting boom.

This 'ended' a little after 2001 (not double checked, please do), the slack was picked up by chinese money flowing into the US economy - people convinced themselves that it was creative financial planning that produced 'stable growth', then it became obvious that it was not and the bubble burst. There was no real sustained growth (house prices didn't rise as before). There hasnt been for quite a long time. (Look at medium wage growth curves, or GDP growth both with inflation factored out (GDP growth also has big company earnings factored in - so less 'shocking'  )).

The Idea on the dem side roughly is, to do health care system reform (you get scalped by corporations there), so you could grow a public health sector with little 'extra spent'. A little environmental tech spending (R&D), issue - that mostly produces growth long term if at all.

And again, if you raise minimum wage - you create innovation pressure in small and medium size enterprises as well. And you cut off the business models that only worked, by paying people below living wages.

People get more money, leisure spending increases > more business opportunities, ...

You just have to make sure, you dont increase income with people who would invest it in stocks, or in loan paybacks, because again - this doesnt create new investment opportunities ('growth potential'), thats just money that then mostly gets invested in india, mexico or china in the current economy. Again, you want to beak that somehow.


Big IF: State investment projects with tax money have to work. But the US has the health care sector it can reform (better for your entire society), and you have infrastructure projects that actually would need investing (moreso than europe afaik), ...

If they do not - you are correct and you just lost quite a few low paying jobs - and have higher welfare costs.

(Another reason why companies dont want to invest in the west currently is demographic development. In a society that first gets older, and then fewer, you have less 'naturally' occurring growth baked in. US is still rather healthy, but you are no baby boomer generation..  (India currently has one - so investment money goes there...  (Free trade agreements. (Which largely arent free trade agreements, but international legal guarantees for investor safety.))


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 20, 2020)

notimp said:


> But you are raising the floor. So poor jobs get better.


And prices go higher.


notimp said:


> The story? Sure. But what it stands for (if you work hard you can get a good life, because your earning 'upwards', in a growing economy) isnt active in american society anymore. Statistically. For most, it has changed to "The american dream of just getting by."


So you can't get promotions?


notimp said:


> Viable. Dude has a business, hires another dude at low cost, scraps by. If that business doesnt produce 'living wage' for the other dude (lets say incl health insurance), if you raise minimum wage - those business either have to 'become better' or die out. In most cases, bosses cut a little less of the top to keep the business running, in some cases they will make the business leaner (but that leads to reliability problems), so eventually they end up innovating to get back on level (or get an even more viable business). And the ones that cant - die out.


There goes the donut shops. (Except for KK and DD, of course.)


notimp said:


> Yes, looking at individual cases sucks. But remember - the idea is, that none of the promises of structural growth are working, service industry accounted for most of new jobs, automation is threatening even more good jobs down the road, and wage growth flatlined. So in the 'do nothing' model you end up with fewer and fewer people being employed, wages still not going up, everyone working taskrabbit and UBER jobs, and then falling out of the system, when a crisis like corona hits ("pseudo" self employed business models you chose between health and livelyhood).
> So the idea is, that if you get fired, because you are working a business model that cant afford to pay higher minimum wage - you hopefully get picked up by investment projects that that tax money is supposed to go into. You get retrained. On the other side, you have to get retrained, because there are less 'low qualification' jobs around.
> 
> There arent any around (in quantity).


Eradicate the minimum wage, let more small businesses open up, and watch as society flourishes with multiple choices at high payments per hour because the lack of small businesses was likely out of fear that the owners wouldn't be able to sustain themselves.


notimp said:


> Unless you dont get education, got sick, got stuck in a service sector job and all 'good jobs' are creating projects in foreign countries (where the growth is).  This is not either or. You are correct also - I'm just showing you another scenario. Both are true at the same time. But again, the chances to get a 'good job' (stable, well paying, fullfilling, ..  ) have become smaller.


There's always something somewhere.


notimp said:


> What do you do with the money then?


Paying off the national debt.


notimp said:


> - Some of the changes we are talking about are structural changes (universal health insurance), so if something like this would get esablished, that means sustained higher taxes, but getting something for it in return (better health insurance, or a more pleasant more stable society (f.e.)).


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> And prices go higher.
> 
> So you can't get promotions?
> 
> ...



And how does this relate to us elections?

Moving on, I'll debunk  the things you said.
1. Prices won't go higher, redistribution of wealth in increasing the minimum wage does not equal inflation.
2. We are garbage compared to other countries in regards to economic mobility
https://reports.weforum.org/social-...ing_wp_cron=1597971670.0124709606170654296875
3. Eradicating the minimum wage would make things worse not better. Have fun with McDonalds paying you 6 dollars an hour or less. (not impossible, especially since all the big companies are in one group together for the most part. and would choke out any small bushiness) 
4 if minimum wage was increased rather than decreased, it would redistribute wealth, meaning getting to the point to start your own business would become easier, not harder. You don't just start a business out of now where with no cash, you need money before hand to start off the right foot.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

Destroying your Credibility with Three Simple Words


monkeyman4412 said:


> redistribution of wealth





Okay, back to being serious.



monkeyman4412 said:


> 1. Prices won't go higher, redistribution of wealth in increasing the minimum wage does not equal inflation.


Increased pricing would be the only thing small businesses could do to maintain a good amount of staff.


monkeyman4412 said:


> Eradicating the minimum wage would make things worse not better. Have fun with McDonalds paying you 6 dollars an hour or less. (not impossible, especially since all the big companies are in one group together for the most part. and would choke out any small bushiness)


Eradicating the minimum wage would, if anything, expose and weed out big, greedy businesses that would turn to sweatshop work if given the option. Small businesses would flourish, and you would make what you earn, encouraging people to work longer and harder for bigger, fatter paychecks.



monkeyman4412 said:


> if minimum wage was increased rather than decreased, it would redistribute wealth, meaning getting to the point to start your own business would become easier, not harder. You don't just start a business out of now where with no cash, you need money before hand to start off the right foot.


And then the money runs out.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Destroying your Credibility with Three Simple Words
> "redistribution of wealth"



That's called social mobility Hun. Money doesn't get printed out of thin air. We already know the top 1% has nearly 95% of the wealth. bumping up wages, would make it less atrocious. really enjoying how hard your trying.






UltraSUPRA said:


> Okay, back to being serious.


Oh good I don't feel like I am dealing with a clown, don't tell me,
I'm about to experience the circus




UltraSUPRA said:


> Increased pricing would be the only thing small businesses could do to maintain a good amount of staff.


Nope, called raising the minimum wage.


UltraSUPRA said:


> Eradicating the minimum wage would, if anything, expose and weed out big, greedy businesses that would turn to sweatshop work if given the option. Small businesses would flourish, and you would make what you earn, encouraging people to work longer and harder for bigger, fatter paychecks.
> 
> 
> And then the money runs out.


*C L O W N
music*

I just explained this one. Don't mind me just going to go quote myself. Also congrats on not refuting any of my arguments. It takes a lot to say nothing.


monkeyman4412 said:


> 3. Eradicating the minimum wage would make things worse not better. Have fun with McDonalds paying you 6 dollars an hour or less. (not impossible, *especially since all the big companies are in one group together for the most part. and would choke out any small bushiness*)
> 4 if minimum wage was increased rather than decreased, it would redistribute wealth, meaning getting to the point to start your own business would become easier, not harder. You don't just start a business out of now where with no cash, you need money before hand to start off the right foot.


Do you really think in our country, as it is right now, removing the minimum wage would enable small business? when the big fish eat the small?
Your not just the clown, your the whole circus.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> That's called social mobility Hun. Money doesn't get printed out of thin air. We already know the top 1% has nearly 95% of the wealth. bumping up wages, would make it less atrocious. really enjoying how hard your trying.


The 1% got there because they worked hard. You should make what you earn. "Redistribution of wealth" is called communism, and it killed millions.


monkeyman4412 said:


> Nope, called raising the minimum wage.


But how are you going to maintain staff if nobody is coming to your business and you're losing money on your employees?


monkeyman4412 said:


> I just explained this one. Don't mind me just going to go quote myself. Also congrats on not refuting any of my arguments. It takes a lot to say nothing.


I was trying to say that without a minimum wage, people would quit Weyland-Yutani en-masse and find better-paying jobs at the local businesses. Companies can't stay open without workers, no matter how big.


monkeyman4412 said:


> Do you really think in our country, as it is right now, removing the minimum wage would enable small business? when the big fish eat the small?


That's capitalism. It ain't perfect, but it's the best there is.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> The 1% got there because they worked hard. You should make what you earn. "Redistribution of wealth" is called communism, and it killed millions.



I lost it at here, your really a clown. Holy shit.
You know what is also a redistribution of wealth? taxes. You also want to know what is redistribution of wealth? Charity
I guess The states must be severely communist then with your logic.


Hell you must be a commie if you pay taxes 2head


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> You know what is also a redistribution of wealth? taxes.


Theft.


monkeyman4412 said:


> You also want to know what is redistribution of wealth? Charity


A choice.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> "You know what is also a redistribution of wealth? taxes."
> Theft..


Ah I see, an anti education person. No need to educate anyone, you like dumb people right? Educators are just leeching off the poooor pooor rich people who make over 20x what a normal American will ever make. W-what's that? Needed program? For future? Ah nah capitalism will have the best human interest, just like climate change!


While we are at it, I guess I gotta unplug my veteran grandfather from the hospital, it will only cost his life


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> Ah I see, an anti education person. No need to educate anyone, you like dumb people right? Educators are just leeching off the poooor pooor rich people who make over 20x what a normal American will ever make. W-what's that? Needed program? For future? Ah nah capitalism will have the best human interest, just like climate change!
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> While we are at it, I guess I gotta unplug my veteran grandfather from the hospital, it will only cost his life


What does any of this have to do with taxation being theft?


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> What does any of this have to do with taxation being theft?


Hmm idk, that maybe just leaving this to corperations won't have people's best interest hence why we have taxes, why we have minimum wage. Oh and it's pretty hard to fund the government and regulations if there is no taxes. I mean idk about you, but uranium make up used to sell. Probably would of been introduced into food products and stay that way, since no one is around the go round up business and tell them not to do things.
companies want nothing but profit
If you honestly believe it's theft, that getting a little money taken from everyone to keep a society functioning  with paved roads,with  a actual functioning government and not axing a veteran who went to war... You need to reevaluate your life decisions if your that fucking petty. And even more petty to believe that, making the richer richer will solve anything, because it simply won't. Capitalism does only profit, it does not consider people. If left alone, business would be choked out, just like how apple had a strangle hold, and still does, over small third party businesses, simply due to apple choking them out.

In other words, I argue taxation isn't theft, it's a social agreement that changes over time, just like how we all agreed to live in a democracy (or supposed to. getting damn close to oligarchy and fascism)
If you don't like taxes, leave the states.


----------



## KingVamp (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> What does any of this have to do with taxation being theft?


Well, I hope you aren't using any "free" roads. We don't want to encourage thief, now do we?


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> Hmm idk, that maybe just leaving this to corperations won't have people's best interest hence why we have taxes, why we have minimum wage. Oh and it's pretty hard to fund the government and regulations if there is no taxes. I mean idk about you, but uranium make up used to sell. Probably would of been introduced into food products and stay that way, since no one is around the go round up business and tell them not to do things.
> companies want nothing but profit
> If you honestly believe it's theft, that getting a little money taken from everyone to keep a society functioning  with paved roads,with  a actual functioning government and not axing a veteran who went to war... You need to reevaluate your life decisions if your that fucking petty. And even more petty to believe that, making the richer richer will solve anything, because it simply won't. Capitalism does only profit, it does not consider people. If left alone, business would be choked out, just like how apple had a strangle hold, and still does, over small third party businesses, simply due to apple choking them out.


Did you even read the rest of my post?


monkeyman4412 said:


> In other words, I argue taxation isn't theft, it's a social agreement that changes over time, just like how we all agreed to live in a democracy (or supposed to. getting damn close to oligarchy and fascism)
> If you don't like taxes, leave the states.


Do you have any idea what fascism even is?


KingVamp said:


> Well, I hope you aren't using any "free" roads. We don't want encourage thief, now do we?


Have you tried investing in an ATV?


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Did you even read the rest of my post?


what the charity part? That had little to no substance of discussion? Since charity is choice? but still supports my point that redistribution of wealth means many things and it doesn't strictly mean communism?



UltraSUPRA said:


> Do you have any idea what fascism even is?


yes, now do you know the stages of it? Because I do.
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2018/07/30/Fourteen-Steps-To-Fascism/
tell me that these don't sound very familiar. And what I just linked btw, was made in 1995.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> what the charity part? That had little to no substance of discussion? Since charity is choice? but still supports my point that redistribution of wealth means many things and it doesn't strictly mean communism?


No, the other post. The one where I said that redistribution of wealth is the basis of communism.


monkeyman4412 said:


> yes


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> No, the other post. The one where I said that redistribution of wealth is the basis of communism.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinesh_D'Souza
huh
let me read this line
"Dinesh Joseph D'Souza (/dɪˈnɛʃ dəˈsuːzə/; born April 25, 1961) is an Indian-born *American far-right political *provocateur, author, filmmaker, and *conspiracy theorist*"
did you just piss yourself? or did you forget that PragU is very right leaning? Of course they would defend their own person. Conflict of interest? very.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



UltraSUPRA said:


> No, the other post. The one where I said that redistribution of wealth is the basis of communism.


Pretty sure you have communism conflated with socialism
https://www.thoughtco.com/difference-between-communism-and-socialism-195448
"Ownership of Economic Resources" (communism): All economic resources are publicly owned and controlled by the government. Individuals hold no personal property or assets."
That's not really redistributing wealth, since no one really owns wealth or really money.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinesh_D'Souza
> huh
> let me read this line
> "Dinesh Joseph D'Souza (/dɪˈnɛʃ dəˈsuːzə/; born April 25, 1961) is an Indian-born *American far-right political *provocateur, author, filmmaker, and *conspiracy theorist*"
> did you just piss yourself? or did you forget that PragU is very right leaning? Of course they would defend their own person. Conflict of interest? very.


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


monkeyman4412 said:


> Pretty sure you have communism conflated with socialism
> https://www.thoughtco.com/difference-between-communism-and-socialism-195448
> "Ownership of Economic Resources" (communism): All economic resources are publicly owned and controlled by the government. Individuals hold no personal property or assets."
> That's not really redistributing wealth, since no one really owns wealth or really money.


0:0 is still an equal ratio. It's still Marxism, regardless.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Gentile


Oh you thought I just linked a random person for no reason?
You do realize the person I linked, is the person in that video. Guess you weren't really fact checking.



UltraSUPRA said:


> 0:0 is still an equal ratio.


That's one of hell of a stretch. I also guess you didn't read the thing I sent you. so here's the socialism part

"Ownership of Economic Resources (socialism): individuals own personal property but all industrial and production capacity is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government."
Realize the significant difference, one is owned by government. the other is not. (to boil that down. each corperation head is democratically elected in socialism. Meaning that someone technically owns it. While in communism there is no such thing as business, the government is the business." There is no wealth to have in communism, you work harder you get the same. And it's not money, same food, same housing.
Now if you trying to put me into the "he's a commie" box. You would be sadly wrong. Since I am capitalist, and communism is the exact opposite to captalism


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> Oh you thought I just linked a random person for no reason?
> You do realize the person I linked, is the person in that video. Guess you weren't really fact checking.


No, I noticed. I posted my link because I wanted you to know that the video wasn't a conspiracy itself.
Giovanni Gentile created fascism, inspired by Karl Marx.


monkeyman4412 said:


> That's one of hell of a stretch. I also guess you didn't read the thing I sent you. so here's the socialism part
> 
> "Ownership of Economic Resources (socialism): individuals own personal property but all industrial and production capacity is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government."


So all businesses are owned by the government. Meaning small businesses can't even exist.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> No, I noticed. I posted my link because I wanted you to know that the video wasn't a conspiracy itself.
> Giovanni Gentile created fascism, inspired by Karl Marx."


wasn't saying that fascism was a conspiracy, was bringing up the guy is a conspiracy theorist  along with supporting the far-right. which destroys his overall credibility (why would I bring it up if it was a conspiracy, be pretty stupid)



UltraSUPRA said:


> So all businesses are owned by the government. Meaning small businesses can't even exist.


Let me just put them side by side.
"Ownership of Economic Resources (socialism):* individuals own personal property* but all industrial *and production capacity is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government*."

"Ownership of Economic Resources" (communism): *All economic resources are publicly owned* and controlled by the government. *Individuals hold no personal property or assets.*"

I don't know if you see the difference, so let me bold it for you.
Communism means you share with everyone.
Socialism means you have your own belongings. Second it also means that you don't exactly own the business, people have to elect you to own it.

How does this go back to distribution of wealth? Due to having belongings which hold value, that would be more a redistribution of wealth (socialism) since at any moment you can be booted from your position if your peers disagree. and implied money/income. While communism isn't that, since technically no one person has wealth since it's all in the public.

Now Let's go back to wages. And just explain how it doesn't fit.
In a capitalist society, you still own things. Already goes against communism. Second people at the top are still going to be at the top in capitalism. This does not change the social hierarchy. Only what a wage increase does is increase social mobility, or the chance to reach the top. Not topple the entire hierarchy.
As say, a full socialism and communism.

Therefore, (minimum) Wages are not communist.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Eradicating the minimum wage would, if anything, expose and weed out big, greedy businesses that would turn to sweatshop work if given the option. Small businesses would flourish, and you would make what you earn, encouraging people to work longer and harder for bigger, fatter paychecks.



Minimum wage is lowered to absolute peanuts/eliminated.
John Q Public has an even harder time gathering the capital through regular jobs to start his own business.
John Q Public wants to take out a loan to start his business but isn't approved because of how little he makes.
John Q Public keeps working his $4 an hour job because that's all MegaCorp is paying their employees and his best shot at saving up money to get his business started. He has an even harder time making ends meet now because he's making less than before yet the general market has not adjusted for the lower baseline wages that the majority of the workforce is making, so he can't save much money to get his business started anyway.

John Q Public's small business is not flourishing because it died before it was even born.


----------



## notimp (Aug 21, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> And prices go higher.


Yes but thats money that flows into 'industry', or retail, or production, hopefully creating a boom in industry, retail or production. 



UltraSUPRA said:


> So you can't get promotions?


Only the meaningless kind. Barista grandgeneral or something. Management of managing everyones believes. CSR.

But you have a point there. If taxes are hiked up for middleclasses their 'individual dreams' might still not be realizable (lets say for most).

So lets look at approaches:

1: Tax people, create investment structures, create new sectors with growth potential, help everyone out that way - kinda. Also, maybe everyone gets healthcare out of it.

2: Stick to status quo, keep taxes low, take state investment money (currently because of COVID), that is "invented" (made up, but you can, because under COVID everyone is - so it doesnt impact your international competitiveness that much), and create more bullshit jobs with it (positions managing useless projects, preferably circularly, and that are only there for people to not revolt, or because the government asked you), and invest heavily into CSR. (CSR = bullshit, that the company cares about social impact at least equal to bottom line - literally lying to all your employees and everyone around, just so they feel better and dont revolt).

Which approach seems preferable. 


UltraSUPRA said:


> There goes the donut shops. (Except for KK and DD, of course.)


I don't think so. More disposable income for the poor, so more leisure spending.
Germany raised minimum wage recently and the 'fallout' was - literally nothing (on the negative side). No higher jobless numbers, nothing. Now, that doesnt always have to work out that way - but it can.


UltraSUPRA said:


> Eradicate the minimum wage, let more small businesses open up, and watch as society flourishes with multiple choices at high payments per hour because the lack of small businesses was likely out of fear that the owners wouldn't be able to sustain themselves.


But now employees cant sustain themselves. Even though they are working, so high social unrest potential. Your ideal society cant be one, where many people have to sustain on food stamp projects, even though they are working full time. Its called a 'floor' (raising the floor) for a reason.


UltraSUPRA said:


> There's always something somewhere.


Hey are we telling bedtime stories to each other, or looking at this statistically.  Yes, there is always an outlier somewhere. 


UltraSUPRA said:


> Paying off the national debt.


Why. 

Here is the basic story on national debt: At one point some professor said debt to GDP ratio cant be higher than 70% or your economy will default. That then became IMF/World bank doctrine. Then some of his stundents found out, that his excel sheet was faulty. 

Also - current US investments into the economy are huge (I think I heard a figure floating around that billionaires in the US gained an average of 10bn each during the COVID crisis), and this is possible, because everyone is increasing national debt during COVID.

At the same time, money for the state (even from private investors) is cheap as never before (Germanys interest rates for 10 year bonds were negative at one point (investors gave them money to take their money and promise to return it in 10 years)).

And all you want to do with this money - is... Better the borrowing conditions of future generations. No actual economic action for people on the ground.

Again - millenials havent seen sustained growth in their lifetime, 2/3 of jobs created are 'service the customer longtime' BS without perspective, you've maybe got an alltime high in joblessness after COVID-19, big investor money never reaches the economy on the ground in your own country, climate change might kill you if unadressed - and you want to do nothing about that?

National debt, usually is supposed to be inflated away. Not 'payed back' by everyone 'saving up'. What would china do with more money? What would private investors do with more investment capital. They already are facing a problem of having too much of it and too few 'investable opportunities' in western countries. They would invest more of it in india, china and mexico, and then? The US could borrow more of it again for future generations to do what?

Why are there sectors, where private investors don't invest but a state might? Usually, too much long term risk, or 'creating something' requires a political mandate. (F.e.: Climate change > everyone has to change their personal outlook and behavior a little > this needs to be induced through political change).


----------



## notimp (Aug 21, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> 1. Prices won't go higher, redistribution of wealth in increasing the minimum wage does not equal inflation.


Eventually it will. Producers of 'needed goods of daily life' will increase prices.  At least in my country, usually.


UltraSUPRA said:


> Increased pricing would be the only thing small businesses could do to maintain a good amount of staff.


But small businesses will not have a big impact on general price structure, regardless of what they do. If you produce a needed good of daily life, you usually arent a small company.

So in those cases (f.e. small company produces a product that will go into a bigger product) production chains have a bunch of other options to deal with those price increases - and they wont factor as prominently in 'costs of daily living'. If they immediately do, you know that you have a price cartel in a certain economic sector.. 

Donut shop might have to cut employees, but thats not a good of daily life.  And that way they could hold their pricepoint. In reality 'artisan' donuts are high margin items (overpriced) anyhow, so if you arent able to pay your employees a little higher minimum wage, when everyone has to, your operation sucks, and maybe deserves to go out of business.. 


UltraSUPRA said:


> Eradicating the minimum wage would, if anything, expose and weed out big, greedy businesses that would turn to sweatshop work if given the option. Small businesses would flourish, and you would make what you earn, encouraging people to work longer and harder for bigger, fatter paychecks.


Expose?  The opposite is true. In an economy like the one you are describing, sustaining yourself becomes a problem, so jobsecurity would be something you'd also immediately look for (because you'll need multiple jobs to just sustain yourself), thats an advantage for the big honchos.  At the same time you'd have immediate social unrest (everyone hungry and 'willing to work for food') and a 'people around here cant afford the products they are producing' problem (something Henry Ford had to do something about).

The lesson of industrialization was, that you had to pay your workers more, not less to be of basically any use, and not sabotage your process all the time. This struggle brought us social security nets in the first place. (Because they increased, not decreased productivity.)


UltraSUPRA said:


> The 1% got there because they worked hard. You should make what you earn. "Redistribution of wealth" is called communism, and it killed millions.


Thats an absolute lie.

On both accounts.

If you dont just look at millionaires/bilionaires (where aboiut two thirds are still self made (broadly catalyzed by new opportunities in technology and in emerging economies (india, china, mexico) src: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/26/maj...est-people-are-self-made-says-new-report.html ), you'll see this picture:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...and-dad-student-university-debt-a7509801.html

Again: The american dream is dead. For most people.
-

Redistribution of wealth is a normal function of government. In fact, its pretty much one of the only reasons why government exists.

Market economies are not fair. There are winners and losers. And if you done made another Detroit, you have to invest in sustaining infrastructure and people, because building that stuff up again, the next time some spoiled prick like you has a great business idea, that would work there, is far more costly than - sustaining it at a low level even for decades.

You are just a 15 year old fool, who knows absolutely nothing, but spews ideology. Learn some stuff, then come back again.

Dont try to push people out of discussion by asserting "redistribution of wealth is communism", no - its freaking what you pay taxes for Bobby.

edit: Here, read this: https://www.vox.com/2016/5/23/11704246/wealth-inequality-cartoon

and this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistribution_of_income_and_wealth


----------



## notimp (Aug 21, 2020)

Roughly the same discussion we had in here summed up:


----------



## omgcat (Aug 22, 2020)

prices for everyday goods have been rising for years independently of minimum wage. we need to establish a new minimum wage and peg it to inflation/productivity. if productivity is increasing(which it has massively) then wages must reflect that as well.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 28, 2020)




----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 29, 2020)




----------



## TheCasualties (Aug 31, 2020)

Lol so what is that supposed to show? People want express their anger? 

So I have a question, How are they saying this situation is "Biden's America"? Everyone I know is .. Basically 'amazed'

I'm  honestly hopeful for everyone growing up in this new generation.The US Government is supposed to be *for the people*. But now it's all about tax cuts for the rich.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Aug 31, 2020)

TheCasualties said:


> Lol so what is that supposed to show? People want express their anger?


In a ridiculously large crowd. Right next to each other.


Do you still say we can't vote in person?


----------



## TheCasualties (Aug 31, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> In a ridiculously large crowd. Right next to each other.
> 
> 
> Do you still say we can't vote in person?


I love you.


----------



## notimp (Aug 31, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> In a ridiculously large crowd. Right next to each other.
> 
> 
> Do you still say we can't vote in person?


Its called hyper spreader event.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 31, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> In a ridiculously large crowd. Right next to each other.
> 
> 
> Do you still say we can't vote in person?


Nobody's saying YOU can't vote in person.  Nobody's saying that these protesters aren't taking a risk by ignoring social distancing guidelines either.  That doesn't mean the same amount of risk should be required for people who simply want to have their votes counted in a supposedly democratic country.  If the idea is to get as many people involved in our elections process as possible, then universal mail-in voting is the way to go even when we aren't in the midst of a pandemic.

On top of coronavirus to worry about, it's becoming increasingly likely that Trump supporters will be out intimidating and assaulting anyone in line to vote who doesn't have MAGA gear on.  Just look at what's happening to random pedestrians in Portland right now, drive-by macings and shootings with frozen paintballs.

Of course, we've gone round in circles on this topic a million times by now.  You want fewer votes cast because rampant voter suppression is the only means Republicans have of winning in the modern day.  You don't want democracy, you want oligarchy akin to what China and Russia have.


----------



## deficitdisorder (Sep 1, 2020)

The number of voting frauds cases is a rounding error in favor of zero. Trumps own appointment commission to root out fraud in the 2016 election disbanded when they found literally nothing. 

I like how this system of voting thats been used for literally a century is now somehow considered a massive fraudulent problem.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 1, 2020)

Unfortunately since orange man said "mail vote bad" (while also trying to sabotage the mail system) quite a few of his followers believe it. Trying to refute will just result them not properly refuting the argument, or using circular thinking or some other logical fallacy.


----------



## Hanafuda (Sep 2, 2020)

Ok so if mail-in voting is what the Left wants for the sake of Covid-19 safety (c'mon, man), and the USPS has already said getting all mailed-in ballots to their destination will take some days, then shouldn't we have a postmark deadline for mailing your ballot??? Let's say all ballots must be mailed by October 30, or else you go vote in person if you still want to vote. That way, all the mail-in ballots are delivered and counted in time for election day/night, and we can have a settled and reliable election result. 

Fauci and Birx both have said in-person voting would be fine and safe, but since there is still (for some reason) so much insistence on the Left for voting by mail (I mean, we all know why) ... shouldn't this mailing deadline be something we all agree to as a compromise worth saving the integrity of the election?


----------



## Xzi (Sep 2, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> Ok so if mail-in voting is what the Left wants for the sake of Covid-19 safety (c'mon, man), and the USPS has already said getting all mailed-in ballots to their destination will take some days, then shouldn't we have a postmark deadline for mailing your ballot??? Let's say all ballots must be mailed by October 30, or else you go vote in person if you still want to vote. That way, all the mail-in ballots are delivered and counted in time for election day/night, and we can have a settled and reliable election result.
> 
> Fauci and Birx both have said in-person voting would be fine and safe, but since there is still (for some reason) so much insistence on the Left for voting by mail (I mean, we all know why) ... shouldn't this mailing deadline be something we all agree to as a compromise worth saving the integrity of the election?


Best practice was already mailing in/dropping off your ballots as far ahead of time as possible, and that's doubly important in this election when you've got Trump's pet postmaster general deactivating sorting machines and removing as many mail dropboxes as possible from urban areas.

That said, if you continue to believe that voter fraud is much more prevalent through the mail than it is in-person, despite all evidence to the contrary, then I'm not sure why you would believe an earlier deadline somehow fixes the issue.


----------



## Hanafuda (Sep 2, 2020)

Xzi said:


> Best practice was already mailing in/dropping off your ballots as far ahead of time as possible, and that's doubly important in this election when you've got Trump's pet postmaster general deactivating sorting machines and removing as many mail dropboxes as possible from urban areas.
> 
> That said, if you continue to believe that voter fraud is much more prevalent through the mail than it is in-person, despite all evidence to the contrary, then I'm not sure why you would believe an earlier deadline somehow fixes the issue.




As I said, I believe it is the entire country's best interest if we can have the election settled in one night, as per mostly usual, and that the majority of the population can get on with the next day. Of course there is the possibility of a 'too close to call' deal, there is every time. But what I'm concerned about is mail-in ballots continuing to show up, being "found" after the fact ... the kind of shenanigans that already happens in some cases. Remember the Franken vs. Coleman election for Senate? Remember Bush v. Gore??? Democrats have this curious tendency of finding ballots for weeks after an election, in the backs of cars, in basements ... dismiss the possibility of fraud if you like but that shit happened. If we have to wait for "every vote" to come in through the mail after election day, there's going to be a lot of people having difficulty accepting the result. If it looks like Trump has won, Democrats will object that there's no way to know if every vote came in yet, if Trump somehow gamed the mail deliveries, etc. But if it looks like Trump has won on election night (Democrats are already conceding this likelihood, because a higher % of Democrats are expected to vote by mail) and then for days after election day Republicans watch that win being whittled down as more ballots show up and then more ballots show up and then more ballots show up, just enough showing up until Biden edges Trump out everywhere necessary to pull out the swing states, the Republicans aren't going to have any faith in it either.

So that's why I suggested the mail-in deadline. Two weeks should be enough for the ballots to get delivered to their local precincts. If the ballot is postmarked on or before October 30 (I just picked a mostly arbitrary date, two weeks in advance of the election, but it could be a different date) then it gets counted, on election day, along with all the in-person votes. After October 30, even if you received a mail ballot, it's too late, the deadline passed, go vote in person if it matters that much. That way, ALL of the ballots are "in" by the evening of election day. And we can almost certainly have a definite result, that night. No repeat of Bush v Gore, hanging chads (in this case, postage due???) etc. That was a damaging farce, I don't want to see it repeated, but right now it's like we're on a bullet train for even worse.

So, it's not about whether some level of fraud happens anyway even with in-person voting. It's just that mailing in ballots, besides the obvious hole in chain of custody involved, also creates this after election day trickle of uncertainty that isn't good for anybody. 

Here's a video from earlier today from Tim Pool. I think you probably know who he is, but he was a major figure during Occupy Wall Street, he was an Obama Democrat, he was a Bernie supporter in 2016 ... now voting to re-elect Trump. You don't have to agree with his opinions, I'm just posting this to address the so-called "Red Mirage" thing the Democrats are foreshadowing us with, to normalize us to the idea that there will be an influx of post-election day ballots. All perfectly normal and valid, we told you this would happen ... go back to sleep.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

Government bad. Get rid of Government, keep USPS, and keep it non-for-profit.

Everyone wins.


----------



## Xzi (Sep 2, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> As I said, I believe it is the entire country's best interest if we can have the election settled in one night, as per mostly usual, and that the majority of the population can get on with the next day. Of course there is the possibility of a 'too close to call' deal, there is every time. But what I'm concerned about is mail-in ballots continuing to show up, being "found" after the fact


I'd also prefer if it could be settled in one night, and that's precisely why I'm so pissed about the attempts to kneecap USPS' efficiency.  All the worst-case scenarios you discuss in your post could easily be avoided if the Trump administration had just provided _more_ resources and manpower to the USPS instead of _less_.



Hanafuda said:


> But if it looks like Trump has won on election night (Democrats are already conceding this likelihood, because a higher % of Democrats are expected to vote by mail) and then for days after election day Republicans watch that win being whittled down as more ballots show up and then more ballots show up and then more ballots show up, just enough showing up until Biden edges Trump out everywhere necessary to pull out the swing states, the Republicans aren't going to have any faith in it either.


I can only conclude that this is very much Trump's intentional strategy, to declare victory as early as possible with only 50% to 75% of the votes being reported, and prior to many important battleground states actually having been called for either candidate.  Then cry foul later, call it an illegitimate election, demand Barr open an investigation, etc and so forth.  It's a desperation play, and it certainly gives the appearance that he knows he's likely to lose.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

Seliph said:


> Government bad. Get rid of Government, keep USPS, and keep it non-for-profit.
> 
> Everyone wins.


Anarchy leads to chaos.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Anarchy leads to chaos.


Anarchy is cool actually.

Also, you act like Capitalism doesn't? Look at all the chaos going on right now.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

Seliph said:


> Anarchy is cool actually.
> 
> Also, you act like Capitalism doesn't? Look at all the chaos going on right now.


Now imagine if there wasn't anyone to stop it.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Now imagine if there wasn't anyone to stop it.


I don't have to, that's already the case. Living conditions are getting worse and worse in the US, millions are unemployed and face eviction. No one seems to be trying to stop this except for the people?


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

Seliph said:


> I don't have to, that's already the case. Living conditions are getting worse and worse in the US, millions are unemployed and face eviction. No one seems to be trying to stop this except for the people?


You've been trying to disband the people who are supposed to stop the riots.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> You've been trying to disband the people who are supposed to stop the riots.


Yeah, cuz if we got rid of them then there wouldn't BE riots. We can no longer depend on corporations, the police, or the lame stinky government. The only thing we can depend on is the power of ourselves and others through mutual aid and support. I've seen this power in action and it looks way cooler than police attacking and arresting demonstrators every goddamn night.

Go read some Errico Malatesta, it would do you good.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

Seliph said:


> Yeah, cuz if we got rid of them then there wouldn't BE riots. We can no longer depend on corporations, the police, or the lame stinky government. The only thing we can depend on is the power of ourselves and others through mutual aid and support. I've seen this power in action and it looks way cooler than police attacking and arresting demonstrators every goddamn night.
> 
> Go read some Errico Malatesta, it would do you good.


The only way to stop criminals is through fear.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> The only way to stop criminals is through fear.


Now THAT's a hot take right there lmao


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

Seliph said:


> Now THAT's a hot take right there lmao


I mean the only thing keeping me from constantly saying the 'N' word (other than my no-swearing rule) is the fear of a ban.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> I mean the only thing keeping me from constantly saying the 'N' word (other than my no-swearing rule) is the fear of a ban.


Oh my


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> The only way to stop criminals is through fear.


Well, if we have learned nothing, we must  consider about how much illegal crap the president has done, or how much of the rich has gotten away with illegal acts. I don't think "fear" is going to work unless it's actually acted no? Which in this case it hasn't, and the rich has mostly set up home base with the government. While more closely eying the poor since they don't have as much money. or, in other words, as much power. Why have an issue when you can just lobby the senator? Send many people as you can to overwhelm the real situation. With the amount of loopholes set up, I honestly don't believe there is any fear for the rich. They simply are often above the law. Trump is a proven case of that. I don't think I have to enumerate everything illegal he has done. and this isn't just about him. there are plenty others.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

monkeyman4412 said:


> Well, if we have learned nothing, we must  consider about how much illegal crap the president has done, or how much of the rich has gotten away with illegal acts. I don't think "fear" is going to work unless it's actually acted no? Which in this case it hasn't, and the rich has mostly set up home base with the government. While more closely eying the poor since they don't have as much money. or, in other words, as much power. Why have an issue when you can just lobby the senator? Send many people as you can to overwhelm the real situation. With the amount of loopholes set up, I honestly don't believe there is any fear for the rich. They simply are often above the law. Trump is a proven case of that. I don't think I have to enumerate everything illegal he has done. and this isn't just about him. there are plenty others.


What did Trump do?
As for rich people, they often pay the most in taxes, which goes to the city, which goes to the prisons. A rich person who goes to jail gets to play tennis as long as (s)he wants.


----------



## Hanafuda (Sep 2, 2020)

Xzi said:


> I can only conclude that this is very much Trump's intentional strategy, to declare victory as early as possible with only 50% to 75% of the votes being reported, and prior to many important battleground states actually having been called for either candidate.  Then cry foul later, call it an illegitimate election, demand Barr open an investigation, etc and so forth.  It's a desperation play, and it certainly gives the appearance that he knows he's likely to lose.



I don't agree with your predictions for how it'll go, but I'm well aware of the Biden voters' concerns. You're aware of the concerns of Trump voters, even if you dismiss them. We would both prefer to avoid it.

So why not set a deadline for mailing ballots that accommodates voters and USPS so they can ALL be counted by midnight Nov 3? You never said if you thought it was a good plan. It's not like it's an unprecedented or unfair procedure ... most states that accommodate early voting already have a date sometime prior to the election when it ends. Mailed in ballots only have to cross town in 99.9% of cases, so two weeks should be more than enough time.


----------



## omgcat (Sep 2, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> I don't agree with your predictions for how it'll go, but I'm well aware of the Biden voters' concerns. You're aware of the concerns of Trump voters, even if you dismiss them. We would both prefer to avoid it.
> 
> So why not set a deadline for mailing ballots that accommodates voters and USPS so they can ALL be counted by midnight Nov 3? You never said if you thought it was a good plan. It's not like it's an unprecedented or unfair procedure ... most states that accommodate early voting already have a date sometime prior to the election when it ends. Mailed in ballots only have to cross town in 99.9% of cases, so two weeks should be more than enough time.




that would be a good idea if the USPS wasn't actively being gutted by the trump administration. Dejoy is a trump donor, and U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors chairman Robert Duncan was the director of a major GOP super PAC. Mail sorting machines that were super expensive to buy and cheap as fuck to run are being stripped out and dismantled which makes zero sense. until these two people we're put in place, the USPS was handling the pandemic shipping load just fine. The GOP are actively trying to suppress the vote in very specific zip codes. some of the most blatant corruption i have ever seen







Real rural American's understand how integral the USPS is to small rural businesses. FedEx and UPS do not and will not take over last-mile delivery because it would cost them more money than they would make with the package flow, that's business. this is why the USPS is a "service" not a business. Anyone who votes for someone who hurts the USPS is voting to hurt rural Americans, plain and simple.


----------



## Xzi (Sep 2, 2020)

Hanafuda said:


> So why not set a deadline for mailing ballots that accommodates voters and USPS so they can ALL be counted by midnight Nov 3? You never said if you thought it was a good plan.


The fundamental issue is that it should be unnecessary to move the deadline at all, given that with proper equipment and funding, USPS would have no problem delivering ballots same-day, in some cases within hours of receiving them.  Instead, with all mail being sorted by hand, and with postal workers being denied overtime, there's no guarantee that setting a deadline even a month ahead of the election would ensure all ballots are counted by midnight November 3rd.  And that's just where domestic ballots are concerned...you can't forget that ballots from American citizens living overseas/troops stationed overseas also have to be delivered by USPS (just as things were pre-COVID too).


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> What did Trump do?
> As for rich people, they often pay the most in taxes, which goes to the city, which goes to the prisons. A rich person who goes to jail gets to play tennis as long as (s)he wants.


well. let's start with the fact he has created multiple fake/scam businesses that had to be shut down. allocated campaign dollars to things that are not his campaign. Trump illegally reallocating funds to build his "wall" (this isn't me just saying that, as the 9th circuit court said no, that's illegal. And it is since funding has to be allocated and allowed by congress.) And that's the tip of the iceberg. Like, TINY tip.



And no rich people don't pay taxes, most of them do tax evasion. This is also already well known.


----------



## TheCasualties (Sep 2, 2020)

Fear is the worst way to run a country. How could you possibly think that's a good idea? That is literally a fascist society. It baffles me how so many people are ok with USA becoming fascist. I fear the UN will have to intervene at some point and WW3 will start in Trumps 2nd term.



Seliph said:


> Oh my


Honestly I don't know how we can reach this kind of person with reason. You'd think kindness and compassion, understanding of other's problems would be obvious. But it seems like  "every man for themselves" now. I miss the old days of neighbors helping eachother and being friends with your fellow man. Hell, that's why I left.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

TheCasualties said:


> Hell, that's why I left.


You left? Lucky.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

TheCasualties said:


> Fear is the worst way to run a country. How could you possibly think that's a good idea? That is literally a fascist society. It baffles me how so many people are ok with USA becoming fascist. I fear the UN will have to intervene at some point and WW3 will start in Trumps 2nd term.


1. When I say fear, I'm talking about how when you're young, and your parents catch you doing something bad, you get grounded. I'm not talking like a dystopian future like Hunger Games, I'm talking about what we already have in place, but with better cops.
2. Fascism is when people willingly subordinate themselves to the state.


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> 2. Fascism is when people willingly subordinate themselves to the state.



No. I mean, that can be an aspect of Fascism, but willing subordination to the state doesn't automatically make the state Fascist. If that were the case then you could call any society dictated by the state a Fascist society, and I don't think you want to do that.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 2, 2020)

Seliph said:


> No. I mean, that can be an aspect of Fascism, but willing subordination to the state doesn't automatically make the state Fascist. If that were the case then you could call any society dictated by the state a Fascist society, and I don't think you want to do that.


Have you ever heard of Giovanni Gentile?


----------



## Ryccardo (Sep 2, 2020)

I consider distance voting a perfectly valid concept, and it better be since I disagree with indirect (elective) democracy in the first place


----------



## Seliph (Sep 2, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Have you ever heard of Giovanni Gentile?


Of course


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 12, 2020)

So this is a bit of a bump, but I found a good meme.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 12, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> So this is a bit of a bump, but I found a good meme.
> View attachment 224585


you_: ignores what everyone has been saying, mentioning that there is verification for mail in votes_
Everyone: _Would you please *kindly *understand your spewing misinformation, and listen, we've told you many times over, there is verification, the effort of proof for vote by mail is high enough that it's borderline impossible, and too risky to create a fraudulent vote. _
you: *FaKe NeWs LiBeRaLs OuT to CaUsE fRaUd*
hopefully this is a good meme.


----------



## notimp (Sep 26, 2020)

FBI director: He is unaware of a coordinated attempt of voter fraud in the US, mail or otherwise, ever:


----------

