US Politics: Guns versus Butter

[DanteGabriel]

15 minutes ago, Rhom said:

NBC News:  Nearly Three Dozen US Voting systems found connected to the Internet

Again.  I'm not enough of a nut job to think the Venezuelans were changing votes in Minnesota.  I do think that even having the possibility should be something we should uniformly restrict.

The Iowa Democratic caucuses were a mess because they used a web app to tabulate the votes instead of the old fashioned way of calling them in.  

I don't think its crazy to ask that for federal elections, we have one standard and then if a state wants to do something different for its own elections... well, have at it.

I've been going on about insecure election machines since 2004, when some Diebold machines were easily hacked.

I am all for federalizing elections. But I suspect the Republican Party is not. Because when each state is its own idiosyncratic mess, it's easier to fuck over minority populations. Which is exactly what Republican state legislatures have done since the Roberts Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013. Your local official may do her thing a certain way, but it is a fact that the Republican Party wants to make registration and voting inconvenient or impossible for more people.

You say you're all for early voting and your neighbors are too? That's great. You sound kind of like a Democrat when you talk about these issues.

Lots of conservatives love the convenience of early voting and voting by mail, and then somehow it becomes a scare word as soon as the prospect of black and brown people using the same system arises. They see no contradiction in that, like Trump voting by mail while screaming lies about vote fraud by mail. I guess voting convenience, for the right wing, is like welfare, opioid treatment, and the 2nd Amendment: a God-given right for me and mine, but a threat to the American way of life when it's a non-white person doing it.

[Jaxom 1974]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

 

Most of the older, white Republican voters that I talked to around here loved the early access voting.  They would like to see that expanded.  

 

Then perhaps these stalwart Republican voters need to be communicating that to their elected officials, because that's the polar opposite of what Republicans want.  Unless you mean they want it because the county you and they are in is predominantly white and Republican already?  Or were they in favor of seeing it expanded for everyone across your state, regardless of voting patterns?

Maybe this is true, as you say, but at the same time, it kinds feels like the, "I have a black friend" defense...

[Fez]

33 minutes ago, Rhom said:

When I go to vote, there are two types machines available to me.  One involves taking essentially a scantron behind a divider booth and then feeding it into a machine out in the open.  I'm sure that sort of machine is what you are referring to.  The other option, I have only used one time.  There is a wheel and a screen.  You spin the wheel until the cursor is over the name of your choice and then you hit a button to lock in that selection.  I have never seen a paper record of that process.

We have 50 states and about a 1000 different voting procedures is what I've seen.     

How long ago did you use the other option?

Here in Virginia we had paperless machines like that a few election cycles. It was a new reform (to improve efficiency) that was quickly back-tracked over concerns about the lack of any hard copies; the state outright banned them in 2017.

As of October 2020, there were only 8 states left that allowed paperless voting machines and all of them were trying to encourage counties to move away from them.

39 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Exactly this. Also - voting machines are NOT connected to the internet.

Funnily enough, back in summer 2019, researchers found at least 35 voting systems that were connected to the internet. The reason being to more quickly provide unofficial results to the public. However, the firewalls to protect the vote tabulations are not unbreakable, despite claims to the contrary. Beyond that, an awful lot of voting machines that aren't connected do have the modems that would enable them to be connected if someone wanted to.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/online-vulnerable-experts-find-nearly-three-dozen-u-s-voting-n1112436

It's unknown how many cleaned up their act after reporting like this got out.

[DMC]

4 hours ago, Rhom said:

When explaining the personal economic reasons that I voted for Trump, I was told that I was evil because the US has kids in cages.

So hey, we ever get those kids out of the cages?  Or is that a Day 95 of the first 100 priority?

Leveling this simplistic parallel and then complaining about the lack of "nuance" in partisan debate is completely ass backwards (and frankly many leftists are guilty of it too).  The reason we currently have a border crisis is precisely because Biden's immigration policy is so different than Trump's - both in practice and in perception by the mass of refugees newly showing up.  What is a "lack of nuance" is failing to understand the problem derived from these differences:

Quote

Former President Donald Trump made radical changes to immigration policy, including fighting for funding for a US-Mexico border wall; instituting the Migrant Protection Protocols, which required asylum seekers to remain in Mexico as they awaited hearings; and signing agreements to send some Central American migrants back to their countries of origin.

President Joe Biden has ended these policies, arguing they run counter to his administration’s pledge to offer a more “humane” approach to immigration than under the previous Trump and Obama administrations.

In February, the Biden administration began accepting unaccompanied children. Many such children have been stranded in Mexico for a year under Trump’s “remain-in-Mexico” policy, and are now seeking protection under federal law and to reunite with US-based family.

And earlier this month, the administration said that it would restart the Central American Minors program — halted under the Trump administration — which allows children in danger to apply to enter the US from their home countries instead of having to first arrive at the US-Mexico border.

Critics of the administration argue that the uptick in immigration stems from this decision. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) told ABC’s This Week on Sunday, “The messaging is that if you want to come, you can stay.”

There is a legitimate complaint that the administration did not sufficiently prepare for this - especially considering it was anticipated by many including themselves - but to suggest there's no difference between Trump and Biden on immigration policy, particularly the fact the latter's is much more humane - because "kids are still in cages" is laughably wrong.

2 hours ago, Rhom said:

That's actually a really good starting point to have a real discussion on how elections should be run in the future.  

Here are the details of HR1.  What about that do you disagree with?  Because virtually every Democrat is an agreement that this is how elections should be run in the future while virtually every Republican characterizes it as an existential threat to democracy.  Not sure where the common ground was ever going to be found when one party wants to make sure everyone who should can while the other party wants the opposite.

2 hours ago, Rhom said:

That's not how I saw it in my area.

This is actually true statewide in Kentucky - they just passed a bipartisan election reform bill.  Kentucky is an outlier.  The issue is otherwise polarized in DC and in the states - where essentially every other state where the GOP controls at at least one chamber or the governorship is currently at least trying to institute voter suppression measures.

2 hours ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

I think it is POSSIBLE that individual rates will increase, but I am actually not so sure that the votes exist in the Senate for this.

While details are still scant, the Biden administration has been very clear rates will increase for those earning over $400 thousand.  Considering Manchin already sounds on board, I'm not concerned about Biden uniting the caucus on this.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

While details are still scant, the Biden administration has been very clear rates will increase for those earning over $400 thousand.  Considering Manchin already sounds on board, I'm not concerned about Biden uniting the caucus on this.

Think it is less and less likely the longer it goes on.  Not to say it won’t happen, but the details are EVERYTHING and will be extraordinarily contentious. The best bet for individual rates would be now.  

[Rhom]

4 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Then perhaps these stalwart Republican voters need to be communicating that to their elected officials, because that's the polar opposite of what Republicans want.  Unless you mean they want it because the county you and they are in is predominantly white and Republican already?  Or were they in favor of seeing it expanded for everyone across your state, regardless of voting patterns?

Maybe this is true, as you say, but at the same time, it kinds feels like the, "I have a black friend" defense...

Oh our county population reflects the average demographic for a similar area I would assume.  We do have Ft Knox in the northern part which means that we have a much larger population of Korean/German born military retirees as well as a very prevalent African American population located primarily in the northern end of the county.  On the subject of Sunday voting and African Americans... maybe its my southern location, but I'd be stunned if that was something the black community wanted here.  First Baptist Church in my town is the largest predominantly African American congregation in town.  There's also a couple of very large African American churches in the town right outside Ft Knox... while the white churches are all racing each other on Sunday to get out first so they can get a head start on breakfast at Bob Evans; the traditionally black churches are going for three or four more hours of service!  The head pastor at First Baptist was a friend of mine before he passed and he always talked about how he'd lock the doors and keep them there until they could send the collection plate around again.    The population in our area is extremely strong in their faith and I can't see them wanting to vote on a Sunday.  

Plus, many churches double as polling places.  (One reason it took so long to pass alcohol in the Wet Dry elections!  No one wants to vote to legalize alcohol while standing in line at the Baptist church!)  

But I digress, I stay away from these threads for a reason.  Today I just happened to open my paper (yeah, I still like a hand held newspaper) and was upset when I saw the pictures of the migrant detention facilities.  They've always been a reason to be upset; but the blind single minded rage directed at me months ago as if Biden would wave a magic wand and fix our sins cried out for me to mention it at the least. 

[DMC]

Just now, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Think it is less and less likely the longer it goes on.  Not to say it won’t happen, but the details are EVERYTHING and will be extraordinarily contentious. The best bet for individual rates would be now.

They have to wait for reconciliation.  Biden hasn't even released his tax plan yet.  Hell, he hasn't even realized the $3 trillion bill the tax plan is supposed to pay for - in part.  Anyway, I don't see much danger of it losing support with time.  Even moderate Dems are fine with the types of increases being discussed.  Actually, they're the one's demanding it so Biden's "recovery" plan is at least a bit paid for.

[Ran]

It's not even really quite a crisis. The increase is not that big and in line with the typical seasonal shifts. Yes, there's "pent-up" migration due to the pandemic last year leading to fewer people chancing it, but it's not at crazy levels except for the fact that the Trump administration did a lot to try and hamstring the ability to intake and process migrant asylum seekers and so on. That will take time and effort to fix, but "crisis" is over-blown media talk, IMO.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

Just now, DMC said:

They have to wait for reconciliation.  Biden hasn't even released his tax plan yet.  Hell, he hasn't even realized the $3 trillion bill the tax plan is supposed to pay for - in part.  Anyway, I don't see much danger of it losing support with time.  Even moderate Dems are fine with the types of increases being discussed.  Actually, they're the one's demanding it so Biden's "recovery" plan is at least a bit paid for.

That's why I think the corporate rates actually happen.  Look, I could be totally wrong, but I think when we get to the fall reconciliation bill things look a bit different.  Corporate rates will be up to 26-28% and people who are all gung ho about increasing individual rates will find it harder politically to support (see Long's maxim, above).  I completely understand that $400K is a ton of money and most people won't be affected, etc. etc. but RAISED TAXES are still bad words in American politics particularly going into an election year (esp. because my understanding of the Biden plan, as nebulous as it is, is that it includes a marriage penalty - that is the $400K is a HOUSEHOLD limit.  I think you are more likely to see see stealth increases like making some of the TCJA deduction limitations made permanent, removing additional deductibility for lots of things, and maybe removing capital gains preferences for incomes over $X.  We'll see though.

[DanteGabriel]

9 minutes ago, Rhom said:

 They've always been a reason to be upset; but the blind single minded rage directed at me months ago as if Biden would wave a magic wand and fix our sins cried out for me to mention it at the least. 

If you want to have better discussions here maybe try to argue with actual people instead of strawmen.

[GrimTuesday]

I haven't been around much as of late, so I'm just kind of stepping into a discussion mid way through, but Republicans entire platform is based on disenfranchising minorities and the poor, destroying the power of workers in favor of the bosses who profit off their labor, and ravaging what little social safety net exists while funneling money to the rich. Add on a heaping helping of social conservatism that basically boils down to if you're not a heterosexual white Christian who thinks that Leave it to Beaver was an actual reflection of "the good old days", you're a bad person and you have a lovely mix of reactionary cruelty.

Vote for low taxes if you want, but know you're voting all that other shit too. If you can live with it, as well as all the other unsavory folks who also like that shit, cool, but don't cry when people point it out.

Dems are pretty shit too, there is some level of truth behind the both sides argument, but hey, until we have an actual social democrat party, it's what we got.

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, Ran said:

That will take time and effort to fix, but "crisis" is over-blown media talk, IMO.

Yes, the "crisis" is repairing the damage done from the Trump administration.  And Rice and Sullivan did warn that will take time back in December.  I still think the administration has made a mistake not emphasizing this and being more open about it (or at least such criticisms are legitimate).

10 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Look, I could be totally wrong, but I think when we get to the fall reconciliation bill things look a bit different.

It could, but that will be dependent (as always) on Biden's approval.  Increasing rates the way it appears he's proposing is generally popular and (Dem) MCs are not going to be afraid to support it due to electoral concerns.  The real difficulty with the reconciliation bill is uniting the caucus on the mass of spending measures that the administration/leadership is going to try to fit into one omnibus bill.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Yes, the "crisis" is repairing the damage done from the Trump administration.  And Rice and Sullivan did warn that will take time back in December.  I still think the administration has made a mistake not emphasizing this and being more open about it (or at least such criticisms are legitimate).

It could, but that will be dependent (as always) on Biden's approval.  Increasing rates the way it appears he's proposing is generally popular and (Dem) MCs are not going to be afraid to support it due to electoral concerns.  The real difficulty with the reconciliation bill is uniting the caucus on the mass of spending measures that the administration/leadership is going to try to fit into one omnibus bill.

Yes, I note that the provisions he ties this to have no bipartisan support.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Yes, I note that the provisions he ties this to have no bipartisan support.

Right.  Any tax increase is going to have to go through reconciliation.  No chance a Dem president would ever get a GOP vote for that.  Hell, that precedes polarization for the most part!

[A True Kaniggit]

45 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

@Rhom - black churches in Georgia often have bus drives called “souls to the polls” on Sundays after church on Sunday early voting days.

Isn’t it a nation wide thing?

I thought it was. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Yes, the "crisis" is repairing the damage done from the Trump administration.  And Rice and Sullivan did warn that will take time back in December.  I still think the administration has made a mistake not emphasizing this and being more open about it (or at least such criticisms are legitimate).

Biden's team has been very consistent, and it's impressive in the sense he said there would be a 1.9T stimulus bill and there was exactly that. But the downside of a big tent that has a base that believes a lot of different things is that they assume because we agree in general doesn't mean we agree on specifics. And that's where so many fights start.

Quote

It could, but that will be dependent (as always) on Biden's approval.  Increasing rates the way it appears he's proposing is generally popular and (Dem) MCs are not going to be afraid to support it due to electoral concerns.  The real difficulty with the reconciliation bill is uniting the caucus on the mass of spending measures that the administration/leadership is going to try to fit into one omnibus bill.

Vincent did try to tell Jules that pork is good. 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Vincent did try to tell Jules that pork is good. 

Definitely wouldn't describe the spending measures Biden/the Dem leadership will try to combine into the next reconciliation bill as pork.  For the most part that'd be an inaccurate use of the term.  Although the GOP certainly will describe it as that.

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

On the subject of Sunday voting and African Americans... maybe its my southern location, but I'd be stunned if that was something the black community wanted here.  First Baptist Church in my town is the largest predominantly African American congregation in town.  There's also a couple of very large African American churches in the town right outside Ft Knox... while the white churches are all racing each other on Sunday to get out first so they can get a head start on breakfast at Bob Evans; the traditionally black churches are going for three or four more hours of service!  The head pastor at First Baptist was a friend of mine before he passed and he always talked about how he'd lock the doors and keep them there until they could send the collection plate around again.    The population in our area is extremely strong in their faith and I can't see them wanting to vote on a Sunday.  

Plus, many churches double as polling places.  (One reason it took so long to pass alcohol in the Wet Dry elections!  No one wants to vote to legalize alcohol while standing in line at the Baptist church!)  

One of the very biggest reasons that AA populations want voting on Sunday and why it's a restriction against them specifically is because they combine churchgoing and voting, and a lot of the biggest organizers of voting are churches. I bet strongly that that's also the case in Kentucky. 

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

But I digress, I stay away from these threads for a reason.  Today I just happened to open my paper (yeah, I still like a hand held newspaper) and was upset when I saw the pictures of the migrant detention facilities.  They've always been a reason to be upset; but the blind single minded rage directed at me months ago as if Biden would wave a magic wand and fix our sins cried out for me to mention it at the least. 

Call me when he's separated one child from their parents.

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

It's not even really quite a crisis. The increase is not that big and in line with the typical seasonal shifts. Yes, there's "pent-up" migration due to the pandemic last year leading to fewer people chancing it, but it's not at crazy levels except for the fact that the Trump administration did a lot to try and hamstring the ability to intake and process migrant asylum seekers and so on. That will take time and effort to fix, but "crisis" is over-blown media talk, IMO.

It's somewhat of a crisis in that this is happening in  the middle of an uncontrolled pandemic and putting a whole lot of kids in close quarters is not super awesome for controlling spreads of disease.

[Ran]

1 minute ago, Karlbear said:

It's somewhat of a crisis in that this is happening in  the middle of an uncontrolled pandemic and putting a whole lot of kids in close quarters is not super awesome for controlling spreads of disease.

I mean, they're kids, the vast majority aren't going to suffer any serious illness and there's no reason to think that the centers are a locus for outbreaks into the surrounding population.

2,897 positive tests, all but 300 already out of isolation, 1800 of them already at homes with sponsors.