Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House The Trump Presidency

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Trump Presidency
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2292 of 4573 (837459)
08-01-2018 10:00 PM


About the value-added of immigrants
For the third time in four years the US has won the International Mathematical Olympiad in which teams of high schoolers from countries around the world compete. Many of the team members are second and third generation immigrants.
Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2352 by marc9000, posted 08-05-2018 4:50 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2295 of 4573 (837462)
08-02-2018 8:51 AM
Reply to: Message 2291 by marc9000
08-01-2018 9:14 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
I couldn't be sure whether your message reflected any confusion between legal non-citizen residents and illegal residents, so I'll be perfectly clear about who can legally vote and who can't in federal elections:
  • Allowed to vote: Birth or Naturalized Citizens
  • Can't vote: Everyone else, including visa waived people, visa holders, asylum seekers, legal immigrants, illegal immigrants, anyone under 18
In case it helps, here are some of the categories of non-citizens who may be present in the country, none of whom can legally vote:
  • Tourist/Business visitor in visa waiver program (only certain countries)
  • Tourist visa holders
  • Foreign visa holders (legal immigrants, generally a citizen or employer must sponsor)
  • Asylum seekers
  • Non-visa holders (illegal immigrants)
When I registered to vote in my town around 30 years ago, there was no citizenship check, just a residency check. Because I'm not affiliated with either party, in order to vote in a Republican or Democratic primary I have to register as one or the other, then after the election reregister back as an independent. I used to do this up until maybe 10 years ago, but it was so annoying to have to register twice that I stopped voting in primaries. But I was never asked for proof of citizenship.
Most states do not require proof of citizenship to register to vote. Some have tried to institute it but have had their laws struck down by the courts. For example, Kansas had a citizenship requirement until recently, but a judge struck it down in June, ruling that the National Voter Registration Act requires that states make it convenient to register, which means only having to swear you're a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury.
For most people proof of citizenship is a birth certificate or a passport. I didn't see any mention of the newly available Enhanced Driver's License. Here's a page listing the federally defined evidence of citizenship. The part I found most interesting is what you have to do if there is no record of your birth. You must obtain a Letter of No Record. I wonder who is most likely to lack a record of birth, the rich or the poor?
There is no evidence of voter fraud by illegal immigrants. This only makes sense because illegal immigrants are highly motivated to keep a low profile which means avoiding visits to city hall to register to vote.
There is also no evidence of meaningful voter fraud by legal immigrants. The number of incidents across the country is miniscule.
On the one hand it seems only right that we insure that only citizens vote, but on the other hand requiring documentary evidence will self-evidently reduce the voter rolls of the poor the most.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2291 by marc9000, posted 08-01-2018 9:14 PM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2298 by Chiroptera, posted 08-02-2018 9:42 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2300 by Chiroptera, posted 08-02-2018 1:40 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2314 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2018 5:20 PM Percy has replied
 Message 2316 by Chiroptera, posted 08-03-2018 6:00 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2297 of 4573 (837464)
08-02-2018 9:24 AM


Trump's Grocery Store ID Claim
During Tuesday night's rally Trump said, "You know, if you go out and you want to buy groceries, you need a picture on a card you need ID.
I do the grocery shopping for our family. I have never been asked for a photo ID. Everything I've read in the news indicates that there are no grocery stores requiring a photo ID.
When asked to explain the president's comments Sarah Huckster Sanders implied he was talking about beer and wine. I buy a few bottles of wine every couple months. I've never been asked for any ID of any kind. The New Hampshire Liquor Commission, Division of Enforcement & Licensing Compliance Checks Policy says (bold underlining in the original):
quote:
III.a.i.1. For the purposes of RSA 179:7, any person making the sale of beverages or liquor to any person whose age is in question (emphasis added) shall require the purchaser to furnish any of the following documentation that such person is 21 years of age or over:...etc...
Here's the YouTube video of Trump making these absurd comments. It's only 1'25" long. There is no murmuring rumble of "say what?" from the crowd as Trump says you need photo ID in grocery stores and wherever you buy things. I shop all the time in Walmart, Home Depot, Lowes, Bed, Bath and Beyond, grocery stores and restaurants, and I'm never, ever asked for a photo ID.
What Trump says makes no sense, but the crowd eats it up anyway. Wasn't it just a few years ago that conservatives were railing loudly against a national ID when it became a topic of discussion? So there we have more evidence that a) Trump is not a conservative; and b) Trump's followers aren't conservatives, either, they're just Trump lovers who cheer (or boo as appropriate) anything he says. For how many more years is he going to rouse his crowds to cheer, "Lock her up! Lock her up!" It's ridiculous, absurd and terrifying all at the same time.
I'm trying to remember the places where I am asked for photo ID. Doctor's offices is the only one I can think of. They seem really concerned about making sure you're really who you say you are.
AbE: And my bank. They require photo ID for certain things, like opening up a new customer bank account, or closing on a mortgage, or anything to do with a trust.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : AbE.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2299 by NoNukes, posted 08-02-2018 12:28 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2301 by Chiroptera, posted 08-02-2018 3:23 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2306 of 4573 (837480)
08-03-2018 7:09 AM


Is the Trump lying getting worse?
Yesterday in Washington National Security Adviser John Bolton said Trump was driving his security team to repel Russian attacks on our elections:
quote:
President Trump has not and will not tolerate interference in America’s system of representative government The issue was discussed and in fact President Putin said the first issue President Trump raised was election meddling.
At the same time Trump was at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania calling Russian election meddling a hoax:
quote:
In Helsinki, I had a great meeting with Putin. We discussed everything, We got along really well. By the way, that’s a good thing, not a bad thing. That’s a really good thing. Now, we are being hindered by the Russian hoax. It’s a hoax, okay?
So which is it? Are we taking Russian election meddling seriously, or do we consider that it ever happened a hoax?
Somebody's lying.
Source
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2351 by marc9000, posted 08-05-2018 4:47 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2307 of 4573 (837481)
08-03-2018 7:21 AM


What's going on with the Russian sanctions?
A US Senator, I think Linsey Graham (R-SC), said today on NPR that Trump not only delayed the Russian sanctions Congress imposed earlier this year, which we knew, but that he has not implemented all of them, which we didn't.
Which sanctions is Trump failing to implement? If Trump is truly picking and choosing which sanctions to implement I couldn't find this information. I think knowing which sanctions Trump isn't implementing would tell us a lot about who or what is pulling the presidents strings and causing his obsequious behavior toward Russia.
Graham, or whichever senator it was, was being interviewed at a press conference where a bipartisan group of senators announced the initiation of legislation to put even tougher sanctions on Russia. Whether it makes it through this session is doubtful since there's little time left before the Senate adjourns in November.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2309 by jar, posted 08-03-2018 8:06 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2308 of 4573 (837483)
08-03-2018 7:37 AM


Trump's Complete Abrogation of Responsibility for Family Separation
About 2000 immigrant children have been reunited with their families, but about 500 remain because their parents were already deported. Charged by Judge Sabraw with developing a plan for reuniting the remaining children with their families the government completely abrogated their responsibility. In a completely embarrassing and despicable display of asking others to clean up their mess, the government has asked the ACLU to find missing migrant parents
Locating these parents will be a difficult task. They fled their home countries because of civil unrest or gang violence or domestic abuse, and so once deported home most would naturally go into hiding. They won't be easy to find. But the government created this problem, and it's their responsibility to solve it, not the ACLU. The ACLU has already done their job taking the government to court and forcing action.
Not every parent wants to be reunited with their children. Some see leaving their children behind in the US as the safest and most advantageous for them. But the US has no record of which parents voluntarily separated from their children and which did not. No interviews were conducted. Each parent or parents needs to be located and a thorough interview conducted that includes making sure the parent or parents understand any decisions they make. Documentation must be created. The US government should take a lesson from the Nazis who at least carefully documented all their crimes.
The parties will be in court again today.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typo.

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2310 of 4573 (837486)
08-03-2018 3:21 PM


Honest reporting from Fox News! Who woulda thought!
Everyone's heard of Trump lap dog Sean Hannity, but probably few of Shep Smith, who has a 3 PM news show on Fox. In this video Smith debunks one Hannity claim after another. Enjoy:
As the Huffington Post put it, this year's Fox Christmas party might be a bit awkward.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2311 by Taq, posted 08-03-2018 3:31 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 2321 of 4573 (837507)
08-04-2018 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 2314 by Hyroglyphx
08-03-2018 5:20 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
Hyroglyphx writes:
Most states do not require proof of citizenship to register to vote.
But it should, is the point. You need identification just to get something as simple as traveling domestically. Why wouldn't you need it for something like voting?
I said "proof of citizenship" and you replied about ID - they're not the same thing. For instance, the Kansas voter ID law was struck down because it included an actual proof of citizenship. Here in my state of New Hampshire we have a voter ID law, but to register you don't actually need any ID or proof of citizenship. You can sign a Qualified Voter Affidavit, under oath, in front of an election official. No ID or proof of citizenship required.
And when you vote you also don't need any ID. You can instead choose to execute what's called a challenged voter affidavit, which involves a photograph and a witnessed signature on the affidavit.
Proof of citizenship is most often a birth certificate. Who do you think is most likely not to have a birth certificate, the poor or the rich?
The problem is accountability.
Accountability?
How do you prevent voter fraud without it.
You're asking how do we prevent voter fraud without accountability? Like laws to punish those who commit voter fraud? Don't such laws already exist?
All kinds of shady practices, like people registering dead people to vote, have been implemented as an underhanded tactic to procure more votes.
Registering dead people? Sounds labor intensive. Here in New Hampshire voter registration requires proof of residency in the town you're registering, like a driver's license, a rental agreement from the past year, a property tax bill from the past year, a motor vehicle registration from the past year, a tax return from the past year, a dated public utility bill from the past year with your name and address on it, etc. It could be done, but not in any kind of meaningful volume, and certainly not in a small town like mine where the town clerk wouldn't fail to notice the first time you registered as someone else. My town isn't too big:
There is a hole concerning registration of dead people. Once registered one is registered forever. One never has to reregister. There is no process for removing dead people from the voter roles. The town clerk does not scan the obituary pages seeking out deceased voters. The only way one is removed from the voter roles is if the town clerk is sent a formal notice of death.
Presumably one could present one's driver's license and vote as oneself, then return a few hours later and vote as one's deceased father (or mother if you're female) by showing their driver's license (expired ID's are fine if you're over 65), and just hope the same clerk isn't still there and recognizes you.
There is no evidence of voter fraud by illegal immigrants.
Agreed.
Great.
It's not the illegal immigrants that's the problem, it's the people [let's be honest, Democrats] who use it as a tactic to gain more votes than is allowable. The DNC panders to this base in exchange for votes.
You just agreed that there's no evidence of voter fraud by illegal immigrants. How could the DNC be pandering to illegal immigrants for votes when there's no evidence of voter fraud by illegal immigrants?
Are there any other political parties that pander for votes to their base. Does this look familiar? It's a video of Trump's rally in Pennsylvania Thursday night:
That's where the problem lies, not the illegal immigrants themselves... then again, they aren't allowed to vote domestically. And if you can't see why that's a problem, imagine a country the size of say, Luxembourg. Imagine if the RNC or DNC paid for Americans to go over there to exploit their lax stance on voting as a way to manipulate votes. The Koch brothers are certainly wealthy enough to fund a venture like that if there was an incentive great enough.
I agree that the Koch brothers are wealthy enough to successfully pull off many illegal things.
On the one hand it seems only right that we insure that only citizens vote, but on the other hand requiring documentary evidence will self-evidently reduce the voter rolls of the poor the most.
Yeah, we've heard that nonsense before...
First, it's not nonsense. There can be do doubt that those least able to provide documentary evidence of citizenship are the poor and minorities. Voter ID laws that include a proof of citizenship have already been struck down in several states across the country.
Second, meaningful evidence is accumulating that voter ID laws disenfranchise the poor and minorities the most, for example Voter ID Laws Really Do Discriminate.
...that it affects poor people, that it affects blacks, it affects immigrants, etc... There is nothing factual about that at all.
You should maybe check your facts before making your attestations.
I also don't think white liberals understand how condescending and patronizing they are to the very communities they profess to care so much about. Without even trying to be, the people featured in this are so unbelievably offensive...
Of course black people in Harlem know all about IDs and the Internet and DMVs and smart phones. Harlem's in New York City on Manhattan Island just a half mile north of Central Park. New York City is one of the most cosmopolitan cities in the world, and not a single black Ami interviewed was poverty stricken. The students Ami interviewed seemed to be referring to poor, rural people. Ami would have received different answers from the black people in this video:.
If you believe that, then explain how poor people receive SSI benefits without something as simple as an i.d. card, which is accessible to virtually anyone that puts forth a modicum of effort.
Looking this stuff up, SSI is for blind and disabled adults and poor children. Welfare is for poor adults and families living at or below 200% of the poverty level (deemed low income) or at or below 100% of the poverty level (poverty stricken). Welfare doesn't require a photo ID, they seem to be fairly flexible with regard to IDs. It's kind of hard to have a program when few beneficiaries qualify, so allowances must be made.
But not everyone poor is on welfare, only 23% according to How welfare reform changed American poverty, in 9 charts.
So let's imagine you're working poor. You have no Internet, no car, no cell phone. You walk to work or hitch a ride or take public transportation. You never had a birth certificate. Imagine the effort it would take to qualify to vote according to the recently overturned Kansas voter ID law.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2314 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2018 5:20 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2334 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-04-2018 3:32 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 2325 of 4573 (837512)
08-04-2018 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 2314 by Hyroglyphx
08-03-2018 5:20 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
Since it's been nearly an hour since I replied I'll post a second reply instead of an AbE.
As you know, after the 2016 election Trump appointed a panel to investigate voter fraud because he believed he lost the popular vote because of millions of fraudulent votes. The panel disbanded without finding any meaningful voter fraud. Excerpts from the article:
quote:
Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap, one of the 11 members of the commission formed by President Trump to investigate supposed voter fraud, issued a scathing rebuke of the disbanded panel on Friday, accusing Vice Chair Kris Kobach and the White House of making false statements and saying that he had concluded that the panel had been set up to try to validate the president’s baseless claims about fraudulent votes in the 2016 election.
Dunlap, one of four Democrats on the panel, made the statements in a report he sent to the commission’s two leaders Vice President Pence and Kobach, who is Kansas’s secretary of state after reviewing more than 8,000 documents from the group’s work, which he acquired only after a legal fight despite his participation on the panel.
About that second paragraph, we already knew that the Republicans on the panel were refusing to share data and documents with the Democrats, but this paragraph states it again. Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap had to go to court to get the information that should have been available to him as a member of the panel.
The article continues:
quote:
Dunlap said that the commission’s documents that were turned over to him underscore the hollowness of those claims: they do not contain evidence of widespread voter fraud, he said in his report, adding that some of the documentation seemed to indicate that the commission was predicting it would find evidence of fraud, evincing a troubling bias.
In particular, Dunlap pointed to an outline for a report the commission was working on that circulated in November 2017. The outline included sections for Improper voter registration practices, and Instances of fraudulent or improper voting, though the sections themselves were blank as they awaited evidence, speaking to what Dunlap said indicated a push for preordained conclusions.
After reading this, Dunlap said of the more than 8,000 pages of documents in an interview with The Washington Post, I see that it wasn’t just a matter of investigating President Trump’s claims that three to five million people voted illegally, but the goal of the commission seems to have been to validate those claims.
To summarize:
  • The Republicans on the committee shut the Democrats on the committee out of meetings and gave them no access to meeting materials.
  • When Democrats requested the right to attend meetings, they were denied.
  • When Democrates requested the meeting materials, they were denied.
  • The Republicans drafted boilerplate and headers under which they expected to fill in voter fraud evidence, but they're empty.
The article continues:
quote:
President Trump’s claim that as many as three to five million fraudulent votes were cast in the 2016 election remains one of his most notable falsehoods.
No credible evidence has ever been produced, by the White House or anyone else, to substantiate the claim. The commission, formally known as the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, was formed in May 2017, and it quickly faced controversy from a wide array of groups, including many state officials from both political parties who objected to its requests for detailed data on voter rolls. By the time it was disbanded in January, it had drawn at least eight lawsuits, including Dunlap’s.
That lawsuit is not yet resolved. Dunlap says he believes that the committee may yet have more information to procure, while the government has said it wants to terminate the litigation, said Clark Pettig, a spokesman for American Oversight.
Did you get that? Intrusive requests to states for detailed voter roll data. Eight lawsuits and counting. No evidence of voter fraud uncovered. The Republicans just want the committee to disappear so they can forget the whole thing, including the litigation, but that probably won't happen.
When you make things up it eventually catches up with you, even if you're the president.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2314 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-03-2018 5:20 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 2350 of 4573 (837548)
08-05-2018 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 2334 by Hyroglyphx
08-04-2018 3:32 PM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
Hyroglyphyx writes:
I said "proof of citizenship" and you replied about ID - they're not the same thing.
In most states, a requirement to obtain a driver's license is proof of citizenship.
You didn't say driver's license, you just said ID. If you're talking about driver's licenses then I guess it is possible proof of citizenship - it depends on when and where the person obtained their first license. Where I lived when I got my first license they didn't ask for a birth certificate. Each time I moved to another state I only had to show my old driver's license and provide proof of residency.
You're asking how do we prevent voter fraud without accountability? Like laws to punish those who commit voter fraud? Don't such laws already exist?
I'm saying how else are you going to know who is or isn't a legal citizen without identifying who in the fuck you actually are?
So by accountability you didn't mean holding people accountable, you meant accounting for who people really are.
How else are you going to ensure someone hasn't voted multiple times?
You know someone hasn't voted multiple times because their name is crossed off before they're handed a ballot at the polling station. We use old fashioned paper and pencil balloting here, I'm sure there are more sophisticated approaches elsewhere.
How else are you going to know if the person voting is the actual person and not a friend or a family member?
Up until the most recent election our state did not require IDs at polling stations and it was never a problem. Now they require IDs and it slows things down and they have the certainty you seem to think so important, but they've solved a problem that if it existed it was only just barely.
A signed affidavit? Thanks. About as helpful as a pinky-promise.
And yet it worked.
Well, major cities are too big to know one person from the next. But here you are explaining NH's policies which sound even more restrictive than what I'm proposing. So what are you even arguing about?
Why would you assume that just because I live here that I must agree with all the laws here? Our state motto is "Live free or die", but they may as well change it to "Freedom? Oh, it died." Earlier this year they passed a citizenship requirement that will make it so that newly issued driver's licenses will be proof of citizenship.
Just informationally, at my last driver's license renewal I got the REAL ID version because it makes travel to Canada and Mexico easier, but the application process requires a birth certificate, making the REAL ID also proof of citizenship, unlike my prior license.
Presumably one could present one's driver's license and vote as oneself, then return a few hours later and vote as one's deceased father (or mother if you're female) by showing their driver's license (expired ID's are fine if you're over 65), and just hope the same clerk isn't still there and recognizes you.
Hence the necessity of showing your i.d., scanning the friggin barcode on the back that is uniquely assigned to just you.
Since relatives voting for other deceased relatives isn't really a problem, why do you think this necessary? Why are you so hot on solving problems that don't exist or that barely exist.
I feel like you're unnecessarily complicating things to obfuscate how simple... and reasonable... checking someone's i.d. is.
The conservative in me objects to the infringements upon freedom and the complicating of procedures and requirements associated with what is in essence, though managed by the states, a national ID system. We didn't used to need it and got along fine.
You just agreed that there's no evidence of voter fraud by illegal immigrants. How could the DNC be pandering to illegal immigrants for votes when there's no evidence of voter fraud by illegal immigrants?
I'm saying Democrats heavily favor all things revolving around immigrants (legal or otherwise).
Ours is a nation built of and by immigrants, including you. Immigrants make us stronger, and people fleeing danger need our help, not our antagonism. What have these facts and issues to do with political affiliation?
There is an obvious incentive that you're pretending doesn't exist.
It takes at least five years for an immigrant to become a citizen, and all political parties can canvas for immigrant votes.
Are there any other political parties that pander for votes to their base. Does this look familiar?
Yeah, of course Republicans pander to their base...
Doesn't look pretty, does it, Trump up there on the stage telling lie after lie and the rubes cheering him on. Unaffiliated as I am with any political party, it doesn't look pretty to me when any party does it. What Trump just did in Ohio and Pennsylvania and the previous week in Florida is pandering to his base. His attitude, and also the presumed attitude of his cheering supportors, is "Make illegal immigrants suffer. It will serve as punishment for challenging our sovereign borders and as a deterrent to future illegal immigration. If children get hurt in the process then that's just too bad. If we deport people back to their home country that the fled from and they get killed then that's just too bad." Here are some of their stories:
Those who oppose ill treatment of illegal immigrants are not pandering - they're exhibiting simple human compassion for those fleeing danger, and in the greatest tradition of the United States trying to provide a welcome haven of safety, security and prosperity in which they can raise their families and flourish.
...the issue is only relevant in the given context. The discussion is identifying yourself at a polling station and the reasons why. My only reason in mentioning Democrats and immigrants is to demonstrate the incentive that.
Didn't get this, the last sentence looks incomplete.
There can be do doubt that those least able to provide documentary evidence of citizenship are the poor and minorities. Voter ID laws that include a proof of citizenship have already been struck down in several states across the country.
The process to register to vote is far more complicated than obtaining a license, Percy. Stop acting like poor people are too dumb or just too marginalized to get something like an i.d.
Denying reality won't make it go away. That is the position that some people are in, and they will be the ones disenfranchised by increasingly strict voter ID laws.
Second, meaningful evidence is accumulating that voter ID laws disenfranchise the poor and minorities the most, for example Voter ID Laws Really Do Discriminate.
How does it disenfranchise poor and minorities to get an i.d? Ridiculous!
Read the link a couple lines above that you obviously ignored. It describes how scientific analysis enabled them to conclude that neither Democrats or Republicans are making numerically accurate claims about the impact of voter ID laws, the former too high, the latter too low. You can get the numbers from the link, but here's the part of thier conclusion that states that blacks are less likely to have adequate ID:
quote:
Using this tool, the researchers confirmed what voting rights advocates already know to be truethat black voters are more likely to lack adequate identification under voter ID laws.
20-25% of the entire U.S. population is on some form of government assistance program.
It's much greater than that. The 20-25% figure is for welfare programs. Around another 20% receive social security, and that number will be growing as the country ages. Around another 20% receive Medicaid. How that adds up is complicated since obviously its possible to receive aid from more than one source. Clearly 60% of the country is not on assistance.
But however high the number is, it *is* high, and immigration would help mitigate that problem by bringing in needed young labor and tax revenue.
ALL of them are required to show proof of citizenship, proof of who they really are, proof of income, proof of address, etc... they already have i.d. in order to obtain those benefits... so this weak argument that it's just too hard for the poor is a complete fabrication. The "just blame everything on racism/classism" argument isn't a catch-all.
As I already told you, ID requirements for welfare recipients are flexible. Not non-existent, but flexible. This is from Is a photo ID required when applying for welfare, including food stamps?:
quote:
You should not be denied SNAP/Food Stamps simply because you do not have a photo ID. To prove who you are, you can use such things as a work or school ID, an ID for health benefits, an ID from another social services program such as TANF, wage stubs, a birth certificate, or a voter registration card.
Ami would have received different answers from the black people in this video
If they're on food stamps, Section 8 housing, HUD, TANF, WIC, they already have i.d.
Earlier you were using ID synonymously with driver's license, which these days is a photo ID that can also be proof of citizenship, but that's not the kind of ID the programs you list would necessarily use, is it. For the poor, the indigent, the homeless, the mentally ill, etc., expecting them to have and to be able to maintain possession of a photo ID is not always reasonable. Allowances have to be made, else all you're doing is providing convenient excuses for your conscience for reducing the roles of aid recipients who need it.
You should probably stop saying "i.d." or "ID". Earlier you said that to you an ID is a photo ID drivers license that is proof of citizenship, so when that's what you're talking about you should be clear about it. Just an ID could be any number of things, and a driver's license is only one of them.
See, there's an incentive for obtaining it, and they did, in order to obtain said incentive. One immutable fact about human beings; you can move mountains when money is on the line.
Ah, I see. Your attitude is that the money's there, and if they can't muster the resources and gumption to come get it then it's just tough patooties for them. Let them remain poor or destitute or prideful or mentally ill or handicapped or elderly or homeless or just tired of being pushed around, you've done all you can for them and your conscience is clear.
Looking this stuff up, SSI is for blind and disabled adults and poor children. Welfare is for poor adults and families living at or below 200% of the poverty level (deemed low income) or at or below 100% of the poverty level (poverty stricken). Welfare doesn't require a photo ID, they seem to be fairly flexible with regard to IDs.
Tips on Applying for Welfare Benefits > Neighborhood Legal Services
Did you read your own link? If there's something in it that would constitute a relevant response to what I said you're going to have to point me to it. Relevant to something I said earlier they do suggest some types of acceptable ID, and one of them's a library card.
So let's imagine you're working poor. You have no Internet, no car, no cell phone. You walk to work or hitch a ride or take public transportation. You never had a birth certificate. Imagine the effort it would take to qualify to vote according to the recently overturned Kansas voter ID law.
Yeah, that's why public libraries and public transportation and the welfare system in general exists...
These exist in some places and not others. Some people have access to them and not others.
But these people just have to get out to vote, right?
This sarcasm sounds like a pretty clear statement that you don't care about the impact of ID requirements on a person's ability to vote. But I guess we already knew that.
You're painting such a false narrative.
And yet you were unable to point to anything actually false. All you could do is use the word false in a sentence.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2334 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-04-2018 3:32 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2361 by caffeine, posted 08-06-2018 11:58 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2355 of 4573 (837561)
08-05-2018 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 2351 by marc9000
08-05-2018 4:47 PM


Re: Is the Trump lying getting worse?
marc9000 writes:
Percy writes:
Somebody's lying.
There are 2 divisions of Russian meddling accusations. One is true, the other false. No one, (Trump or Bolton) are lying.
The answer was obvious. Trump was lying. There was definitely Russian meddling in the 2016 election. There is no hoax.
I've little doubt that some of them are right here on EvC.
Could be. So who here is a supporter of a Russian sympathizer?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2351 by marc9000, posted 08-05-2018 4:47 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2356 of 4573 (837562)
08-05-2018 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 2352 by marc9000
08-05-2018 4:50 PM


Re: About the value-added of immigrants
marc9000 writes:
Central and South American immigrants, or European and Asian? It would be important to distinguish between the two, when we're focusing on our southern border security.
Well aren't you the little racist.
Here's a link to the article, answer your own racist questions: America just won the world’s hardest math contest. Again.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2352 by marc9000, posted 08-05-2018 4:50 PM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2357 by NoNukes, posted 08-05-2018 8:02 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2358 of 4573 (837565)
08-05-2018 8:41 PM
Reply to: Message 2357 by NoNukes
08-05-2018 8:02 PM


Re: About the value-added of immigrants
NoNukes writes:
Percy writes:
marc9000 writes:
Central and South American immigrants, or European and Asian? It would be important to distinguish between the two, when we're focusing on our southern border security.
Well aren't you the little racist.
I think you've jumped the gun a bit. Marc9000's comment is addressed to the observation that a southern wall is directed to folks south of the border.
That said, his comment does demonstrate an amount of ridiculousness that is, in fact, encapsulated by the fact that immigration is primarily about folks overstaying their authorized stay, and not about folks who enter the country illegally.
I'm trying to see your point, but I can't get past the obvious interpretation. The connection he drew to southern border security made sense to neither of us, so ignoring that, how is caring about the racial origin of kids exhibiting exceptionalism not racist? Is it your view that he was talking geographically, not racially? If so then he forgot a couple continents.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2357 by NoNukes, posted 08-05-2018 8:02 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2359 by NoNukes, posted 08-06-2018 2:46 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2360 of 4573 (837579)
08-06-2018 11:57 AM


The Trump Tower Meeting
I still feel the same way about how much wrong doing was committed by the Trump Tower meeting as I did back in February, and I think the papers are missing aspects of this, so here I make my case again.
We all know that in June of 2016 during the presidential primaries Donald Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with representatives of the Russian government for purposes of opposition research. When information about the meeting leaked a year later in July of 2017 Donald Jr. lied about it. Then Trump lied about it. The stories kept changing from (paraphrasing) "it was about adoptions" to "it was about getting dirt of Hillary" to "it wasn't collusion" to "collusion is not a crime."
A timeline with details can be found at The White House's story on the Trump Tower meeting shifts yet again.
Here are the FEC (Federal Election Commission) regulations that prohibit foreign nationals from providing any value to American political campaigns. This is from the Cornell Law Library (52 U.S. Code 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals):
quote:
(a) Prohibition It shall be unlawful for
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
...
...
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.

Does it matter if no information actually changed hands? From what I understand of conspiracy, success doesn't matter, but most people forget that information *did* change hands. This is from Trump campaign—Russian meetings:
quote:
On July 14, Akhmetshin stated in an interview that Veselnitskaya had claimed to have evidence of "violations of Russian law by a Democratic donor", and added that she "described her findings at the meeting and left a document about them with Trump Jr. and the others."
The document that passed from the Russians to Donald Jr. represents an "other thing of value" that I highlighted in the excerpt from the legal statute above. A crime was committed at that meeting, which represents a conspiracy.
But it gets worse (much worse, actually). By derivative liability the Trump campaign becomes connected to the whole Russian conspiracy, including the hacked emails and manipulation of social media.
As I said back in February, just what is publicly known places Trump and his associates in scalding hot water, and even worse, Mueller undoubtedly knows much more than we do. And then there's the obstruction, which just becomes more and more overt and blatant every day.
Will Trump finish out his term? It depends on the fall elections and the Mueller report. If the Democrats sweep the House and Senate and if the Mueller report is sufficiently damning then I doubt the Democrats will be able to resist impeachment, but it seems a pointless exercise since a 2/3 majority in the Senate is required to convict. The Mueller report would have to be awfully bad to get that many Republican impeachment votes.
But even if impeachment could be successful, by the time the whole process ended there would only be a year of Trump's term left. Would it be worth it? Wouldn't it be better to run against a neutered Trump than Pence?
Suggested slogan for the Democratic candidate, idea comes from the Harding campaign: "Back to Sanity"
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 2367 by NoNukes, posted 08-06-2018 4:57 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2364 of 4573 (837587)
08-06-2018 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 2361 by caffeine
08-06-2018 11:58 AM


Re: .50 Cal Jesus Kills for your Sins
caffeine writes:
I think there's some confusion going on between citizenship and residency. Hyroglyphx mentioned that there are separate licences for temporary residents; but something like 4% of the US population are legal permanent residents but not US citizens.
About the confusion, Hyroglyphx has used the terms "ID" and "drivers license" inconsistently. There were at least several times where I felt he was saying one but meant the other. And he never mentioned permanent residents, so there's no way to know if there's more confusion there, though Jar lives in Texas, maybe he knows something.
They do not have the right to vote in the US, but they have the same driver's license as everybody else.
I actually looked this up for Texas (his state) and New Hampshire (my state). For Texas licenses the images I found online do seem to indicate whether the holder is a non-citizen. New Hampshire licenses do not (I found a non-citizen to show me one), so New Hampshire licenses cannot serve as proof of citizenship.
But I should mention something about the expiration date on NH licenses. For citizens and for permanent residents it is their birthdate, but for all other non-citizens it is their visa expiration date. If a visa holder's birthday is known it could be checked against his license expiration date, and if it didn't match then therefore they are not a citizen.
Just to bore you with a little more explanation, while permanent residency status is permanent, the green card has to be renewed every ten years. The New Hampshire driver's license renewal period is five years, which might be why it isn't tied to the ten year green card period.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2361 by caffeine, posted 08-06-2018 11:58 AM caffeine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2372 by caffeine, posted 08-07-2018 11:23 AM Percy has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024