Certainly not all those farm subsidies!
2021 American Civil War
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Certainly not all those farm subsidies!
Chuck Norris' kicks are so fast that he would knock President Biden's head off three years in the future.
Postal voters are actually recipe for disaster, there's a reason even my country don't adopt that. It's very easy to obtain ID for those that won't vote and mail them in. It's actually harder when you actually have to show up with your face and ID. And they use a simple ink on your pinky finger that last for 1 day, indicating you have voted.
It's actually very hard to rig an election (assuming 2 parties are involved and there's witness all over). Most of the election booth are run by locals, and the counting is witnessed by everyone involved, you really can't somehow tamper with it. The tally have to be certified by both witness. Most who comes are local neighbours, they'd know immidiately if there's a bunch of outsiders suddenly voting, and even then their name won't be on the list.
So unless they come up with retinal scan which means 1 person 1 vote I doubt they'd be moving too far from the traditional come and vote mechanism.
Its residual sentiment left over from the cold war, where Rs were constantly railing against Communism. In today's GOP world, socialism is framed as communism-lite, so its easy to vilify in that regard.
On a serious note, I really do wonder. Again and again you hear republicans mention the radical left or socialism. And I would really like to ask them what exactly are these radical or socialist ideas that they oppose so much.
Okay, so you've got someone else's ID, and you've requested a postal vote in their name. How do you get into their home/registered address to get it? Risk election fraud and breaking and entering charges just to get an extra vote or two in the ballot box?
On a serious note, I really do wonder. Again and again you hear republicans mention the radical left or socialism. And I would really like to ask them what exactly are these radical or socialist ideas that they oppose so much.
Non white people being allowed to vote and hold power.
Yeah, seems like it, as you hear it almost every time an R talks about dems or dem policies.
Coming from a much more left wing country than the US, where even the right wing parties are more left wing than the dems, it just sounds so weird.
My thoughts exactly. No specifics at all - just the vague threat of 'socialism' and 'loss of freedom'. The Republicans are amazing at courting the dumb vote.
First, I don't see how it's "very easy" to obtain ID for those that won't vote. It's actually not that easy at all. You would have to know more information than is publicly available and go through a series of checks at the DMV. It's quite hard which is why hustlers can't just obtain ID for identity theft and fraud. They have to go through one of several much more complicated hustles simply to get a single stolen ID that would pass. Any operation to somehow mass obtain ID and commit postal voter fraud would be extremely time-consuming, complicated, and run a very high risk of getting caught. It's simply not happening.
Second, in-person voting (in California at least) doesn't require showing an ID. It just requires a name and address.
And it's absurd to think that somehow your "local neighbors" will notice. First, local neighbors don't see you mark off your name and address when you go into polling. Second, it's not like anyone actually knows their entire neighborhood, that's absurd to suggest really. (I haven't recognized a single other person when voting).
I'm talking if one party actually wants to rig , as in really rig hard the election. Not some random people wants to vote extra. We're talking about actual counterfeit ballots with bogus ID suddenly appears to be counted.
If you wanna rig, you rig the paper, not the actual house.
The notion of mass voter fraud is a hoax perpetuated by parties who know they're losing voters because of their archaic policies that only favour the wealthy.
While that may be true for some of todays campaign messaging stereotypes, I have to assume the conflict predates the cold war?
After all it's not like there was no workers movement in the US like there was everywhere else, and describing/vilifying it as a communist threat surely was going on in US political messaging since the beginning of the century?
I would be interested to hear whether for example the New Deal legislation was attacked as 'socialist' at the time, too?
This is the correct answer.
This is an incorrect answer.
The bold sounds like a nice science-fiction story but its not something remotely close to realistic or feasible.
I think we're talking about two slightly different things here.
The first, which you're talking about now is voter fraud and postal Voting has issues, but so does in-person voting and there's been conflicting evidence on the amount of possible fraud via postal voting. In the UK we did a pilot trial of postal votes in the 2004 local / European parliament elections in select areas of the UK (where all votes were postal) and the result was that the electoral commission suggested that there had been less fraud and a significantly higher turnout.
I was primarily thinking about voter suppression and allowing the maximum amount of people to vote without interference / work getting in the way. I think all evidence that I'm aware of suggests that allowing non in-person voting has far higher turn out. That has a huge significance on high integrity elections.
Introducing tech to one of the most Bomb proof electoral systems in the world would be silly. You’re adding a tech barrier to millions of people that probably couldn’t afford to keep up with the pace of change.
Our system is great on an operational level. All we need is a better window. Either a weekend, or better still, an additional Public Holiday on a Monday with a 48 hour voting window running Sunday to Monday.
Postal voting needs a push too.
I think you have a misconception on what I'm trying to say.
I'm not speaking in terms of US election. I'm saying that in a rigged election. They simply rigged the result, not the actual people coming to vote. When they want to add votes to one party, they did it with simply adding numbers. Data. Reports. With fake details. Something that's harder to do when every voters need to come to voting booth.
If hypothetically everyone should vote by mail. Those without homes cant vote. But their id details remain and can be used.
In person you need id and actual face to match the id.
Which one is harder to rig?
To be fair, we also need anonymous untraceable voting. I understand why we haven't got it, as that's what allows us to go in with minimal ID but it's not a great way of it working if governments can conceivably trace back who voted for who. It would only be a potential issue with a particularly untrustworthy government....but Trump's can happen.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how voting works (as t least in America).
First, people without a home address can vote. That's a legal right. FYI a lot of homeless people with ID use a government benefits office as their address on ID.
Second, as I said before you do not need a photo ID to vote in-person (at least in California). You simply give your name and address (which for homeless would be the benefits office).
Third, if there actual was mass vote rigging (and there is no evidence of such) it would be just as easy to alter data from in-person voting. Literally no difference, although again it simply doesn't occur due to other checks.
Being forced to carry a card saying who we are impinges on our civil rights.
The thing is that we are given a voting card for every election that we are eligible for that we could take to the polling booth but councils don't enforce that you bring them with you. There is no point taking them if the people at the polling station don't want to see them.
Bingo. Add sides of fear-mongering, voter repression and gerrymandering, and you have a successful formula for republican election wins.
Do you really believe on the bolded ? When you try to open a bank account , how do you id yourself ?
Yeah it is.That's not Chuck Norris ffs
It largely started at the beginning of the cold war and was amplified by the likes of McCarthyism, the threat of nuclear war against the Soviets, the Cuban missile crisis, the space race, the contrast between the American dream and life in the Soviet Union, as well as hardline rhetoric by the likes Nixon and Reagan.
That was the argument successfully made against introducing ID cards in the UK. I personally don't care, although I see little benefit to it, but lots of newspapers used that line of argument against it along with the cost, and it was dropped.
To open a bank account, you can show three or four different things for proof of ID. Tax bills, drivers licences, birth certificate, passport, but if you don't have the passport or drivers license, there are work around.
It's not having them that's the issue it's being forced to carry them most adults have a driving licence and a passport anyway. It's not a problem for me either I'm not the group that has scuppered every attempted roll out of a National Identification card.
And, when doing regular cash withdrawals, how do you id yourself if you dont have passport or driver license?
Jim Jordan is a fecking cnut
The easiest way to try and steal an election is to simply try to stop people that won't vote for you voting, not screwing around with ID fraud and all that. But of course, no one would try to suppress votes....
Many FIs issue their clients a card that they will accept as an initial ID. More ID may be required but if you don;t have a driver's licence or passport there are other acceptable forms of ID, bills, credit cards etc that can be used. Some institutions are now using palm scanners for authentication. Knowledge based authentication and other forms are also used in lieu of identification.
How many people go into the bank to withdraw money? It"s not the 1980s anymore. We use an ATM and a pin code, like it's the 2020s.
How many people use cash anymore? I took $100 out in March just in case and didn't use it up until September.
Hookers or Coke?
That's not the point, the idea is that this possibility exists and any person can withdraw an amount of cash from his bank account up to a limit . Therefore the possibility of fraud does exists.
Pizza and beggars.
There were red scares before the cold war - in fact, more violent than McCarthyism. First one coincided with the October Revolution, when the Soviet Union was basically fighting for survival. In the US it led to race riots, strike-breaking, government raids, arrests, murder and deportations of labour activists. Incidentally, the protocols of the elders of zion first popular in the public at this time since it was supposedly the manual the reds were using.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmer_Raids
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion#English_language_imprints
The Unamerican Activities Committee itself was formed in the 30s, again, before the cold war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_Committee#Dies_Committee_(1938–1944)
You use your bank card and enter your pin into a card reader that the teller gives you. It then gives a one time usable code that the teller puts into the computer in front of them to allow them to withdraw money from your account. They might ask you security questions if the sum is large.
:lol'
That's fecking spooky as hell! I spent about an hour looking for the video the other night and meant to pm @Olly Gunnar Solskjær to ask if he still has it anywhere as I think the youtube link is dead now.
To anyone confused, I kicked The Docs arse and Olly recorded it and put it on YouTube.
Don't think it was Chuck, but he looks like the kind of guy that wouldn't correct you if you started telling him how much you loved him in Forced Vengeance.
