Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 140

I didn’t notice any of that, I was just looking at the rug:

Joke’s on me.

SilverWook said:

Handman said:

I didn’t notice any of that, I was just looking at the rug:

Joke’s on me.

Well, isn’t there a standing White House set in Hollywood that many productions have used over the years? Oliver Stone’s Nixon came out the year before ID4, so maybe they just used the same carpet.

Perhaps, that probably explains why it’s pretty much an exact replica of that specific rug.

JEDIT: You were right!

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

In more important news, Jeff Sessions doesn’t like poor and/or minority voters. Big shocker there.

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/02/27/voter-id-case-trumps-team-drops-argument-against-texas/

I don’t get the argument at all that somehow minorities aren’t capable of getting an ID. It’s not unreasonable to need an ID to vote.

Just do a few seconds of Googling and you’ll find tons of evidence speaking to how this disenfranchises minorities and the poor (and the elderly). I assume you’ll just dismiss it, but it’s real.

If ID laws are made, a new ID system should be rolled out, similar to how it’s done in countries all around the world at the moment. That doesn’t seem to be the plan, however.

The Washington Post said:
“In Switzerland, every registered voter is sent a registration card prior to an election, and if the voter brings her registration card to the polling place, no additional identification is needed.”

“Canada permits any voter who lacks one of the allowed forms of photo identification to present two of forty-five other forms of identification or documentation that have the voter’s name and address on at least one. Acceptable documents include leases, student transcripts, and utility bills.”

Sweden’s policy is a bit more vague, requiring that a “voter who is not known to the voting clerks [produce] an identity document or in another way verify her or his identity.”

“India allows the use of fifteen different types of identification, ranging from property documents to arms licenses to income tax identity cards. Included, too, are forms of identification most likely to be possessed by the poor… For instance, voters can present ration cards issued to the poor to allow them to buy food staples and kerosene oil at subsidized prices.”

That’s in addition to many countries that don’t require ID to vote, such as “Denmark, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom (with the exception of Northern Ireland),” the authors wrote.

They also pointed out that in many other countries, it’s much easier to obtain identification than it is in the United States because ID cards are issued to all citizens automatically:

“Countries such as Spain, Greece, France, Malta, Belgium, and Italy provide national identity documents to their citizens to use for many purposes, including travel, banking, and healthcare access as well as voting.”

Just to get you started.

https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

I’m not really convinced either way. I don’t understand why it’s a racial problem here and noncontroversial everywhere else (surely other countries have their own minorities and poor?), and I don’t understand why it’s needed with little evidence of voter fraud. In essence, it is a nonissue.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/voter-id-laws-racism

Another key reason why Republican voters see no problem with these laws is their big safety valve: if you don’t have an ID, well, then, be responsible and go get one!

If, however, Republican voters are generally unaware of the high frequency of minorities, the poor, and the elderly lacking IDs, they are blissfully ignorant of the real costs of getting an ID. Yes, the ID itself is free for the indigent (to comport with the 24th Amendment’s ban on poll taxes), but the documents one needs to get a photo ID aren’t, and the prices haven’t been reduced. Lost your naturalization certificate? That’ll be $345. Don’t have a birth certificate because you’re black and were born in the segregated south? You have to go to court.

Similarly, Republican voters—and perhaps most others—tend not to be aware of how hard it can be to get an ID if you live in a state where DMV offices are far away or where they simply aren’t open very often. One can only hope that would-be voters have access to a car or adequate public transportation, and a boss who won’t mind if they take several hours off work to go get their ID, particularly if they live in, say, the third of Texas counties that have no ID-issuing offices at all.

I doubt that most Republican voters know that some Republican officials are taking steps to make it even harder to get that ID. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, to take an example, signed a strict voter ID law and then made a move to start closing DMV offices in areas full of Democrats, while increasing office hours in areas full of Republicans—this in a state in which half of blacks and Hispanics are estimated to lack a driver’s license and a quarter of its DMV offices are open less than one day per month. (Sauk City’s is open a whopping four times a year.) Somehow I doubt that this is primarily about saving money.

Handman said:

I’m not really convinced either way. I don’t understand why it’s a racial problem here and noncontroversial everywhere else (surely other countries have their own minorities and poor?)

I don’t know about other countries, but I have the same response as I gave to mfm - just do a few seconds of searching and you’ll find tons of studies showing how disproportionate of a problem it is for minorities in the US.

Pretty sure I linked to this the last time voter ID came up.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html?utm_term=.f0a030ffbd03

.

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Handman said:

But if they don’t like Hillary, why would they vote for her? I don’t understand this logic. If they don’t like her, they probably wouldn’t have voted for her regardless of who else is on the ticket, and most likely did not think Trump was that bad. Furthermore, frankly it’s long overdue a third party had power in government. I do not see how not voting for your candidate is childish.

Trump supporters voting for Trump was not childish…although it’s already proving to be self-defeating in many cases!

Bernie supporters in swing states not voting for Hillary because of what the DNC did to Bernie was childish…unless they somehow truly still believe things would be no better under Hillary than things already are under Trump. And if you’re really a Bernie supporter, I don’t know how you can possibly believe that. And if they do, I think they’re deluding themselves.

Bernie supporters tended to hate Hillary long before what she and her cohorts did to him at the DNC. There was never going to be a rush of his people voting for her.

Well I hope his people enjoy Trump.

I guess. Personally I think that Trump is a message to the DNC that they can’t afford to push a candidate that their base hates.

I think Trump is a message about what can happen when people fail to see that sometimes you do have to choose between the lesser of two evils.

I would have no problem with voter ID laws if it could be assured that that it would be easy and inexpensive enough for everyone(this includes minorities, the poor, the disabled, the elderly, etc . . ) to obtain IDs.

Apparently Trump is getting a lot of credit for his speech. Low bar, I guess.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/dont-be-fooled-donald-trump-didnt-pivot

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/02/28/trumps-speech-to-congress-was-devoid-of-substance/?utm_term=.76c875173778

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/03/no_trump_s_speech_was_not_reaganesque.html

Trump’s plan for VOICE sounds an awful lot like this.

https://www.balloon-juice.com/2016/11/15/why-stopbannon-is-so-important/breitbart-black-crime/

Mashing up two memes.

The Doctor Who one looks smaller on the inside : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs0qpASAtCA
The Superman II one is the one most familiar to me : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKDFop0aqYQ

Holy shit I can’t even keep up with all the Russia/Trump news tonight.

You mean the bi-partisan investigation?

There’s also the fact that Sessions might have committed perjury during his confirmation hearing when he didn’t disclose his contact with Russian officials.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-spoke-twice-with-russian-ambassador-during-trumps-presidential-campaign-justice-officials-say/2017/03/01/77205eda-feac-11e6-99b4-9e613afeb09f_story.html?utm_term=.1d2a51252159

Yes, both of those…and Sessions is on camera under oath saying he had no contact with Russia, I don’t understand how that could possibly be anything other than perjury…and then there’s also this one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/obama-trump-russia-election-hacking.html

In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.

American allies, including the British and the Dutch, had provided information describing meetings in European cities between Russian officials — and others close to Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — and associates of President-elect Trump, according to three former American officials who requested anonymity in discussing classified intelligence. Separately, American intelligence agencies had intercepted communications of Russian officials, some of them within the Kremlin, discussing contacts with Trump associates.

Then and now, Mr. Trump has denied that his campaign had any contact with Russian officials, and at one point he openly suggested that American spy agencies had cooked up intelligence suggesting that the Russian government had tried to meddle in the presidential election. Mr. Trump has accused the Obama administration of hyping the Russia story line as a way to discredit his new administration.

At the Obama White House, Mr. Trump’s statements stoked fears among some that intelligence could be covered up or destroyed — or its sources exposed — once power changed hands. What followed was a push to preserve the intelligence that underscored the deep anxiety with which the White House and American intelligence agencies had come to view the threat from Moscow.

I could be wrong, but I think Jeff Sessions is in a bit of trouble.

Here’s the video of Sessions saying he had no contact with Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BpgHcanjCQ