Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 145: Lawyer Dog, Coming to CBS Tuesdays This Fall

(+) Yeah! (+)

Espeon posted...

dowolf posted...

man.

just block MWC.

it's pretty easy.

He IS blocked on my main.

Plus his contribution to the lawyer dog debate (and there was something else recently that escapes me at the moment) gave me a glimmer of hope that he can decrease some of the more hyperbolic posts he makes in here.

Thank
You.

Sincerely.
---

I remember now! It was about the national anthem debate. MWC thought it was stupid that people were being booed for kneeling even when the anthem wasnt being played. There was civility there that inspired me to want to behave more civilly as well.
---

Espeon posted...

I remember now! It was about the national anthem debate. MWC thought it was stupid that people were being booed for kneeling even when the anthem wasnt being played. There was civility there that inspired me to want to behave more civilly as well.

Oh. Thx. Again.
---

I will bow out on this one.

Didn't intend to piss anyone off. Was just surprised something like that hadn't been done previously.

I'll be back later maybe when the winners are declared.

Night.
---

EmDubyaSee posted...

Espeon posted...

EmDubyaSee posted...

Espeon posted...

EmDubyaSee posted...

Peace___Frog posted...

https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/927936962232815616

We are getting reports of calls to Virginia voters falsely saying that their polling place has changed.

If you receive a call:
Confirm your polling place at https://t.co/3NmwdTvoHb

Report it to @ACLUVA at 804-644-8080
#ElectionDay #vagov

Also seeing reports of full parking lots, but very short voting lines.

Voter suppression attempts, gotta love it.

That second part is awesome! I wonder why no one thought of it before. It's so amazingly simple.

I told myself I was going to stop being so aggressive and confrontational Im these topics, so this is me being calm.

Can you PLEASE not act vocally giddy about reports of actions that, if true, represent underhanded tactics designed to screw American citizens out of their right to choose their own representation? I know you hate the Patriots and all the allegations of cheating, so please dont support cheating in politics, which ACTUALLY affects peoples lives and can negatively impact them without their voice being heard.

How is it cheating?

It's pretty dirty, (like having the lead of less than 6 on offense and making multiple offensive penalties to kill clock...) but it's totally not cheating. Just like killing the clock while driving it's probably dirty, but absolutely great strategy.

Voter suppression in general is cheating. How would you feel if I arbitrarily had the power to deny you a voice in decisions that affect your life? Our democracy is founded on the idea that the people have a say in choosing their elected officials and this is yet another example of taking peoples rights away.

The FIRST part is voter suppression, and while it was brilliant, it was also illegal. You didn't see me praising the phone scam did you? If that happens report them and get them arrested. That would be like deflating football.

The second part isn't remotely voter suppression. You aren't making it so someone can't vote, or can't find a place to vote and gives up.

You are giving the illusion that the line is incredibly long, and if they don't think their vote is worth time that's on them. The Dems actually can do this too. We just are usually more passionate about voting. Dems don't go out in the rain in large numbers for this.

I didnt even consider the optics of someone turning away on the notion that the line is too long. I thought it was just a deterrent because if you cant park your car, youre probably just gonna turn away.

But the problem with EITHER action is that you cannot assume that people are just lazy for not sticking around. If voting takes an unfair amount of time, there ARE people who cannot afford to spend that time waiting in line, either for financial reasons (job wont give them time to go vote) or caretaker reasons (have to be home for children or elderly relatives).

All Im asking is not to cheer an underhanded tactic. Even if its not illegal, its fucked up and wanting people to vote shouldnt be a partisan issue.
---

I have most of MWC's accounts blocked but not this one yet, so I'll just say this:

It's not just an illusion that the line is long to vote. It's an actual obstacle for parking to vote. You can't just drive up to a planted car's parking spot and decide "oh hey, actually that's available for me."

That practice lengthens the lines for everybody, which is part of why I think this is a weak way to suppress the vote too...but I'm really not suprised you support this dirty practice either. Be better.
---

HaRRicH posted...

I have most of MWC's accounts blocked but not this one yet, so I'll just say this:

It's not just an illusion that the line is long to vote. It's an actual obstacle for parking to vote. You can't just drive up to a planted car's parking spot and decide "oh hey, actually that's available for me."

That practice lengthens the lines for everybody, which is part of why I think this is a weak way to suppress the vote too...but I'm really not suprised you support this dirty practice either. Be better.

That's basically how I feel too. But if the lot is for voters only, and you're parked there and not voting... then the vehicle should be towed and owner fined more than the standard rate.

But that is difficult to do since the stations are likely understaffed as is.
---

HaRRicH posted...

I have most of MWC's accounts blocked but not this one yet, so I'll just say this:

It's not just an illusion that the line is long to vote. It's an actual obstacle for parking to vote. You can't just drive up to a planted car's parking spot and decide "oh hey, actually that's available for me."

That practice lengthens the lines for everybody, which is part of why I think this is a weak way to suppress the vote too...but I'm really not suprised you support this dirty practice either. Be better.

I can tell you why it's not weak at least.

The reason Repubs think this would be an advantage for them is because Repubs as a whole are much more Likely to go out in bad weather to vote. It's been shown over and over, and if it so much as rains a lot of Dems stay home. They are just extrapolating that fact and going with if it looks like the line is long, people who brave the elements are more likely to wait in line than those who typically vote in significantly smaller numbers when it rains.
---

A lot of these problems are solved by allowing early voting.
---

Dancedreamer posted...

A lot of these problems are solved by allowing early voting.

Which is why so many states will never do that.
---

Dancedreamer posted...

A lot of these problems are solved by allowing early voting.

For a Republican government, these are features, not bugs.
---

Dancedreamer posted...

A lot of these problems are solved by allowing early voting.

It's far far easier to rig with this you know...
---

It's better for every vote-rigger to go free than for one innocent citizen to lose their vote though right?
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

It's better for every vote-rigger to go free than for one innocent citizen to lose their vote though right?

As a person who backs the party who doesn't routinely have dead people vote.... no. No it's not.
---

To make sure, you know I was being facetious right? I was paraphrasing you actually.
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

To make sure, you know I was being facetious right? I was paraphrasing you actually.

Yes. I know. They aren't remotely the same thing though....

No ones vote matters if it's rigged with dead people from the beginning.

Innocents being incarcerated always matter.
---

It's 2017 everyone should just be able to vote from their phone, I don't know why this is even a debate.

But if it was easy then poor people would do it and we can't have that.
---

Kenri posted...

It's 2017 everyone should just be able to vote from their phone, I don't know why this is even a debate.

But if it was easy then poor people would do it and we can't have that.

So you want to make it even EASIER to rig?
---

Kenri posted...

It's 2017 everyone should just be able to vote from their phone, I don't know why this is even a debate.

Too much security issues, tbh. Otherwise I'd agree with you.

Early in person voting would solve a lot of issues though.
---

Kenri posted...

It's 2017 everyone should just be able to vote from their phone, I don't know why this is even a debate.

But if it was easy then poor people would do it and we can't have that.

Youre just asking for people to hack the system. Anything that is not showing up in person to vote is not desirable.
---

EmDubyaSee posted...

So you want to make it even EASIER to rig?

Guy on team "6 million fraudulent votes were cast in California for some reason": we can't change the current system or it'll be too easy to rig!
---

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.
---

Kenri posted...

EmDubyaSee posted...

So you want to make it even EASIER to rig?

Guy on team "6 million fraudulent votes were cast in California for some reason": we can't change the current system or it'll be too easy to rig!

I mean, if somebody keeps breaking through the lock on your door and breaking into your house, yes it's bad, but the answer certainly isn't "You know what? Cardboard doors."
---

Kenri posted...

EmDubyaSee posted...

So you want to make it even EASIER to rig?

Guy on team "6 million fraudulent votes were cast in California for some reason": we can't change the current system or it'll be too easy to rig!

This is worse. This can ACTUALLY be hacked.

There is alway a chance that enough real people will vote to counter act the amount of dead people you have vote.

With this thing which is 100% getting hacked, just use an algorithm to change votes to keep it close within polls and no one will ever remotely know different.
---

Dancedreamer posted...

Too much security issues, tbh. Otherwise I'd agree with you.

Early in person voting would solve a lot of issues though.

charmander6000 posted...

Youre just asking for people to hack the system. Anything that is not showing up in person to vote is not desirable.

We have those issues now with voting machines anyway, might as well make it easier for legitimate voters. Though if elections were on weekends and voting days were holidays it would help a lot too so that's a short term solution.
---

Lopen posted...

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.

Do you believe poor people don't have smart phones? As a whole?
---

Lopen posted...

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.

It's 2017, bro. Even most "poor people" have smart phones, they just might be a few years behind.

Unless your definition of poor people is like literally just the homeless(and even some of them have phones!)
---

Lopen posted...

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.

Poor people can have smart phones. They're not even that expensive.
---

Dancedreamer posted...

Lopen posted...

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.

Poor people can have smart phones. They're not even that expensive.

Owning a smart phone is cheap

Actually having working service is not and would screw half the country
---

I'm not a fan of voting machines either, but it would take a lot more effort to hack.
---

Lopen posted...

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.

...yes? what about it. what other method is more accessible?

StealThisSheen posted...

I mean, if somebody keeps breaking through the lock on your door and breaking into your house, yes it's bad, but the answer certainly isn't "You know what? Cardboard doors."

great analogy dude, whatever argument you think i'm making sure is shot now
---

StealThisSheen posted...

Actually having working service is not and would screw half the country

Not really. You can get a 2GB plan for like $30/month.
---

Kenri posted...

Dancedreamer posted...

Too much security issues, tbh. Otherwise I'd agree with you.

Early in person voting would solve a lot of issues though.

charmander6000 posted...

Youre just asking for people to hack the system. Anything that is not showing up in person to vote is not desirable.

We have those issues now with voting machines anyway, might as well make it easier for legitimate voters. Though if elections were on weekends and voting days were holidays it would help a lot too so that's a short term solution.

Equating the security issues of anything using some sort of wireless to a closed system is laughable.
---

Kenri posted...

great analogy dude, whatever argument you think i'm making sure is shot now

Your argument is "Illegal voting already happens so who cares if it's easier to do so as long as more people in general can vote"

So yes it is a pretty good analogy, thanks!
---

fwiw I never specified smart phones, and quite intentionally because I know those aren't within some people's budgets (though each year they become more and more so)

StealThisSheen posted...

Your argument is "Illegal voting already happens so who cares if it's easier to do so as long as more people in general can vote"

nailed it, i'm definitely one of those people who believes 6 million fake votes were cast in california, you're right
---

With a smart phone you either have an up front cost most poor people can't afford, or you have a plan that's too expensive that most poor people would be stupid to afford. Even in 2017, imo.
---

Reminder that Washington State mails paper ballots to all registered voters that we fill out and return to drop boxes at our leisure.
---

What's the opinion on voting by mail? It'd be a lot easier for voters and most states already use it in some situations, so why not make it an option at least.
---

StealThisSheen posted...

Dancedreamer posted...

Lopen posted...

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.

Poor people can have smart phones. They're not even that expensive.

Owning a smart phone is cheap

Actually having working service is not and would screw half the country

My fianc has Kricket.... 45 dollars a month.
Data and txt. I think unlimited minutes too.
---

Kenri posted...

nailed it, i'm definitely one of those people who believes 6 million fake votes were cast in california, you're right

...I... You literally said

Kenri posted...

We have those issues now with voting machines anyway, might as well make it easier for legitimate voters.

Is being stupid your new gimmick
---

Xeybozn posted...

What's the opinion on voting by mail? It'd be a lot easier for voters and most states already use it in some situations, so why not make it an option at least.

I think it's fine, but I think early voting in person would be even better. I mean I'm not sure why they haven't had this forever now. Especially with how bad lines are in some places. (Where I live now there were hardly any lines, but we only have really local elections here this year, including the Mayor who ran unopposed)
---

EmDubyaSee posted...

StealThisSheen posted...

Dancedreamer posted...

Lopen posted...

I like how "poor people" and "can vote from their phone" are used in the same sentence.

Poor people can have smart phones. They're not even that expensive.

Owning a smart phone is cheap

Actually having working service is not and would screw half the country

My fianc has Kricket.... 45 dollars a month.
Data and txt. I think unlimited minutes too.

45 a month is a lot if you're living paycheck to paycheck or worse
---

Like

Given the context of the discussion is "people who are poor enough that voting sites are not accessible to them"

I think if these same people have phones good enough that voting from them is a viable option they've got some screwed up priorities and probably aren't voting regardless of how accessible it is
---

You wouldnt even need the plan you would just need the phone and an open wifi network. You could cast your vote sitting outside a McDonalds.
---

StealThisSheen posted...

Kenri posted...

nailed it, i'm definitely one of those people who believes 6 million fake votes were cast in california, you're right

...I... You literally said

Kenri posted...

We have those issues now with voting machines anyway, might as well make it easier for legitimate voters.

Is being stupid your new gimmick

Yeah, we do have "those issues" (electronic systems being hackable) now and yet fraudulent votes are still (despite what some people claim) incredibly rare, so as to basically be nonexistent.
---

Lopen posted...

Like

Given the context of the discussion is "people who are poor enough that voting sites are not accessible to them"

I think if these same people have phones good enough that voting from them is a viable option they've got some screwed up priorities and probably aren't voting regardless of how accessible it is

I mean, this is just wrong.

Because time is a much, much bigger limiting factor to accessibility than money for working poor people with dependants, and getting a cheaper phone isn't going to help with that.
---

Kenri posted...

StealThisSheen posted...

Kenri posted...

nailed it, i'm definitely one of those people who believes 6 million fake votes were cast in california, you're right

...I... You literally said

Kenri posted...

We have those issues now with voting machines anyway, might as well make it easier for legitimate voters.

Is being stupid your new gimmick

Yeah, we do have "those issues" (electronic systems being hackable) now and yet fraudulent votes are still (despite what some people claim) incredibly rare, so as to basically be nonexistent.

So youre arguing that a system which takes votes over the phone somehow isnt less secure?
---

MWC, why do you think dead people vote en masse for Democrats? Like, where are you getting your data? The data I've seen regarding voter fraud seems to indicate that fraudulent votes are much more infrequent than you seem to believe. I will admit there is a non-zero amount of fraudulent votes cast overall, but I don't think it's an amount that threatens changes in the outcome of the overall vote, nor do I think it's specific to a single political party (as evidenced by the woman this past election cycle who voted in her husband's place since he'd died.) I think that, yes, dead people do vote sometimes, but it's less fraud and more a person voting early, only to die before election day.
---

I can't believe there are still people who think having a smartphone is some kind of luxury that poor people shouldn't even consider. They're the cheapest way to have internet access these days, and I'm pretty sure most people agree the internet is fairly important in modern life.

(Note: Voting by phone is still a terrible idea. This just isn't a good reason.)
---

redrocket_pub posted...

Because time is a much, much bigger limiting factor to accessibility than money for working poor people with dependants, and getting a cheaper phone isn't going to help with that.

Eh.

It's both, really. I mean, I just don't see a huge uptick in poor people voting through phones were it made a common thing. Either they don't have phones up to the task, or simply aren't going to prioritize it.
---