… with tears in their eyes, singing “To Sir, With Love”
Lulu will never forgive you for that one.
The first obvious work-around–expensive, of course–is to send the mail-in ballots via a service othr than the USPS.
Charlatan’s Carnival line-up as of last report.
The article continues with the names of those who will not and will be there. Another poster asked me for a cite about Commodores. The article has this:
The Woman Who Should be President is on point.
And, of course, the felon is outsourcing the artwork.
Here’s what a real leader does when someone faints in their presence. (It’s a video; the whole blurb is belowl.)
Miller Lite in the Brains asserts his boss is “building an extraordinary paradise”.
Am sure there is nefarious intent with the proposal, but most functioning democracies would consider that a central tenement of a national voting system in a democracy would be a nationally maintained electoral roll. Next step is a nationally mandated, standard election polling and counting procedure, including an appeals body.
Per CNN, Trump has now threatened to bomb 9% of the world’s population.
As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump gleefully painted his opponents as trigger-happy interventionists who would get the United States bogged down in all manner of foreign wars — up to and including World War III.
As always with these people, “every accusation is a confession”.
Is that the gist of the grift ?
In the US those voter rolls are maintained at the State level, not Federal. It’s how the system has been built from the beginning. Each State maintains it’s electoral roll. We do not have a “national voting system” in the US, we have “state/province voting systems”. Yes, it’s a legacy of when the States functioned more like separate nations (and two of the States used to be sovereign nations) but that doesn’t mean it’s entirely bad
It has worked, more or less, up until now and I do not see a reason to change.
For one thing, it’s a lot harder to corrupt and/or subvert 50 separate voting systems than to pervert just one. A fact not lost on the current crew.
It would actually benfit him if he followed in their footsteps. He’d have to lipsync somewhat, but his tiny pouty mouth doesn’t enunciate very well anyway. No would would notice if they got a suitable voice actor.
That way, a sane person could be actually responsible for Presidential communications.
Or even, different words on teleprompt, and what is broadcast on the speakers so he thinks he’s making a speech…
Dangit!
So you consider that the advantage of a broken system is that it’s harder to fix?
What’s broken about it?
Well if you discount the disproportionation caused by the electoral college, partisan interference in electoral boundaries, partisan interference in maintaining electoral rolls, partisan disenfranchisement of eligible voters, partisan interference in polling day voting, partisan interference in vote counting, partisan interference in election determination & partisan interference in election certification, probably not that much really.
How many things on that list are solved by requiring the federal government to establish a list of eligible voters based on available citizenship data and directing the U.S. Postal Service to only deliver mail-in ballots to individuals on each state’s approved voter roll?
Probably three of them:
- partisan interference in maintaining electoral rolls
- partisan disenfranchisement of eligible voters
- partisan interference in polling day voting
And the bellwether realisation regarding several other measures that the system can be fixed without necessarily burning the republic to the ground.
The electoral college is probably the most “broken” part of the system. All of the rest - partisan interference in electoral boundaries, maintenance of electoral roles, disenfranchisement of select groups, etc., etc., can (and do) occur in national elections in other nations.
Past history indicates that under the current system(s) while some locations might be corrupt and oppressive (see Jim Crow South and the suppression of Black voting) other locations are less so (during that time the North, West, and New England weren’t perfect but less oppressive).
The system may not be as efficient as some (for certain definitions of efficient) but I don’t see where it is “broken”. The fact someone despicable was elected doesn’t make the system broken.
I don’t see where nationalizing the election rolls and processes will be fix any of the above.
Or don’t national-level elections in other nations suffer from “partisan interference” and corruption?
I’m old enough to remember when there was one and ONLY one day on which a person could vote (outside of absentee voting, which you had to justify). That was the second Tuesday in November and that was everywhere. (A few party primaries were held at other times, but they were the exception, not the rule, and are to choose the candidates for the “real” elections in November).
Now, early voting is widespread. This enables people like retail workers to actually get to the polls and vote in a reliable manner.
What makes you think Trump and the billionaires will want to continue that, should they gain central control?
As it stands now, multiple states are MUCH more even-handed and less partisan than if the Trump administration controlled all elections everywhere.
Your proposal doesn’t seem to consider that Trump & Co. want control of the voter rolls to control who can vote - massive disenfranchisement of anyone who voted other than Republican, anyone seeming ethnic, anyone who might be an immigrant or former immigrant now citizen, political/personal enemies, anyone who might belong to an “enemy” group. You’re talking about an administration that basically declared any dissent as “domestic terrorism”.
Even if you could convince me that “nationalizing” the entire election apparatus in the US was a good idea I’m not convinced it’s a good idea at this time.
No they don’t. Not with your democratic peers to the north. Not with your democratic peers to the east. Not with your democratic peers to the west. That’s American exceptionalism for you.
A step in the right direction, no doubt. In this unsophisticated backwater pre-poll voting is of such increasing utility and popularity that in the next electoral cycle the votes cast pre-poll are expected to exceed those cast on polling day. 45-55% of local eligible voters vote pre-poll which compares favourably with the % of eligible voters who will vote at all in the stateside mid-terms. It was 46.8% in 2020, no?
'Cause you are really quite happy for the system to be broken, provided your guy wins. You are being partisan about fixing a broken system that partisans broke.
I don’t care which guy wins, provided the system has integrity.
True but the suggestion suffers from the same problem any system suffers - it’s a chicken and egg problem.
If it is not established up front in a genuinely nonpartisan manner by people interested in actually seeing democracy work, it’s already doomed to fail.
Worse, if it somehow still gets set up and is overseen by the sort of people it is intended to defend against, it can have the opposite effect and be weaponized against actual democratic norms.
First, there needs to be actual buy-in from enough interested parties to have a chance at working. Simply bolting it onto the current US system would actually make things worse.
And I guess you haven’t been paying attention but there’s very little chance of setting it up in a genuinely effective and representative manner with the way things are now. We need the general public to think there’s actually an issue to be addressed, and since you haven’t noticed, there’s more than a little delusion on that front.
trump has repeatedly talked about what a bad non-nuclearization deal the Obama admin made with Iran. In that way he has of making up stupid stories and repeating them ad nauseum, he’s often said “Obama cleared cash out of several banks and gave it to Iran, nobody had ever seen anything like it”. In my infrequent visits to Facebook I’ve seen right-wing cartoon memes like one depicting “Obama negotiating with Iran” showing Obama holding a white flag and a bag full of cash; and “trump negotiating with Iran” showing trump holding a bazooka.
Anybody who has even a modest relationship with reality knows that the Obama admin did not pay Iran any American money, they simply unfroze $1.7 billion in Iranian assets in return for Iran allowing nuclear inspectors to ensure they weren’t pursuing a nuclear program. And the deal was working, until trump tore it up.
Now the latest trump peace deal with Iran includes includes a ‘$300 billion investment fund to help rebuild Iran at the end of the war’. It’s just lies and hypocrisy stacked on top of lies and hypocrisy, all the way down.
I know this is Raw Story, which some find suspect, but their source is a NY Times article, which I don’t have a paid subscription to.
From your article:
Analysts and observers reacted to the report on social media.
“That’s 300 ballrooms!” Sarah Longwell, publisher of The Bulwark, posted on X.
ROFL