Trump

[Lisnpuppy]

I have yet to participate in an election that I did NOT have to show ID in order to vote...... and I've been voting for a long time....... :)

As we know how elections run are decided per state (which I personally think some things should not.) I an 50 now (well in 2 months anyway) and the first presidential election I was able to vote in was Bill Clinton's first term. I been voting since.

 

At not one election be it city, county or state level have I ever had to have ID or even my voter's registration card. You would given the poll worker your name and they would have you sign the book that had the registration stuff in it. This year we alll voted absentee (again without even requesting it for the primary then were sent a request form for the general and sent that in if we wanted one. I have heard many republicans have issue with srares sending ballots without requests and even just sending in the mail the request form FOR the mail ballot.) Anyway, this year you had to sign the special envelope they provide which your ballot goes into.and your name, address and county of residence,

 

That is it. No ID. Never had nor did we this time, any issues. Oh wait, there was some mail carrier that got arrested maybe at primaries time stealing and opening peoples' ballots to replace then with Trump ballots..

 

Seems my state's legislature is trying to chage some of the stuff for our election right which was not having issues. Early voting is an issue. (I think it is an issue only because the person might no longer be running in the primary or sometimes things blow up at the end.) Also they moved the in person early voting and the deadline for absentee[.

 

It seems like it was a bunch of to do about nothing as it wasnt really changing to much. That us very different than other states.

[colourwheel]

 

I have yet to participate in an election that I did NOT have to show ID in order to vote...... and I've been voting for a long time....... :smile:

As we know how elections run are decided per state (which I personally think some things should not.) I an 50 now (well in 2 months anyway) and the first presidential election I was able to vote in was Bill Clinton's first term. I been voting since.

 

At not one election be it city, county or state level have I ever had to have ID or even my voter's registration card. You would given the poll worker your name and they would have you sign the book that had the registration stuff in it. This year we alll voted absentee (again without even requesting it for the primary then were sent a request form for the general and sent that in if we wanted one. I have heard many republicans have issue with srares sending ballots without requests and even just sending in the mail the request form FOR the mail ballot.) Anyway, this year you had to sign the special envelope they provide which your ballot goes into.and your name, address and county of residence,

 

That is it. No ID. Never had nor did we this time, any issues. Oh wait, there was some mail carrier that got arrested maybe at primaries time stealing and opening peoples' ballots to replace then with Trump ballots..

 

Seems my state's legislature is trying to chage some of the stuff for our election right which was not having issues. Early voting is an issue. (I think it is an issue only because the person might no longer be running in the primary or sometimes things blow up at the end.) Also they moved the in person early voting and the deadline for absentee[.

 

It seems like it was a bunch of to do about nothing as it wasnt really changing to much. That us very different than other states.

 

 

When I lived up north back in the 90's I also had the same experience voting for the 1st time in my life. I also voted for Clinton and didn't have to show my ID or voter registration card. It was just simply taking my name down and then marking me on a list for showing up.

 

Once I ended up moving from the north down to a southern state, suddenly voting became extremely taxing and somewhat in my opinion had unnecessary restrictions. Participating in an election in a southern State I was required to not only state my name and show them my drivers license but they even asked me questions such as if I was a citizen and what party I was affiliated with as well as confirming my current residence etc... I just found all the questions they asked me to be completely ridiculous. I ended up skipping the next local election and tried to show up a cycle later to vote and I was rejected. They told me I had to register again to participate if I missed the last local cycle. It was extremely discouraging because this is how I found out how this state ran their elections. As Far as I understood back when I lived up north, the state never had any problems with voting fraud and no one ever questioned the integrity of the results despite not having any strict voting laws.

[Lisnpuppy]

 

 

I have yet to participate in an election that I did NOT have to show ID in order to vote...... and I've been voting for a long time....... :smile:

 

As we know how elections run are decided per state (which I personally think some things should not.) I an 50 now (well in 2 months anyway) and the first presidential election I was able to vote in was Bill Clinton's first term. I been voting since.

 

At not one election be it city, county or state level have I ever had to have ID or even my voter's registration card. You would given the poll worker your name and they would have you sign the book that had the registration stuff in it. This year we alll voted absentee (again without even requesting it for the primary then were sent a request form for the general and sent that in if we wanted one. I have heard many republicans have issue with srares sending ballots without requests and even just sending in the mail the request form FOR the mail ballot.) Anyway, this year you had to sign the special envelope they provide which your ballot goes into.and your name, address and county of residence,

 

That is it. No ID. Never had nor did we this time, any issues. Oh wait, there was some mail carrier that got arrested maybe at primaries time stealing and opening peoples' ballots to replace then with Trump ballots..

 

Seems my state's legislature is trying to chage some of the stuff for our election right which was not having issues. Early voting is an issue. (I think it is an issue only because the person might no longer be running in the primary or sometimes things blow up at the end.) Also they moved the in person early voting and the deadline for absentee[.

 

It seems like it was a bunch of to do about nothing as it wasnt really changing to much. That us very different than other states.

ÃÃÂ

When I lived up north back in the 90's I also had the same experience voting for the 1st time in my life. I also voted for Clinton and didn't have to show my ID or voter registration card. It was just simply taking my name down and then marking me on a list for showing up.

ÃÃÂ

Once I ended up moving from the north down to a southern state, suddenly voting became extremely taxing and somewhat in my opinion had unnecessary restrictions. Participating in an election in a southern State I was required to not only state my name and show them my drivers license but they even asked me questions such as if I was a citizen and what party I was affiliated with as well as confirming my current residence etc... I just found all the questions they asked me to be completely ridiculous. I ended up skipping the next local election and tried to show up a cycle later to vote and I was rejected. They told me I had to register again to participate if I missed the last local cycle. It was extremely discouraging because this is how I found out how this state ran their elections. As Far as I understood back when I lived up north, the state never had any problems with voting fraud and no one ever questioned theÃÃÂ integrity of the results despite not having any strict voting laws.

Since West Virginia is right in-between it makes sense we are a bit different. Lol

7

The only time I had to state my party was to confirm it at a primary because you could not obviously, vote for the other side. For years independent voters could not vote the primary at all but they now can choose one for the primaries. Still, I never even had to show my voter registration or any kind of picture ID. I state my name, they find it in the list and I sign it there in their book. My turned in ballot has no identification on it, as should be. Since we voted by mail this time that signature went on the ballot envelope which was inside the mailing envelope. Since I've never voted outside of West Virgina I can't comment though I have friends who talk about it.

 

It is absolutely nuts to clear voter registration rolls from one cycle to the next. What a pain in the ass that would be. I'm going to bet you can get a gun license in that state easier that voter's registration. If you need a license for a gun at all.

 

Appears we are of the same age perhaps, Colourwheel? I can still remember watching the election results that night Clinton was first elected. I was so excited and proud I had voted. Little did I know what was to come.

[HeyYou]

Actually, Clinton was a good president, just not a good person. :) When slick Willy was in office, the economy was good, we weren't involved in any wars, and I do believe he actually had something resembling a balanced budget. (not 100% on that last bit....) Then we had 9/11, and the world went to sh...... crap. I don't think its improved much over the intervening years..... some things have certainly gotten worse....

 

Apparently, voting laws vary DRAMATICALLY from state to state...... A uniform set of rules would certainly be good, but, I don't think the states would stand for the fed dictating to them how to run elections. Of course, for federal elections, they would have a leg to stand on, (the feds) but, for local stuff..... not so much.

 

I don't see that changing any time soon either.

[Deleted92948618User]

First, it would help to remember that in the southern states, voter fraud is defined as "voting for a democrat".

 

 

 

< prune >

 

Apparently, voting laws vary DRAMATICALLY from state to state...... A uniform set of rules would certainly be good, but, I don't think the states would stand for the fed dictating to them how to run elections. Of course, for federal elections, they would have a leg to stand on, (the feds) but, for local stuff..... not so much.

 

I don't see that changing any time soon either.

 

 

And remember, all the Republican Senators from those self same Southern States who believe the Big Lie (the election was stolen from Lying Little Donnie) voted against a federal level voting rights law. Why do you suppose that is? Oh, yeah! I remember! They gotta keep all those folks who just ain't quite white enough from voting.

 

Why do I believe this.

In 1977, I was home in my native village and a black man walked into the tavern. He wasn't the first black man I had ever seen, but he was the biggest. We got to talking and I learned he worked at one of the local logging camps. Every week thereafter, we met and talked. I told him about my youth in a Regional Residential Indian School and he told me about his youth in the Jim Crow South.

At the age of seven, his uncle was castrated and hung from a tree for participating in a parade honoring WWII Veterans, which he was. At age nine his cousin was beaten to death and then hung and castrated for "looking at a white woman". At age fourteen, his younger sister was raped and her eviscerated body left in a "blacks only" park.

 

At sixteen, his father was hung from his own front porch with a burning cross on his front lawn for the crime of attempting to register to vote. That same year, 37 black people were killed in Mississippi for attempting to register to vote. The school and church he attended were firebombed, as were four of his neighbors homes. Three women were dragged into the local community square and beaten and burned to death for teaching people how to fill out a ballot.

 

So the next time someone spouts "it's all about voter fraud prevention", you know the truth. It is part of the centuries old racist attempt to disenfranchise black voters. Black voters commit voting fraud. Remember, voter fraud is defined as "voting for a democrat".

Edited July 23, 2021 by Guest

[xrayy]

that`s problably not what trumpists like to hear... pure ignorance is such a fine and comfortable thing.

[gnarly1]

Actually, Clinton was a good president

No. No he wasn't. It was the Clinton administration that ordered the cruise missile strike (Operation Infinite Reach) on the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, precipitating a massive humanitarian crisis which cost the lives of several tens of thousands of Sudanese. All on the basis of fairly flimsy intelligence.

 

Coincidentally the attack occurred only a week after the Lewinsky scandal and there was strong suspicion from various quarters that the attack was motivated, at least in part, by Clinton's need to 'look presidential'.

 

And since you mentioned 9/11 in your comment, here's some further food for thought, taken from the link above:

 

 

Journalist Jason Burke, in the book Al-Qaeda: Casting a Shadow of Terror, claims that Operation Infinite Reach "merely confirmed to [bin Laden and his close associates], and others with similar views worldwide, that their conception of the world as a cosmic struggle between good and evil was the right one".

The implication being that if Clinton had acted differently, 9/11 might never have happened.

 

Perhaps by 'good' you actually meant 'effective in certain areas'. Like his habitual womanising....

[HeyYou]

 

Actually, Clinton was a good president

No. No he wasn't. It was the Clinton administration that ordered the cruise missile strike (Operation Infinite Reach) on the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, precipitating a massive humanitarian crisis which cost the lives of several tens of thousands of Sudanese. All on the basis of fairly flimsy intelligence.

 

Coincidentally the attack occurred only a week after the Lewinsky scandal and there was strong suspicion from various quarters that the attack was motivated, at least in part, by Clinton's need to 'look presidential'.

 

And since you mentioned 9/11 in your comment, here's some further food for thought, taken from the link above:

 

 

Journalist Jason Burke, in the book Al-Qaeda: Casting a Shadow of Terror, claims that Operation Infinite Reach "merely confirmed to [bin Laden and his close associates], and others with similar views worldwide, that their conception of the world as a cosmic struggle between good and evil was the right one".

The implication being that if Clinton had acted differently, 9/11 might never have happened.

 

Perhaps by 'good' you actually meant 'effective in certain areas'. Like his habitual womanising....

 

Bin Laden was already planning 9/11 even before operation infinite reach. He had been wanting to attack the US for quite some time previously. Granted, infinite reach was likely a mistake, but, one person died immediately, and sudan had to do something else about medicines for a while. Bush, on the other hand, started a friggin' war based on his own lies, that lasted more than a decade, and kill tens, if not hundreds of thousands. A fair bit of the world sees him as a war criminal. For slick Willy, they just kinda snicker behind their hand. :D

[Lisnpuppy]

 

 

Actually, Clinton was a good president

 

No. No he wasn't. It was the Clinton administration that ordered the cruise missile strike (Operation Infinite Reach) on the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, precipitating a massive humanitarian crisis which cost the lives of several tens of thousands of Sudanese. All on the basis of fairly flimsy intelligence.

 

Coincidentally the attack occurred only a week after the Lewinsky scandal and there was strong suspicion from various quarters that the attack was motivated, at least in part, by Clinton's need to 'look presidential'.

 

And since you mentioned 9/11 in your comment, here's some further food for thought, taken from the link above:

 

 

Journalist Jason Burke, in the book Al-Qaeda: Casting a Shadow of Terror, claims that Operation Infinite Reach "merely confirmed to [bin Laden and his close associates], and others with similar views worldwide, that their conception of the world as a cosmic struggle between good and evil was the right one".

 

The implication being that if Clinton had acted differently, 9/11 might never have happened.

 

Perhaps by 'good' you actually meant 'effective in certain areas'. Like his habitual womanising....

Bin Laden was already planning 9/11 even before operation infinite reach. He had been wanting to attack the US for quite some time previously. Granted, infinite reach was likely a mistake, but, one person died immediately, and sudan had to do something else about medicines for a while. Bush, on the other hand, started a friggin' war based on his own lies, that lasted more than a decade, and kill tens, if not hundreds of thousands. A fair bit of the world sees him as a war criminal. For slick Willy, they just kinda snicker behind their hand. :D

Most people are more titillated by his mistreatment of women than anything he ever did in his purview as president. I mean the entire Whitewater investigation turned into a sex report. If there was anything actually done wrong with Whitewater (and who knows maybe) it was lost going down the rabbit hole of Clinton's inability to keep it in his pants.

 

I always laugh when the republicans got their knickers in a twist with the Mueller report talking about it going "past its scope and authority" when they literally blew the damn door off its hinges with Starss report. And funny that they got so concerned about Bill's sex scandals when Starr ended up as Prssident of Baylor University and was ousted for hiding and ignoring campus sexual assaults and harassment. The irony is delicious.

[HeyYou]

 

 

 

Actually, Clinton was a good president

No. No he wasn't. It was the Clinton administration that ordered the cruise missile strike (Operation Infinite Reach) on the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, precipitating a massive humanitarian crisis which cost the lives of several tens of thousands of Sudanese. All on the basis of fairly flimsy intelligence.

 

Coincidentally the attack occurred only a week after the Lewinsky scandal and there was strong suspicion from various quarters that the attack was motivated, at least in part, by Clinton's need to 'look presidential'.

 

And since you mentioned 9/11 in your comment, here's some further food for thought, taken from the link above:

 

 

Journalist Jason Burke, in the book Al-Qaeda: Casting a Shadow of Terror, claims that Operation Infinite Reach "merely confirmed to [bin Laden and his close associates], and others with similar views worldwide, that their conception of the world as a cosmic struggle between good and evil was the right one".

The implication being that if Clinton had acted differently, 9/11 might never have happened.

 

Perhaps by 'good' you actually meant 'effective in certain areas'. Like his habitual womanising....

Bin Laden was already planning 9/11 even before operation infinite reach. He had been wanting to attack the US for quite some time previously. Granted, infinite reach was likely a mistake, but, one person died immediately, and sudan had to do something else about medicines for a while. Bush, on the other hand, started a friggin' war based on his own lies, that lasted more than a decade, and kill tens, if not hundreds of thousands. A fair bit of the world sees him as a war criminal. For slick Willy, they just kinda snicker behind their hand. :D

Most people are more titillated by his mistreatment of women than anything he ever did in his purview as president. I mean the entire Whitewater investigation turned into a sex report. If there was anything actually done wrong with Whitewater (and who knows maybe) it was lost going down the rabbit hole of Clinton's inability to keep it in his pants.

 

I always laugh when the republicans got their knickers in a twist with the Mueller report talking about it going "past its scope and authority" when they literally blew the damn door off its hinges with Starss report. And funny that they got so concerned about Bill's sex scandals when Starr ended up as Prssident of Baylor University and was ousted for hiding and ignoring campus sexual assaults and harassment. The irony is delicious.

 

Yeah, for the most part, life was pretty calm while Willy was in office. (aside from the various scandals. :) )