the problem with votes is that its treated as a commodity when it should be treated like dollars.
dollars = secret service <> counterfeits
there's really no one or anything that would protect votes being counterfeited.
votes = counterfeits
until we see a day when votes has the same standard as dollars.
- dilbert firestorm
- 12-17-2011, 03:45 AM
- I B Hankering
- 12-17-2011, 04:40 AM
the problem with votes is that its treated as a commodity when it should be treated like dollars.
dollars = secret service <> counterfeits
there's really no one or anything that would protect votes being counterfeited.
votes = counterfeits
until we see a day when votes has the same standard as dollars. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm
The FBI is involved if even one candidate for federal office is on the ballot.
http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pre...otfraud_102710
Votes are equivalent to dollars - tax dollars and how they are spent.
Voter fraud will never be completely eliminated. There's much too much money involved to stop politicians and their shenanigans, but requiring positive ID would make ballot-stuffing (personation) more difficult.
- WTF
- 12-17-2011, 07:17 AM
Now of course if you do not want perfectly legal voters to vote, then it is no problem. What you have done is make it illegal for some folks to vote that were perfectable legal in prior elections.....unless they do exactly as you say. They went from perfectly legal to not legal unless they do as you say.
http://www.rosporkad.com/2010/07/09/what-an-old-malcolm-gladwell-article-can-tell-us-about-the-gulf-spill/
The Gulf spill resulted from two malfunctions: 1) the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded for as yet unknown reasons, and 2) a device called a “blowout preventer” didn’t stop the massive gush of oil that resulted (and is still resulting . . .) from the explosion. And, we now know, BP had paltry plans in placefor addressing this disaster.
One reaction to learning of this is, “How on earth did BP (or the government) set this operation in motion without being sure the equipment would work?” Probably much the same way the NASA engineers overlooked the faulty o-ring that gave way to a fuel leak that exploded the Challenger space shuttle. Malcolm Gladwell (author of Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference
, and Outliers: The Story of Success
) explains in “Blowup,” a 14-year-old article in his latest anthology of New Yorker stories, What the Dog Saw: And Other Adventures
that NASA had identified the o-ring as being risky . . . in a book spanning six volumes containing similarly risky items.
Space shuttles are complex. So is deep water drilling. With any complex, technological, highly competitive industry (oil, not space), risk is inevitable, even essential, to progress. NASA, Gladwell explains, could have chosen to improve the o-ring. However, having improved the safety of the space shuttle by a small increment, it would have felt justified in taking a new risk–with a new kind of metal or tubing, or whatever. This is called consuming a benefit, rather than saving it.
We consume a safety benefit rather than save it every time we drive our cars. We could ensure public safety by driving 30 mph, and in tanks. But people need to get places, and they don’t want to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a vehicle to take them. So we drive 70 mph, in cars of moderate safety. The National Highway Safety Transportation Administration reported 34,017 fatal car accidents in 2008, but nobody is seriously considering a major change in speed limit or car design.
http://www.rosporkad.com/2010/07/09/what-an-old-malcolm-gladwell-article-can-tell-us-about-the-gulf-spill/
The Gulf spill resulted from two malfunctions: 1) the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded for as yet unknown reasons, and 2) a device called a “blowout preventer” didn’t stop the massive gush of oil that resulted (and is still resulting . . .) from the explosion. And, we now know, BP had paltry plans in placefor addressing this disaster.
One reaction to learning of this is, “How on earth did BP (or the government) set this operation in motion without being sure the equipment would work?” Probably much the same way the NASA engineers overlooked the faulty o-ring that gave way to a fuel leak that exploded the Challenger space shuttle. Malcolm Gladwell (author of Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference
, and Outliers: The Story of Success) explains in “Blowup,” a 14-year-old article in his latest anthology of New Yorker stories, What the Dog Saw: And Other Adventures that NASA had identified the o-ring as being risky . . . in a book spanning six volumes containing similarly risky items. Space shuttles are complex. So is deep water drilling. With any complex, technological, highly competitive industry (oil, not space), risk is inevitable, even essential, to progress. NASA, Gladwell explains, could have chosen to improve the o-ring. However, having improved the safety of the space shuttle by a small increment, it would have felt justified in taking a new risk–with a new kind of metal or tubing, or whatever. This is called consuming a benefit, rather than saving it.
We consume a safety benefit rather than save it every time we drive our cars. We could ensure public safety by driving 30 mph, and in tanks. But people need to get places, and they don’t want to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a vehicle to take them. So we drive 70 mph, in cars of moderate safety. The National Highway Safety Transportation Administration reported 34,017 fatal car accidents in 2008, but nobody is seriously considering a major change in speed limit or car design.
- CuteOldGuy
- 12-17-2011, 08:07 AM
- WTF
- 12-17-2011, 11:10 AM
Neocons are so yesterday , don't ya think? On the other poll tax cats seem to have made a comeback! Where is Jim crow when you need a good history primer? Lol
- CuteOldGuy
- 12-17-2011, 11:17 AM
Ah, yes. When all else fails, call your opponent a racist. Nice job.
- I B Hankering
- 12-17-2011, 11:27 AM
Neocons [formerly "become"] are so yesterday , don't ya think? On the other poll tax cats seem to have made a comeback! Where is Jim crow when you need a good history primer? Lol Originally Posted by WTFThat auto-correct feature on your phone sucks doesn't it? But it's always diverting to try to figure out what you meant to post as opposed to what you actually posted.
- WTF
- 12-17-2011, 11:48 AM
I was using my better halfs I pad. I was wondering wtf it had done. Hell I have trouble trying to figure out what I meant as opposed to what I actually posted from time to time. Lol
- Munchmasterman
- 12-18-2011, 10:13 PM
- CuteOldGuy
- 12-18-2011, 10:59 PM
Liberals and conservatives come from the same place. Uranus.
- WTF
- 12-19-2011, 05:42 AM
Ah, yes. When all else fails, call your opponent a racist. Nice job. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuyI did not call yhou a racist. I compared jim crow laws to these new laws. The laws seem to seek one thing while their trfue intent is quite another. These laws appear will disenfranchise older poor voters. That does not make you a racist. More like an ostrich with your head buried in the sand
- I B Hankering
- 12-23-2011, 06:12 AM
Vote-probe arrests include councilmen
TROY — The City Council president, a councilman and two others were arrested Tuesday and charged with felonies for allegedly forging absentee ballots in the 2009 primary to benefit Democratic candidates.
TROY — The City Council president, a councilman and two others were arrested Tuesday and charged with felonies for allegedly forging absentee ballots in the 2009 primary to benefit Democratic candidates.
- WTF
- 12-23-2011, 07:27 AM
Vote-probe arrests include councilmenSounds like the process is/was working without these new laws.
TROY — The City Council president, a councilman and two others were arrested Tuesday and charged with felonies for allegedly forging absentee ballots in the 2009 primary to benefit Democratic candidates.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering
I compare them to having stupid hate laws.
If you have killed someone, why the fuc do they need to act like it is worse because you killed them because of skin color or sexual orientation? We need less laws and way less stupid laws!
People cheat...we could implant a chip in everyone, is that what ya'll want?
We should not be making it harder on older , poorer voters to vote.
We just disagree on this folks.
Maybe we should just dip thier finger in purple ink!
- dilbert firestorm
- 12-23-2011, 07:30 AM
how hard is it to remove purple ink?
- WTF
- 12-23-2011, 07:37 AM
tatoo'd purple ink!