Trump runs for POTUS / Trumped Up! Part IV

[halleyscomet]

Let's just note that we're not talking about "disenfranchising" students. They can vote. They should vote -- from their legal residence.

The simple fact of the matter is both the major parties want youth involvement. Forcing college students to use absentee ballots would reduce student involvement, retarding the development of lifelong voting habits. Regardless of what philosophical or political arguments one can make in favor of forcing college students to vote where they spend their Summers instead of where they spend the rest of the year, raw pragmatism has resulted in students being able to vote where they're going to school, for the simple fact that both parties want young voters to vote.

Now, the GOP has been saber rattling a bit on this point, mostly at the local level where student voters are preventing someone's pet project from passing, but actual action is really only going to happen if the party really and truly gives up on the youth vote.

 

[Stacko]

Ya, I'm waiting for the excuse. Every person I've heard who is knowledgeable in campaigning and presidential security gave a long list of reasons why this is a logistical nightmare.

He's going to Mexico for the same reasons he went to Chicago in March and expecting the same results.

 

[Bob001]

The Washington Post has produced a searchable database of hundreds of documents associated with its investigation of, and book about, Trump. I don't have time to wade through all this, but it sure looks interesting.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-revealed-book-reporting-archive/

 

[Donal]

dp

 

[Donal]

He's going to Mexico for the same reasons he went to Chicago in March and expecting the same results.

He's going to Mexico to yell at white people about Mexicans and Muslims?

 

[Dr. Keith]

You think you're getting a piece of the action?

I don't help for free. What do you think this is, charity work?

 

[Stacko]

He's going to Mexico to yell at white people about Mexicans and Muslims?

That's the pretense but the result he wants is different.

 

[bonzombiekitty]

Well, there is the fairly obvious point that this gives wealthy folk more power, since they are more likely to afford two residences and spend adequate time in each.

This is why it's more about being able to vote on local issues. IMO, if you have a real vested interest in a given locale (owning property, having residency, or owning a business) then you should be able to have some input into how it's governed.

When it comes to state and national level stuff, then it gets more complicated. If your two residences exist in the same state, then you would either only get one vote on state level issues or a partial vote in each spot. You wouldn't be able to, for example, vote cast a vote for governor in two different localities and have it count as two votes for that governor. But you would be able to vote for the mayor of A and the mayor of B.

 

[acbytesla]

The simple fact of the matter is both the major parties want youth involvement. Forcing college students to use absentee ballots would reduce student involvement, retarding the development of lifelong voting habits. Regardless of what philosophical or political arguments one can make in favor of forcing college students to vote where they spend their Summers instead of where they spend the rest of the year, raw pragmatism has resulted in students being able to vote where they're going to school, for the simple fact that both parties want young voters to vote.

Now, the GOP has been saber rattling a bit on this point, mostly at the local level where student voters are preventing someone's pet project from passing, but actual action is really only going to happen if the party really and truly gives up on the youth vote.

This is simply NOT the case. There is a strong belief in the Republican party and it is substantiated by statistics that younger people are more likely to view the world more progressively and vote more Democratic. The NH GOP leader trying to pass a tough voter ID law that would have prevented the use of student IDs for voting was caught on tape saying that he wanted to prevent students to vote as he did when he was younger "like a liberal".

 

[halleyscomet]

This is simply NOT the case. There is a strong belief in the Republican party and it is substantiated by statistics that younger people are more likely to view the world more progressively and vote more Democratic. The NH GOP leader trying to pass a tough voter ID law that would have prevented the use of student IDs for voting was caught on tape saying that he wanted to prevent students to vote as he did when he was younger "like a liberal".

Damn.

It would appear my view of the GOP was entirely too optimistic.

 

[acbytesla]

This is why it's more about being able to vote on local issues. IMO, if you have a real vested interest in a given locale (owning property, having residency, or owning a business) then you should be able to have some input into how it's governed.

When it comes to state and national level stuff, then it gets more complicated. If your two residences exist in the same state, then you would either only get one vote on state level issues or a partial vote in each spot. You wouldn't be able to, for example, vote cast a vote for governor in two different localities and have it count as two votes for that governor. But you would be able to vote for the mayor of A and the mayor of B.

The problem with this is that those with money would have a greater influence than those without. As if they are more invested in the future. That the future of a part time resident or absent business owner should have as much or more weight than others.

Don't people with money have enough influence without giving them multiple votes?

 

[NoahFence]

Let's just note that we're not talking about "disenfranchising" students. They can vote. They should vote -- from their legal residence.

So if Jane Doe goes to Harvard but she's from Seattle, she should have to fly cross country to vote?

 

[bonzombiekitty]

Don't people with money have enough influence without giving them multiple votes?

They wouldn't really be getting multiple votes, they would be able to vote in several separate, disparate elections that decide on how a place the live in or own property is governed. If I happen to own some property in NY but my permanent residence is in PA, I should be able to have some level of input as to how my property in NY is governed.

 

[NoahFence]

This is a serious blunder by Trump: he hasn't given the Press enough time to hype this and send correspondents.

If he had a nickle for every time he made a blunder, he'd be a billionaire!

 

[Ladewig]

So if Jane Doe goes to Harvard but she's from Seattle, she should have to fly cross country to vote?

Wouldn't early voting and absentee voting solve that issue?

 

[acbytesla]

They wouldn't really be getting multiple votes, they would be able to vote in several separate, disparate elections that decide on how a place the live in or own property is governed. If I happen to own some property in NY but my permanent residence is in PA, I should be able to have some level of input as to how my property in NY is governed.

That's a rational argument. But I disagree. At its core, that is saying your money should be represented. People should be represented, not money.

Consider the effect of owning multiple properties on the areas where your second, third or fourth home may be.

1. When buying the second property, the absentee buyer effectively helps to increase the competition for housing which negatively impacts first time buyers.

2. Absentee or secondary residents are more likely to vote against school levies, negatively impacting school funding.

 

[Bob001]

So if Jane Doe goes to Harvard but she's from Seattle, she should have to fly cross country to vote?

Excellent example. Washington is one of three states that conduct elections entirely by mail.
https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-mail-elections.aspx

Voting by mail is a nearly ideal way to increase voter participation, and eliminate all the problems associated with traditional methods: inconvenient poll hours and locations, long lines, hackable voting machines, restrictive ID laws, etc. I'd like to see it adopted more widely. But you still have to decide where you live.

 

[stanfr]

My guess is that, a week or so before the election, the Mexican President will make a formal announcement that, yes indeed, Mexico will pay for the wall to be built, and it will be a very nice wall. Thereby handing the election to Trump.
Not sure what the deal cut will entail, perhaps something on the order of 10 billion going to the pres...

 

[Garrison]

Wouldn't early voting and absentee voting solve that issue?

Which are also things new voter laws have sought to restrict.

 

[DavidJames]

Excellent example. Washington is one of three states that conduct elections entirely by mail.
https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-mail-elections.aspx

Voting by mail is a nearly ideal way to increase voter participation, and eliminate all the problems associated with traditional methods: inconvenient poll hours and locations, long lines, hackable voting machines, restrictive ID laws, etc. I'd like to see it adopted more widely. But you still have to decide where you live.

Voting by mail is an excellent way to vote. That doesn't mean we shouldn't provide many alternatives. he objective should be to err on the side of allowing people to vote. It's clear the attempts to limit voting are politically motivated and should be rejected.