Politics - Page 1211 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > Miscellaneous > Off-Topic - Entertainment/News

  #12101  
Old 23.11.2016, 10:54 AM
BoatmanReturns BoatmanReturns is offline
Pro
 
Join Date: 09.09.2016
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidjones178@hotmail.co.uk View Post
I suspect the truth is that the motivations are entwined. People want to suppress the votes of people with different views. But peoples views are shaped by their past, their present and the future they anticipate. If race was incidental to politics then you would expect just as many black people to vote Republican as white people.

It is far easier to suppress votes if you are the incumbent administration or if your supporters constitute a majority of the local voting electorate. In this way the majority voting electorate has the power to help ensure that it remains the majority voting electorate - and the incumbent administration has the power to help ensure it remains the incumbent administration.



Voting is such a simple concept. It should be so easy with modern technology. Where it is not easy, I think you have to suppose that someone is making it hard on purpose.

You just need a list. People go on that list when they register to vote and if they are already on a list elsewhere, they are transferred over. You can register people by default in all sorts of ways, if they are not inclined to do it themselves. Then you send everyone a voting card and they bring it with them when they vote. Pick up a bit of paper. Put a cross in the box. Tick them off the list. It couldn't be easier.

Anything else - proxy votes, postal votes, online votes, machines that punch cards, it all makes it more complicated and more prone to error and fraud. But realistically the amount of voter fraud is very low. When you are talking about millions of votes, it is meaningless. At that level the only way to influence the election is to stuff ballot boxes or make it difficult for people to vote in the first place.

If you are worried about voter fraud, all you really need is a digital video camera at polling stations and a no hat/mask rule. People have to look at the camera when they present their card. If you record the order in which you tick people off, you can later tally footage to voter cards in the event that somebody steals someone elses voter card. Then they are a felon, you have their face and they go to prison.
Nothing really disagreeable with any of that. Although we could go on to discuss the motivations for the difference between race and voting patterns. Is it rooted in deep historical past or more modern policies that are causing this? Probably both and many more factors.
I would also like to see the return of the classical Greek process of ostracism. Vote for a politician who you would like to ban from politics for a few years!
Reply With Quote
  #12102  
Old 23.11.2016, 02:28 PM
JensonF's Avatar
JensonF JensonF is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 03.09.2009
Posts: 6,554
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoatmanReturns View Post
Nothing really disagreeable with any of that. Although we could go on to discuss the motivations for the difference between race and voting patterns. Is it rooted in deep historical past or more modern policies that are causing this? Probably both and many more factors.
I would also like to see the return of the classical Greek process of ostracism. Vote for a politician who you would like to ban from politics for a few years!
Would there be any of the blighters left? Seeing that politics is always about a minority getting power. No matter whom you name, there will always be more people who hate him/her than support her/him.
Reply With Quote
  #12103  
Old 23.11.2016, 05:21 PM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoatmanReturns View Post
With you now.

Jim Crow laws- yes definitely.

The question to be asked now is that does voter suppression happen on partisan or economic lines that coincide with racial lines? if suppression tactics are designed specifically to prevent a specific race of people from voting, regardless of what way they vote then yes. But from what I have seen, particularly in this election cycle, its more about preventing those who are likely to vote one way or another (or illegally enable ineligible voters who are likely to vote one way or another).

Voter ID laws for example; Traditionally conservatives are pro. There are reports that this will prevent illegal voters but may restrict some poorer voters and that Dems tried to capitalise on the lack of them by encouraging in-eligible voters or bussing people from other areas.

Both sides are up to dirty tricks.
either way they are trying to take away a peoples voice with laws that target.

i didnt bring up gerrymandering as you could argue thats just good old rigging against all people

(although polling did show 0% Black support for Trump, i think i recall him getting some when it came to voting.)

those stories tend to be a tad questionable
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us...gain.html?_r=0

and in person voter fraud is beyond rare
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...oter-fraud-is/

then theres this
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ble-vote-early



Quote:
Originally Posted by BoatmanReturns View Post
Here is it from the horses mouth. There was an incident that was the straw that broke the camels back as it were;

http://www.dailywire.com/news/8441/i...on-ben-shapiro

And here is his opinion on the alt-right

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIUAW5G2SBc


I counter your quote from the quote from the Harvard paper I posted

"On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account. We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings."

Also a Washington State Study

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-surprise-you/


With reference to the article on drugs, if the point is that there is reform needed in rehabilitation in how we treat offenders, regardless of race, with drug related crime, I completely agree.

Regarding the statistics on racial sentencing - Now we are getting somewhere. This is the type of study that needs to be replicated across the US. I would be a little concerned that the data set is 15 years old though (not to the point of dismissing), perhaps studies like this should be done every 10 years or so. Evidence is a far better way of proving or disproving things rather than the media narrative and SJWs screaming all over the place
Bannon had been there for years before he quit.
(also thats the incident listed on Wiki)

that video does make me feel a tad better about the guy but still
http://www.salon.com/2015/12/16/patt...anti_semitism/

and then theres his position on the trans community.


tbh maybe cases can be made on both sides when it comes to the Havard study and the one i showed.

that study does seem rather flawed to me, maybe it has some weight and theres only so many way to test the issue.


did you click the drugs article?
cos the point of me posting that was on the comparison of cocaine.


on sentencing theres this
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014...04463789858002

and closer to home

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35452975

now that article, contains other racial bias' but the key bit is

Downing Street said 61% of black and minority ethnic defendants found guilty in crown courts were given custodial sentences, compared with 56% of white offenders.
Government data published in 2013 suggested that, in each year from 2008 to 2012, black offenders were more likely to have been jailed than white offenders by courts in England and Wales.
Reply With Quote
  #12104  
Old 24.11.2016, 08:39 AM
BoatmanReturns BoatmanReturns is offline
Pro
 
Join Date: 09.09.2016
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
either way they are trying to take away a peoples voice with laws that target.

i didnt bring up gerrymandering as you could argue thats just good old rigging against all people

(although polling did show 0% Black support for Trump, i think i recall him getting some when it came to voting.)

those stories tend to be a tad questionable
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us...gain.html?_r=0

and in person voter fraud is beyond rare
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...oter-fraud-is/

then theres this
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ble-vote-early





Bannon had been there for years before he quit.
(also thats the incident listed on Wiki)

that video does make me feel a tad better about the guy but still
http://www.salon.com/2015/12/16/patt...anti_semitism/

and then theres his position on the trans community.


tbh maybe cases can be made on both sides when it comes to the Havard study and the one i showed.

that study does seem rather flawed to me, maybe it has some weight and theres only so many way to test the issue.


did you click the drugs article?
cos the point of me posting that was on the comparison of cocaine.


on sentencing theres this
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014...04463789858002

and closer to home

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35452975

now that article, contains other racial bias' but the key bit is

Downing Street said 61% of black and minority ethnic defendants found guilty in crown courts were given custodial sentences, compared with 56% of white offenders.
Government data published in 2013 suggested that, in each year from 2008 to 2012, black offenders were more likely to have been jailed than white offenders by courts in England and Wales.
Not got a lot of time so will only address a few just now then get back.

Not had time to read through all those links re voters but a quick search shows that Trump got about 8% of the Black vote

The O'Keefe videos show that there is voter fraud going on on the DNC. I accept that his credibility is questionable but those videos are yet to be disproved and some of the people caught bragging of illegal activity have been fired since their release and thats before we get into the Podesta emails, MSM collusion and comments from Obama that could be interpreted as encouraging illegals to vote.

I think the bottom line here is that it is false to say voter suppression is purely on racial lines but that it does happen. Its a dirty dirty game that as David put, should be easy.

3 things with the next part

1. Feel free to contact him yourself, in reference to his opinion on Bannon or your opinion on his opinion on Bannon or whatever you are getting at here. It seems a clear denunciation to me
2. He was trolled and he bit. Is that it?
3. What about his opinion on the trans community is false?

I have extended the curtsy of not referencing right wing garbage that has become of Breitbart please extend me the same curtsy of not referencing the left wing garbage that is Salon!!!

What about the Harvard study is flawed? Or are you meaning the other one? I have used the kind of simulators they are talking about so can perhaps shed some light on them if its the method

The WSJ is behind a paywall

The BBC article for the large part is quite frankly garbage. Places on Universities should be appointed to the best candidate regardless of race. Correct me if I am wrong but do they not do 'blind' applications now? Its equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. That does lead us to the states problems with early schooling which is a whole other issue.

I assume you have read that report before you have referenced it? I am not going to have time until the weekend at the earliest. I would be appreciative if you could link me to the part where it compares offending rates by race, nature of crime, custodial sentences. Will save me reading a 168 page report.
Reply With Quote
  #12105  
Old 24.11.2016, 11:22 AM
RockyBalboa's Avatar
RockyBalboa RockyBalboa is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 15.11.2015
Posts: 1,522
Default

"How can you favour someone that is totally against LGBT rights".

Um.....why are you lying:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-gay-equality/

Name me a republican that has done that in the past.... Because it would mean a death sentence for their election chances.

If you're going to claim Trump is spawn of satan and far worse than any elected official on this planet then at least be truthful and do some research. Tah.

Last edited by RockyBalboa; 24.11.2016 at 11:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #12106  
Old 24.11.2016, 11:27 AM
HSTDriver's Avatar
HSTDriver HSTDriver is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 22.08.2009
Posts: 11,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyBalboa View Post
"How can you favour someone that is totally against LGBT rights".

Um.....why are you lying:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-gay-equality/

Name me a republican that has done that in the past.... Because it would mean a death sentence for their election chances

Trump's attitude to the LGBT community has flip-flopped back and forth over the years, and sometimes within the space of a single paragraph.

He will tell whichever crowd he is preaching to exactly what they want to hear, that much is obvious.
Reply With Quote
  #12107  
Old 24.11.2016, 11:32 AM
RockyBalboa's Avatar
RockyBalboa RockyBalboa is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 15.11.2015
Posts: 1,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HSTDriver View Post
Trump's attitude to the LGBT community has flip-flopped back and forth over the years, and sometimes within the space of a single paragraph.

He will tell whichever crowd he is preaching to exactly what they want to hear, that much is obvious.
Yep. But still it was pretty brave to hold that flag during the campaign. Or was it a cheap trick?. Either way it was a risk.

But the republican alternative was Ted Cruz. Who shared a stage with Christians who called for gay people to be killed.

So I suppose there is a glimmer of a positive!.

Their main fear should be if Pence has much influence.
Reply With Quote
  #12108  
Old 24.11.2016, 01:22 PM
davidjones178@hotmail.co.uk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyBalboa View Post
Yep. But still it was pretty brave to hold that flag during the campaign. Or was it a cheap trick?. Either way it was a risk.

But the republican alternative was Ted Cruz. Who shared a stage with Christians who called for gay people to be killed.

So I suppose there is a glimmer of a positive!.

Their main fear should be if Pence has much influence.
Trumps campaign was nothing but risks. Chancers take chances.

You can play both sides in a campaign. The real trouble starts when you get elected and both sides have expectations.

The Lib-Dems encapsulate this perfectly. They told one demographic one thing, another demographic another, they were Pro-EU where that was popular anti-EU where it wasn't. They promised to abolish tuition fees, and then... Government. Suddenly not everyone can have a pony.

Trump will now be judged on his actions.

Those Jail Hillary t-shirts look awkward already.
Reply With Quote
  #12109  
Old 24.11.2016, 07:00 PM
Valour's Avatar
Valour Valour is offline
Pro
 
Join Date: 08.02.2005
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HSTDriver View Post
Trump's attitude to the LGBT community has flip-flopped back and forth over the years, and sometimes within the space of a single paragraph.

He will tell whichever crowd he is preaching to exactly what they want to hear, that much is obvious.
flip flopping, huh?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6K9dS9wl7U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

and save that self-serving "evolved" crap for someone with an IQ under 80
Reply With Quote
  #12110  
Old 24.11.2016, 07:27 PM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoatmanReturns View Post
Not got a lot of time so will only address a few just now then get back.

Not had time to read through all those links re voters but a quick search shows that Trump got about 8% of the Black vote

The O'Keefe videos show that there is voter fraud going on on the DNC. I accept that his credibility is questionable but those videos are yet to be disproved and some of the people caught bragging of illegal activity have been fired since their release and thats before we get into the Podesta emails, MSM collusion and comments from Obama that could be interpreted as encouraging illegals to vote.

I think the bottom line here is that it is false to say voter suppression is purely on racial lines but that it does happen. Its a dirty dirty game that as David put, should be easy.

3 things with the next part

1. Feel free to contact him yourself, in reference to his opinion on Bannon or your opinion on his opinion on Bannon or whatever you are getting at here. It seems a clear denunciation to me
2. He was trolled and he bit. Is that it?
3. What about his opinion on the trans community is false?

I have extended the curtsy of not referencing right wing garbage that has become of Breitbart please extend me the same curtsy of not referencing the left wing garbage that is Salon!!!

What about the Harvard study is flawed? Or are you meaning the other one? I have used the kind of simulators they are talking about so can perhaps shed some light on them if its the method

The WSJ is behind a paywall

The BBC article for the large part is quite frankly garbage. Places on Universities should be appointed to the best candidate regardless of race. Correct me if I am wrong but do they not do 'blind' applications now? Its equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. That does lead us to the states problems with early schooling which is a whole other issue.

I assume you have read that report before you have referenced it? I am not going to have time until the weekend at the earliest. I would be appreciative if you could link me to the part where it compares offending rates by race, nature of crime, custodial sentences. Will save me reading a 168 page report.
of course people were fired for talking in a stupid manner.

but theres still a beyond tiny percentage of in person voter fraud.

voter suppression/ID laws do target black people though, surely doing it to win and so take away there voice makes it even worse.

so more than 0


1. he left this job in March this year and Bannon had held a high position since 2012.

2. he wasnt trolled (if anything its the other way around.) and i found the exchange quiet telling.

3. what do you mean where is he wrong? morally is that enough or psychologically or that he doesnt understand the basic concept of gender.
jump back into that article (from 2) and you will see the manner in which he talks.

i did mean the other one, i mean i just dont trust enough about it in general terms like they say the police they didnt know what the study was on but maybe they did or had a clue. but the big key for me is they knew they were being watched, that changes things. just observation changes a behaviour and simulation isnt reality.

WSJ didnt ask me to pay but now it does seem to wants some cash.
this link seems to offer the same info
http://www.abajournal.com/news/artic...es_than_whites

as i said the BBC article was about the comment on the sentencing report.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 01:33 PM.