Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[martinuzz]

Hmmkay. Let's just say then that it was an extremely unpresidential thing to do.

[Orange Wizard]

(let's not)

Not what? Compare Trump to WBC? Shit on Trump? Shit on WBC?

[Frumple]

The problem in US is what we have with the American/Mexican border. We still have a problem with drugs coming over the border through ways that are only caught months and years after the stuff has gotten through without any suspicion. This is the problem the States has.

Dude, what. What does only a part of the U.S. drug trade have to do with a national ID, or even just passports? Like, at all.

... not to mention that is not even remotely "the" problem the U.S. has with... anything, really. Not even drug trafficking. Pretty substantial amounts come through that border but not nearly all of it, or even enough to break US drug distribution if it was somehow ended (never mind how many different things the logistics of doing so would screw over). Slow down or reduce for a few years, maybe, but stop (even temporarily) or reduce things for anything resembling permanently? If you think that you are seriously underestimating the state of the illicit drug market in the US.

[KingofstarrySkies]

(let's not)

Not what? Compare Trump to WBC? Shit on Trump? Shit on WBC?

(let's not even bring up wbc)

[Orange Wizard]

(let's not even bring up wbc)

... why not? They're not terribly relevant but it's not going to start a flame war or anything.

[Rolan7]

Sorry, I'm on a trip so playing catchup.  Doesn't look like this has been addressed, though.

As mentioned, the most common form of ID in the US is a driver's license. Thing is, getting one of those requires: some form of Driver's Ed, driving tests you need to pass, and being a generally abled person; no blind folks, no narcoleptics, no people prone to seizures or other medical issues. On top of that, you may need a vehicle, which means money.

Uh, technically...  But you don't need a driver's license.  Just a photo ID.  I should know, I didn't get my driver's license till 22.
In NC it's $13, or free if you're homeless, blind, or physically or mentally disabled.

Passports are another one: those cost $500 or so and expire periodically.

No, it's $110.  But it's unrelated to voting.

Moreover though, when drafting these laws in some of the cases where they were struck down recently, the Republican legislatures first requested studies showing which voter demographics would have which forms of IDs. They then banned those forms of ID which would be used by non-white voters so as to maximize disenfranchisement of minority voters and minimize disenfranchisement of those who would likely vote for their party.

...What non-photo ID would that be?  Were people bringing water bills to the polling station?  Because that's just stupid.  It works for getting an actual ID, because the DMV is equipped to verify.

I don't think there should be a $13 fee, but people *don't* need a driver's license or a car to vote.  They don't even need a home.
Requiring some evidence of your identity seems obvious to me.  Otherwise we might as well use Strawpoll.com.  Voter fraud isn't "rare" either.  Just an example, hundreds of dead people voting year after year in California:  http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/05/25/cbs-uncovers-voter-fraud-in-la-n2168330
When we don't require IDs, that becomes infinitely easier.

Yes, poor people are less likely to have IDs.  The answer is to let them get IDs for free, not remove all verification from the vote.  And for perspective, we're talking about a $13 fee (if any) (at least in NC).

[birdy51]

I think the opinion on the WBC is fairly one sided enough that we wouldn't have too many issues. But at the same time, there really isn't much to discuss about them either. They and their ideas continue to exist and it's rather unfortunate, but meh. They aren't worth a mention.

As for drugs? I don't know enough on the subject. The lion's share may come from the border, but we mustn't forget we have two. I blame those pesky Canadians and bootleg syrups and charming demeanors!

[Frumple]

More than two, s'just two land borders.

It's fairly easy to get ballpark numbers, though. Varies by drug; cocaine's in the 60s coming from south of the border (though that doesn't mean all of that is coming through the land border -- fair amount comes by air or sea), pot's mostly from that direction, ecstasy is largely coming out of europe, meth has a substantial domestic production, opium's been coming from ME and south-east asia quite a bit over the last decade or two, etc., etc., etc.

Thanks substantially to american drug laws, though, we're talking a market that's somewhere in the range of a hundred billion a year. Cut supply to half (or whatever) of that and it's just going to start coming from some other direction. Maybe you'd be able to stop that from happening if you do what some countries do and just start basically executing everyone that traffics or somethin', but, uh. That's not very compatible with the US legal system. Or its constitution. Or ethics.

[Strife26]

Or, y'know, start treating drug addiction as a public health problem and then abandon the War on Drugs.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2013/onion-drugs.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjPg9Xk9p3OAhXHPiYKHYg5DccQFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNFlGLc71rffCyu_evuGPGw_z2gcXQ&sig2=CUoLJ3GA-VlJy1pJWDNyHg   

If this link doesn't work, just Google onion drugs win drug war and find the pdf.

[TheBiggerFish]

So I just heard that Trump may have blabbed top secret material?  Second- or thirdhand, but good grief, if he did...

Please, please, let the strategic value of admitting the thing he blabbed about during the treason trial outweigh the loss of secrecy.

[smjjames]

So I just heard that Trump may have blabbed top secret material?  Second- or thirdhand, but good grief, if he did...

Please, please, let the strategic value of admitting the thing he blabbed about during the treason trial outweigh the loss of secrecy.

I hate to do this to you, but, source?

[Reelya]

Seriously just google "trump blabbed top secret material" and there are links. The context is this:

“We pay rent for our base to Saudi Arabia,” complained Donald Trump to his audience in Colorado Springs today as he tried to make the case that the United States was weak. But there’s the thing. Officially, the United States doesn’t have a military base in Saudi Arabia. As far as anyone knows, we haven’t had one there in more than a decade. And yet almost immediately after Trump’s daily briefings began, which may have begun as recently as today, suddenly he’s talking about a military base that the public doesn’t know anything about.

And so now we’re left with only two possibilities, both of them extraordinary, yet one of them has to be true. The first possibility is that Donald Trump just made up an imaginary U.S. military base in Saudi Arabia so he could complain about it, which wouldn’t be shocking as he’s been revealed to be lying most of the time by the most respected fact checkers out there.

The second possibility is that in the handful of days since Trump accepted the Republican nomination and began getting classified security briefings, he’s come to learn that the United States has a secret military base in Saudi Arabia and he’s already leaked it. This might explain why he had a startlingly and incoherently defensive meltdown later in the day when he insisted (while misspelling every other word) that Hillary Clinton is the one who shouldn’t get briefings.

Original sources have cited a retraction of the claim, i.e. it's not proven that Trump received a briefing before he said that. But as the above source states, that just means that Trump made up a pretend US Army base in Saudi Arabia so he could complain about it. Which isn't a whole lot better. Here's a link to the Guardian quoting Trump on the matter:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/29/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-hits-back-at-controversies

[Flying Dice]

Sorry, I'm on a trip so playing catchup.  Doesn't look like this has been addressed, though.

As mentioned, the most common form of ID in the US is a driver's license. Thing is, getting one of those requires: some form of Driver's Ed, driving tests you need to pass, and being a generally abled person; no blind folks, no narcoleptics, no people prone to seizures or other medical issues. On top of that, you may need a vehicle, which means money.

Uh, technically...  But you don't need a driver's license.  Just a photo ID.  I should know, I didn't get my driver's license till 22.
In NC it's $13, or free if you're homeless, blind, or physically or mentally disabled.

Yeah, voter ID laws are discriminatory and probably unconstitutional, but not because of ID availability. You can get a state photo ID for 10-20$ at any DMV office, here's their breakdown of  requirements by state: http://www.dmv.org/id-cards.php. Where I live all you need is proof of residence and the original or a certified copy of your birth certificate and SS card.

[smjjames]

Seriously just google "trump blabbed top secret material" and there are links. The context is this:

“We pay rent for our base to Saudi Arabia,” complained Donald Trump to his audience in Colorado Springs today as he tried to make the case that the United States was weak. But there’s the thing. Officially, the United States doesn’t have a military base in Saudi Arabia. As far as anyone knows, we haven’t had one there in more than a decade. And yet almost immediately after Trump’s daily briefings began, which may have begun as recently as today, suddenly he’s talking about a military base that the public doesn’t know anything about.

And so now we’re left with only two possibilities, both of them extraordinary, yet one of them has to be true. The first possibility is that Donald Trump just made up an imaginary U.S. military base in Saudi Arabia so he could complain about it, which wouldn’t be shocking as he’s been revealed to be lying most of the time by the most respected fact checkers out there.

The second possibility is that in the handful of days since Trump accepted the Republican nomination and began getting classified security briefings, he’s come to learn that the United States has a secret military base in Saudi Arabia and he’s already leaked it. This might explain why he had a startlingly and incoherently defensive meltdown later in the day when he insisted (while misspelling every other word) that Hillary Clinton is the one who shouldn’t get briefings.

If it's truly a top secret thing and not something he made up or part-truthed (I believe we do have access to some airbases in Saudi Arabia, but outside of that, no), then yeah, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing that people were worried about when the time to brief the candidates was coming up.

Also, the stuff that they get debriefed on is supposedly not hugely sensitive and just general stuff, and a secret base in Saudi Arabia sounds like rather sensitive stuff.

I wonder if he is even aware of the consequences of blabbing top secret stuff, and they say Clinton should be tried for treason because of the email mess.

[Reelya]

I'm leaning towards ignorance here. He just assumed there was a US base in Saudi Arabia without any fact checking.