Mid Term First Impressions

[Hawktawk]

So Trump in france where to begin? Tweets an attack on California's land management practices while people are being roasted like a spittle in their cars and thousands of homes are gone in the worst fire in the states history. Tweets attacks on the european union from the comfort of his hotel room where he was hanging out skipping the trip to a cemetery where 1800 WW1 us servicemen were buried due to a drizzle.Every other major world leader at the memorial attended but Trump sent Kelly and Dumford instead. Itys right in keeping with his whining about having a "bad hair day" after speaking in the rain following the pittsburgh synagogue shooting.

What a winner.....And Im unhinged for hating the guys guts.... how he has 1% approval is mystifying to me. WTF has happened in america

[c_hawkbob]

Well over 90% of these "mismanaged forest lands" in California are federal lands. Blaming the state is pure politics, and stupid.

[RiverDog]

What a winner.....And Im unhinged for hating the guys guts.... how he has 1% approval is mystifying to me. WTF has happened in america

Speaking for myself, it's not your judgement I question. I'm right there with you regarding my dislike of the man. "Hating" him isn't the problem IMO. It's the notion that if you are a conservative as you said you are and have never voted for a Dem candidate yet you are critical of every single position he takes, including SCOTUS nominations, his immigration policy, taxation, et al, all subjects that most conservatives largely agree with the POTUS on. It seems to me that you take the polar opposite side no matter what the issue is. For me, that's hard to reconcile, and I can see why others might refer to you as "unhinged", although that's not my term.

[burrrton]

You have to produce photo ID to buy alcohol or tobacco product.

I haven't paid cash for groceries since the Eisenhower administration, and in such cases (using a card), ID can be, and frequently is, demanded (to say nothing of the case you point out).

That he didn't cover every possible scenario in a throwaway soundbite is a good example why nobody takes these "ALL HE DOES IS TELL LIES!" charges seriously anymore. If you walk in and pay $1 cash for a Snickers, yeah, you won't have to show ID, but a grocery store *is* a place where ID can be required if you intend to walk out with your stuff.

I hear what you're saying about being accused of being a racist simply for insisting that you produce photo ID... I frankly don't give a rip if they levy such charges.

Neither does anybody else- the charge has been rendered completely meaningless by people who yell RAAAACIST over literally everything (See Bernie Sanders calling voters racist for rejecting black candidates, for an outrageous example from just the last few days).

[RiverDog]

I haven't paid cash for groceries since the Eisenhower administration, and in such cases (using a card), ID can be, and frequently is, demanded (to say nothing of the case you point out).

Outside of some bubble gum in order to obtain some baseball cards, I never bought anything in the Eisenhower Administration as I was born in '54.

I pay for groceries with a credit or debit card and have never had to produce photo ID. When I used to write checks, I would occasionally have to produce my driver's license, but that was rare.

That he didn't cover every possible scenario in a throwaway soundbite is a good example why nobody takes these "ALL HE DOES IS TELL LIES!" charges seriously anymore. If you walk in and pay $1 cash for a Snickers, yeah, you won't have to show ID, but a grocery store *is* a place where ID can be required if you intend to walk out with your stuff.

It's not necessary to use Trump's comments on voter ID as an example of his telling lies. He provides us with much better examples and does it daily. Why make that accusation over a rather mild example when there are tons better? And as I've said above, I've walked out with over $100 worth of groceries without ever having to have produced photo ID.

I hear what you're saying about being accused of being a racist simply for insisting that you produce photo ID... I frankly don't give a rip if they levy such charges.

Neither does anybody else- the charge has been rendered completely meaningless by people who yell RAAAACIST over literally everything (See Bernie Sanders calling voters racist for rejecting black candidates, for an outrageous example from just the last few days).

Yea, we could fill an entire thread with examples of outrageous accusations of racism. I'd be willing to bet money that 90% of blacks...or whites, for that matter...did not understand what the connotations of "black face" meant until Megan Kelly started talking about it.

[burrrton]

I pay for groceries with a credit or debit card and have never had to produce photo ID. When I used to write checks, I would occasionally have to produce my driver's license, but that was rare.

That's out of sheer goodwill- they could have demanded it if they chose to.

We're losing sight of the point, though, which is this: making purchases with credit cards and checks simply *is* something for which ID can be required. Acting like it's an outrageous lie to point that out just makes outrage about actual lies ring more and more hollow.

See also: calling people Nazis for detaining people at the border, etc.

It's not necessary to use Trump's comments on voter ID as an example of his telling lies. He provides us with much better examples and does it daily.

Agree! This is why it's so monumentally stupid to spend 2 days of the news cycle on the grocery store comment.

[RiverDog]

Agree! This is why it's so monumentally stupid to spend 2 days of the news cycle on the grocery store comment.

Two days? I made first mention of it less than 18 hours ago. With that kind of concept of time, it's no wonder that you thought that you bought groceries during the Eisenhower Administration.

[burrrton]

Eisenhower admin = exaggeration for effect and humor. I always thought it was funny when grandparents would reference periods in the past by Presidential administration.

And I wasn't just talking about you with the '2-day' thing. It was all over CNN and Social Media. Didn't mean to indict you on that.

[RiverDog]

:) Eisenhower admin = exaggeration for effect and humor. I always thought it was funny when grandparents would reference periods in the past by Presidential administration.

And I wasn't just talking about you with the '2-day' thing. It was all over CNN and Social Media. Didn't mean to indict you on that.

No sweat. I pay casual attention to CNN and filter out most of the political crap on my Facebook page, which is the only social media I follow, so I was unaware as to how long the story had been around.

My point is that voter ID is one of those areas in which I agree with Trump on. I have no evidence of fraud occurring and I'm not accusing either party of tampering with the voting process, but we shouldn't wait for a scandal to occur before we fix what's broken or what's suceptible.

The problems in Florida are laugable. Being that I don't really have a horse in that race, I'm more amused and entertained than I am outraged at the ineptitude of a state that didn't learn a GD thing from their debacle 18 years ago. It's too bad that they can't punish them by taking away a few of their electoral votes.

[Aseahawkfan]

So Trump in france where to begin? Tweets an attack on California's land management practices while people are being roasted like a spittle in their cars and thousands of homes are gone in the worst fire in the states history. Tweets attacks on the european union from the comfort of his hotel room where he was hanging out skipping the trip to a cemetery where 1800 WW1 us servicemen were buried due to a drizzle.Every other major world leader at the memorial attended but Trump sent Kelly and Dumford instead. Itys right in keeping with his whining about having a "bad hair day" after speaking in the rain following the pittsburgh synagogue shooting.

What a winner.....And Im unhinged for hating the guys guts.... how he has 1% approval is mystifying to me. WTF has happened in america

You're unhinged for calling him the most "evil man in history" and the like.

Hating his guts I don't care about. Lots of people hate him. It's irrational comparisons that are tiresome. Why make him bigger than he is? He's not even close to the greatest villain or most evil man in history. He's just some narcissistic billionaire that decided he had enough money and charisma to retire to the presidency. Now he's living out every cantankerous, angry, crazy conservative grandpa's fantasy. Two more years and he's likely done, maybe earlier. We'll see. When he's out of office, hopefully you'll sleep easier and find out he was just a man and not a particularly great or dangerous one. Just some rich guy that decided to become president because he was bored and needed something to do.

[Hawktawk]

Speaking for myself, it's not your judgement I question. I'm right there with you regarding my dislike of the man. "Hating" him isn't the problem IMO. It's the notion that if you are a conservative as you said you are and have never voted for a Dem candidate yet you are critical of every single position he takes, including SCOTUS nominations, his immigration policy, taxation, et al, all subjects that most conservatives largely agree with the POTUS on. It seems to me that you take the polar opposite side no matter what the issue is. For me, that's hard to reconcile, and I can see why others might refer to you as "unhinged", although that's not my term.

I’m not on the record opposing gorsuch but he didn’t spend his younger years trying to rape 15 year olds. Im for immigration reform but not family separation, flat out kkk style racism, white nationalism. I’d love to have lower taxes but not at the cost of blowing up the deficit which the interest alone will surpass defense spending next year and all spending in a few more. But yes as I’ve saud repeatedly I give trump credit for opening my eyes to the racist misogyny , bigotry and unbridled greed and dishonesty of the firmerly republican and now trump party..oh btw he couldn’t even make it to Arlington yesterday to lay a wreath on the tomb of the unknown soldier. Must have been misting or maybe hannihty was on faux. Anyone in either party who supports this detestable piece of excrement is whose lost their minds

[RiverDog]

Hating his (Trump's) guts I don't care about. Lots of people hate him. It's irrational comparisons that are tiresome. Why make him bigger than he is? He's not even close to the greatest villain or most evil man in history. He's just some narcissistic billionaire that decided he had enough money and charisma to retire to the presidency. Now he's living out every cantankerous, angry, crazy conservative grandpa's fantasy. Two more years and he's likely done, maybe earlier. We'll see. When he's out of office, hopefully you'll sleep easier and find out he was just a man and not a particularly great or dangerous one. Just some rich guy that decided to become president because he was bored and needed something to do.

That's pretty much my take. Trump's the kind of person that if you give him enough rope, he'll hang himself. The Dems are making a big mistake by making their entire existence based on personal attacks on DJT.

Speaking of basing their existence on bashing Trump, I see where Hillary Clinton is talking about another run for POTUS. That would be a dream come true for Trump supporters. No single Dem can draw out the conservative vote like Hillary. If she gets the nomination we'll be stuck with that ass clown for another 4 years.

[Hawktawk]

Couldn’t agree more on Hillary . She lost to the most incompetent unpopular non incumbent republican candidate I can remember. Just go away and take Pelosi with you.

[RiverDog]

Couldn’t agree more on Hillary . She lost to the most incompetent unpopular non incumbent republican candidate I can remember. Just go away and take Pelosi with you.

Well, it sure sounds like she's running again. Her closest advisors say that she is and Clinton herself has dropped some very strong hints. Despite her loss to Trump in 2016, those idiot Dems would hand the nomination to her on a silver platter.

[Aseahawkfan]

Couldn’t agree more on Hillary . She lost to the most incompetent unpopular non incumbent republican candidate I can remember. Just go away and take Pelosi with you.

Glad you still have clear vision on Pelosi and Hilary. They are both lousy.

[idhawkman]

It's not necessary to use Trump's comments on voter ID as an example of his telling lies. He provides us with much better examples and does it daily. Why make that accusation over a rather mild example when there are tons better? And as I've said above, I've walked out with over $100 worth of groceries without ever having to have produced photo ID.

You may not remember it but you had to show your id to setup the bank account that the card you used in the grocery store was tied to. When you put in your pin or sign (debit vs credit but I can't imagine a financially sound person like you would be buying food on credit) is what proved you owned that account that is tied to your driver's license/passport and SSN.

[idhawkman]

:) Eisenhower admin = exaggeration for effect and humor. I always thought it was funny when grandparents would reference periods in the past by Presidential administration.

And I wasn't just talking about you with the '2-day' thing. It was all over CNN and Social Media. Didn't mean to indict you on that.

Bad move Burrton. River only uses literal interpretations of what is said and never thinks there's hyperbole or sarcasm in any statements whatsoever unless it helps his case of course.

[burrrton]

Bad move Burrton. River only uses literal interpretations of what is said and never thinks there's hyperbole or sarcasm in any statements whatsoever unless it helps his case of course.

I know you two have gone back and forth, but I think you're selling our friend a little short there.

[RiverDog]

You may not remember it but you had to show your id to setup the bank account that the card you used in the grocery store was tied to. When you put in your pin or sign (debit vs credit but I can't imagine a financially sound person like you would be buying food on credit) is what proved you owned that account that is tied to your driver's license/passport and SSN.

Actually I do use my credit card to buy food. I use it anywhere that will accept it w/o an additional charge so I can get the rewards. It's safer than using a debit card and more convenient than cash or check, plus it makes it easy for me to track my expenses as 95% of my monthly expenditures appear on one statement. It does have a photo ID on the back (it's a Costco Visa), but the clerk never even handles it anymore...except at Costco.

There's so many cameras in stores now that they can take a pretty good picture if a person is attempting to use a stolen card, and gas pumps require you to enter your zip code, information that's not contained on the card. Phone/internet transactions usually require the 3 digit number on the back. Bottom line is that there are very few routine finaincial transactions we make that require photo ID/driver's license, etc.

[burrrton]

Bottom line is that there are very few routine finaincial transactions we make that require photo ID/driver's license, etc.

Well, I think the obvious takeaway here is more that there are *myriad* transactions that either can or do require photo ID, including the ones you've described (although maybe not a debit for the reasons ID explained).

If there's a signature on the back of the card, you better have your ID on you if want to guarantee yourself the ability to use it.

[idhawkman]

I know you two have gone back and forth, but I think you're selling our friend a little short there.

Yeah, I've been gone so I'm poking at him a bit to rile him up.

[RiverDog]

Well, I think the obvious takeaway here is more that there are *myriad* transactions that either can or do require photo ID, including the ones you've described (although maybe not a debit for the reasons ID explained).

If there's a signature on the back of the card, you better have your ID on you if want to guarantee yourself the ability to use it.

The takeaway is that they 'can' require photo ID, but very few do...and the list of those that don't gets longer all the time.

Signatures don't mean squat. Perhaps once in 500 times has a clerk checked the signature on my credit card. There's a move to eliminate signing for credit card purchases altogether. Home Depot doesn't make you sign for anything under $50, Costco anything under $200.

After my England trip, I decided to renew my passport as it was going to expire next August. When the new one arrived, I actually read the instructions and noted that there was a place for my signature. I never remembered signing my old passport and when it arrived, I checked it and sure enough, I hadn't signed it. I had it for nearly 10 years, used it to get into 8 countries and back into the US multiple times, and obviously no one bothered to check and see if it was signed. All they were interested in was the photo page and swipe the bar code. I also experienced my first encounter with facial recognition technology during my last trip.

[RiverDog]

Yeah, I've been gone so I'm poking at him a bit to rile him up.

[idhawkman]

Actually I do use my credit card to buy food. I use it anywhere that will accept it w/o an additional charge so I can get the rewards. It's safer than using a debit card and more convenient than cash or check, plus it makes it easy for me to track my expenses as 95% of my monthly expenditures appear on one statement. It does have a photo ID on the back (it's a Costco Visa), but the clerk never even handles it anymore...except at Costco.

There's so many cameras in stores now that they can take a pretty good picture if a person is attempting to use a stolen card, and gas pumps require you to enter your zip code, information that's not contained on the card. Phone/internet transactions usually require the 3 digit number on the back. Bottom line is that there are very few routine finaincial transactions we make that require photo ID/driver's license, etc.

You sparked an idea in me with your response. You are right, there are so many cameras out there that they can track it back if needed. So why don't we have a camera at the polling places. Not where you can see people casting ballots but to see who and how many actually show up. The way that facial recognition is now, it can even verify your identity and see if you have already voted.

So that would just leave the mail in and early voters to deal with. That would be easy since the signature on file has to match the signature on the ballot or it is set aside. It wouldn't get rid of voter fraud entirely but it would stop those that go from polling station to polling station to vote or those that vote when they were in the first Roosevelt election.

[idhawkman]

The takeaway is that they 'can' require photo ID, but very few do...and the list of those that don't gets longer all the time.

Signatures don't mean squat. Perhaps once in 500 times has a clerk checked the signature on my credit card. There's a move to eliminate signing for credit card purchases altogether. Home Depot doesn't make you sign for anything under $50, Costco anything under $200.

After my England trip, I decided to renew my passport as it was going to expire next August. When the new one arrived, I actually read the instructions and noted that there was a place for my signature. I never remembered signing my old passport and when it arrived, I checked it and sure enough, I hadn't signed it. I had it for nearly 10 years, used it to get into 8 countries and back into the US multiple times, and obviously no one bothered to check and see if it was signed. All they were interested in was the photo page and swipe the bar code. I also experienced my first encounter with facial recognition technology during my last trip.

Last year when I took my daughter and her boyfriend to San Luis, MX to get their teeth done they checked my signature and made sure I had signed it. I think it is the luck of the draw on how many people are coming through, how shady you look, who you actually get as a custom's official and maybe which port of entry you are coming through as to whether they check such things.

[RiverDog]

You sparked an idea in me with your response. You are right, there are so many cameras out there that they can track it back if needed. So why don't we have a camera at the polling places. Not where you can see people casting ballots but to see who and how many actually show up. The way that facial recognition is now, it can even verify your identity and see if you have already voted.

So that would just leave the mail in and early voters to deal with. That would be easy since the signature on file has to match the signature on the ballot or it is set aside. It wouldn't get rid of voter fraud entirely but it would stop those that go from polling station to polling station to vote or those that vote when they were in the first Roosevelt election.

Facial recognition, fingerprinting, even DNA samples I'm good with, so long as our right to privacy is protected. You're preaching to the choir when it comes to voter ID.

I don't know what the answer is to validate mail in voting. A signature is totally inadequate, as is a fingerprint. There is no way of telling if a person signed then handed over their ballot to someone else.

[Hawktawk]

Well, it sure sounds like she's running again. Her closest advisors say that she is and Clinton herself has dropped some very strong hints. Despite her loss to Trump in 2016, those idiot Dems would hand the nomination to her on a silver platter.

I don't think so. Trump is the most unpopular president ever for having the type of economic fundamentals at this point in his first term mired in somewhere between high thirties to low 40s depending on how disastrous a week he's had. But he STILL out polls Killary Klingon.

I don't think the dem party will bless it and I don't think the voters will support it either.She would truly be his only shot. Recent polls show that only about a third of voters support a second trump term including a substantial number of republicans 19%!!! who do not support a second trump term. It would take a Hillary sighting for them to change their minds.

I'm hoping for a primary challenge to Rump by Jeff Flake, John Kasich, or dream team Nikki Haley or even better Ben Sasse. So far only Flake has suggested he might do it and to a lesser degree Kasich but 2020 is a long time from now. Plenty more time for Trump to trip over his little mushroom. Then there's the big wild card which is mueller. My guess is we know about 1% of what he knows and when his report comes out it's going to be a bombshell that will force the congress and the senate to take notice. One can hope.

Oh well GO HAWKS!!!! off to work

[burrrton]

The takeaway is that they 'can' require photo ID, but very few do...and the list of those that don't gets longer all the time.

*sigh* The point, as it relates to "Voter ID Laws", is that there is "Credit Card User ID Law" in place, and for good reason. Checkers/cashiers seldom actually insisting on it, for all the various reasons they don't in 2018, doesn't mean the law isn't there.

Signatures don't mean squat ... Home Depot doesn't make you sign for anything under $50, Costco anything under $200.

If signatures don't mean squat, they wouldn't be required for 'serious' purchases.

[RiverDog]

I don't think so. Trump is the most unpopular president ever for having the type of economic fundamentals at this point in his first term mired in somewhere between high thirties to low 40s depending on how disastrous a week he's had. But he STILL out polls Killary Klingon.

I don't think the dem party will bless it and I don't think the voters will support it either.She would truly be his only shot. Recent polls show that only about a third of voters support a second trump term including a substantial number of republicans 19%!!! who do not support a second trump term. It would take a Hillary sighting for them to change their minds.

HRC still has a nearly 80% approval rating amongst Dems, she still has a vast campaign network, and she still has tons of willing donors willing to throw money at her. And Dems will remember that she won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote by less than 100k votes between 3 states. They can very easily rationalize her electoral failures and let her have another shot at Trump.

I'm hoping for a primary challenge to Rump by Jeff Flake, John Kasich, or dream team Nikki Haley or even better Ben Sasse. So far only Flake has suggested he might do it and to a lesser degree Kasich but 2020 is a long time from now. Plenty more time for Trump to trip over his little mushroom.

In modern times, ie the 20th and 21st centuries, it would be unprecedented for a primary challenger to displace a sitting POTUS. The only role for a challenger would be that of a spoiler, like Eugene McCarthy was in 1968 (forced LBJ not to run), Ted Kennedy was in 1980, Ross Perot (although 3rd party) in 1992. As much as we might hate it, the Republicans are Trump's party.

Then there's the big wild card which is mueller. My guess is we know about 1% of what he knows and when his report comes out it's going to be a bombshell that will force the congress and the senate to take notice. One can hope.

I'll admit that Trump is acting like the cat that ate the canary with regard to the Mueller investigation, but IMO the more likely explanation for his rather eccentric behavior (I'm being generous in my characterization), especially recently, is his over inflated ego and the fact that he's a spoiled rich kid not used to having people disagree with him.

Oh well GO HAWKS!!!! off to work

Work? Do you mean to say that there are people out there that have to work for a living? Say it ain't so!

[RiverDog]

The takeaway is that they 'can' require photo ID, but very few do...and the list of those that don't gets longer all the time.

*sigh* The point, as it relates to "Voter ID Laws", is that there is "Credit Card User ID Law" in place, and for good reason. Checkers/cashiers seldom actually insisting on it, for all the various reasons they don't in 2018, doesn't mean the law isn't there.

Yes, there's a credit user ID law. There's also a speed limit law that no one adheres to and that LE doesn't enforce (unless beyond a certain point).

Signatures don't mean squat ... Home Depot doesn't make you sign for anything under $50, Costco anything under $200.

If signatures don't mean squat, they wouldn't be required for 'serious' purchases.

Of course, they're *required* for serious purchases. As we noted, they're *technically* required for a lot of things. But when I sold my mom's house, the agent at the title company didn't check my signature any more than a clerk at a convenience store does. Same goes with a public notary. All they do is check your photo/address on your driver's license and witness you scribble a wiggly line. The signature itself is completely meaningless as they don't check it. If they did, mine would be rejected as all I do anymore is duplicate Mr. Magoo's driving route.

[burrrton]

That it's not universally enforced doesn't mean the law isn't useful- it's there when needed.

And I know you don't disagree with the need (at least generally) for Voter ID laws, so I'm not even sure what you're arguing about anymore.

Or maybe I'm not sure what *I'm* arguing about anymore.

[RiverDog]

That it's not universally enforced doesn't mean the law isn't useful- it's there when needed.

And I know you don't disagree with the need (at least generally) for Voter ID laws, so I'm not even sure what you're arguing about anymore.

Or maybe I'm not sure what *I'm* arguing about anymore.

LOL! Yes, our argument is pretty pointless. The only thing I'm disagreeing with you on is the signature requirement. It's as outdated as a buggy whip factory and no longer a viable means of identification. There are, and has been for decades, much better ways of authenticating a person's ID.

And contrary to what you've been saying, checking ID for credit card purchases is not a law:

It's possible Trump was referring to the mostly outdated practice of cashiers requesting ID for customers who pay with checks or credit cards, but such requests have become relatively rare in recent years and are done at retailers' discretion, not by law.

Watching Donald Trump try to rationalize voter ID is actually quite comical. The man out of touch with reality and his comments shows the gap between the super wealthy and Joe 6 Pack.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-c ... ks-2018-11

[burrrton]

And contrary to what you've been saying, checking ID for credit card purchases is not a law

I didn't intend to imply it was codified in the RCW, just that it can be demanded and your card refused if you don't produce it. It's a legitimate security measure.

[edit]

This is kind of ridiculous, though:

"It's possible Trump was referring to the mostly outdated practice of cashiers requesting ID for customers who pay with checks or credit cards"

To whoever conceded that rather obvious point: no sh*t? Of course that's what he was referring to, and everyone who's being intellectually honest knows it.

Yeah, maybe he shouldn't have made such an absolute statement, but it's another example of diluting legitimate criticism of him with dopey nitpicking.

[RiverDog]

I didn't intend to imply it was codified in the RCW, just that it can be demanded and your card refused if you don't produce it.

Perhaps you didn't intend to imply it, but you certainly gave one that impression when you said this:

The point, as it relates to "Voter ID Laws", is that there is "Credit Card User ID Law" in place, and for good reason.

This is kind of ridiculous, though:

"It's possible Trump was referring to the mostly outdated practice of cashiers requesting ID for customers who pay with checks or credit cards"

To whoever conceded that rather obvious point: no sh*t? Of course that's what he was referring to, and everyone who's being intellectually honest knows it.

Yeah, maybe he shouldn't have made such an absolute statement, but it's another example of diluting legitimate criticism of him with dopey nitpicking.

I agree that it's nit picking, but the problem is that the man can't hardly make ANY statement without something in it being incorrectly stated or in many cases, blatantly false. The press wouldn't be doing their jobs if they didn't point out those inaccuracies. They've done it with past presidents, and not just R presidents, either.

[burrrton]

Perhaps you didn't intend to imply it, but you certainly gave one that impression when you said this:

Fair, but there's a reason I put it in quotes.

I agree that it's nit picking, but the problem is that the man can't hardly make ANY statement without something in it being incorrectly stated or in many cases, blatantly false.

Seems to me that's all the more reason they need to pick their battles. It just becomes a one-note drone when they "fact check" every slightly debatable tweet and offhand remark the guy makes, with this outrage about showing ID in a grocery store a perfect example.

It'd also be a lot easier to take them seriously if they hadn't taken 8 years off this Super Diligent Fact-Checking™ and Speaking Truth to Power™.

[RiverDog]

Seems to me that's all the more reason they need to pick their battles. It just becomes a one-note drone when they "fact check" every slightly debatable tweet and offhand remark the guy makes, with this outrage about showing ID in a grocery store a perfect example.

It'd also be a lot easier to take them seriously if they hadn't taken 8 years off this Super Diligent Fact-Checking™ and Speaking Truth to Power™.

It's gotten to the point that Trump's inaccuracies and misstatements happen so often that we've become callous to them, hence the "nit picking" sentiments.

Trump has put the presss between a rock and a hard place: People will complain if the press doesn't thouroughly analyze and report on what he says just like they have every other POTUS since the turn of the last century, yet on the other hand, there'll be people like you that will be critical of them picking on poor DJT.

[burrrton]

It's gotten to the point that Trump's inaccuracies and misstatements happen so often that we've become callous to them, hence the "nit picking" sentiments.

When we lose news cycles over a throwaway line, that *is* nitpicking. You *can* be forced to show ID at the grocery store, just like you can at the bank, etc, so calling that "ANOTHER LIE RAWR RAWR" is ridiculous and makes you look foolish whining about it.

yet on the other hand, there'll be people like you that will be critical of them picking on poor DJT.

You have GOT to be kidding me with this.

I don't feel sorry for anyone, and if you think Trump has my sympathies, I'd point out that it could only be due to your blind hatred. I've made my feelings on him as clear as I know how, and pointing out how stupid the press looks hollering "LIAR!" when he was 90% correct doesn't change that.

[RiverDog]

This argument between me and you makes for a good case study regarding why Trump is not a good leader. We both agree with Trump on the subject of voter ID. Heck, I've even gone so far as to say that I'd be OK with providing biometric data, like fingerprints, retina scans, facial recognition, hair follicles, even DNA. My only objection would be if an acceptable form of ID cost the voter any more than a very modest amount of money or was difficult to obtain.

But because Trump can't make a simple argument without loading it up with either lies, white lies, half truths, or whatever you want to characterize his misinformation to be, the two of us get distracted and break down into an argument over Trump's poor examples rather than keeping our eyes on the prize, in this case, voter ID.

I honestly think that he Trump doesn't bother to prepare or consult with his associates, that unlike other POTUS's, he does not take advice from his handlers so he can articulate his thoughts and give relevant, well thought out examples. He just wings it, and when he's confronted with a subject like this one, where he has such a lack of experience with simple things that you and me take for granted, like making purchases in a grocery store, he ends up giving bad analogies.

[burrrton]

I honestly think that he Trump doesn't bother to prepare or consult with his associates, that unlike other POTUS's, he does not take advice from his handlers so he can articulate his thoughts and give relevant, well thought out examples. He just wings it, and when he's confronted with a subject like this one, he has such a lack of experience with simple things that you and me take for granted, like making purchases in a grocery store, he ends up giving bad analogies.

We agree!

[idhawkman]

I don't know what the answer is to validate mail in voting. A signature is totally inadequate, as is a fingerprint. There is no way of telling if a person signed then handed over their ballot to someone else.

I think it is a little better than nothing though. Here's what I suspect is happening.

Many voter registrations have been found to be forged by people who were getting paid for each registration. Some have even filled out the forms themselves and then signed them on behalf of the name that was registered.

So by comparing the voter ID signature to the actual ballot signature you could infer that the signatures won't be anywhere close to the fake registration. For those that filled out many voter registrations, they could go back and analyze the signature of multiple ballots and see if it is the same person and could even analyze the ink to see if the same pen was used for all of them. That wouldn't invalidate the vote by itself but by checking the addresses of those people that have many of the same ink and signature style they could go and interview the registered voter. More than likely, they would find the person doesn't exist or didn't fill out the ballot themselves.