I reference Tide Pods because when Zuck complained about "pressure" being put on him, he failed to say ABOUT WHAT.

Anyone with a room temp IQ or higher knows if it was something controversial (or even neutral), Zuckerberg would've spilled the beans.

The fact he didn't proves it was something he would've been embarrassed promoting.

...like eating Tide Pods.

"Who makes the determination of what is " provably harmful misinformation""

The maker of Tide Pods, for one.

A responsible government watching kids die from consuming Tide Pods, for another.

Meanwhile, Zuckerberg was pissed he couldn't continue the malinformation about Tide Pods.

"You support censorship,"

You're a liar, who's embarrassed he never found censorship under Biden, and has to pretend Trump doesn't do it PUBLICLY and OFTEN.

What a farkin' hack.

"short lived Disinformation board and other acts of censorship"

Huh? You've never found ANYTHING to this point other than an Editorial Board doing their job.

Do you finally have proof??? Or is this just another BS claim, to smokescreen for OBVIOUS censorship?

"What does a senate race in Michigan have to do with this thread topic?"

At least one of the posters who signs in under your name resides in Michigan.

"...either stupidity or gaslighting."

Or both.

" Please explain how it was anything other than an unmitigated disaster."

Oh, it was.

Please explain how Trump releasing 5,000 Taliban was anything other than a major contributor to that unmitigated disaster.

" The idea that Gavin "French Laundry" Newsom isn't apart of it is quite hilarious on your part."

Always fascinating when a Slurper accidentally tells the truth.

" It means being deliberately insincere or misleading about what you actually believe or intend."

Pretending you want to protect the vote instead of suppressing it is DISINGENUOUS.

And refusing to realize you're disingenuous is either stupidity or gaslighting.

I'll be a gentleman, so I'll let you decide which one.

" It means being deliberately insincere or misleading about what you actually believe"

Yep.

And you're lying to yourself, as well as the rest of us.

You can't deal with the fact you have no evidence, just pretense without proof.

You can't even PRETEND to have proof.

" Do you know what disingenuous means?"

Someone who pretends without a scintilla of proof, and maintains the artifice despite zero evidence.

Then add the cowardice required to refuse admitting your system suppresses more legal votes than thwarts illegal votes.

It proves you're not interested in stopping illegal voting, you're trying to suppress LEGAL voting.

" I've been nothing but clear that I suspect certain states are permitting ineligible people to vote and that it needs investigated."

Let me guess: only states that vote blue. And your sum total of proof is ZERO.

Your suspicion means NOTHING without evidence.

Theories without evidence is called pretending.

" I agree."

No, you believe they currently aren't.

I believe ballots already ARE easier to handle, for the reasons I listed.

You have no reasons, only cockamamie claims and bogus theories.

And ... need I say it for the thousandth time? ZERO PROOF.

" Having you as a witness is exactly a positive thing."

Always fascinating when a poster inadvertently tells the truth.

Bill has nothing but lies.

Ballots should be EASIER to process, not harder.

Easily identifiable, even from across the room.
Possible destinations VERY LIMITED.
Time factor obvious.
Already scaled.
2024 ... almost 100 million ballots handled.

Bill has nothing but lies.

I agree with barring soda, candy, and energy drinks, just like liquor, cigarettes, etc.

But while eliminating fast food places is ideal, it's certain to add A LOT of meal-making time for the parent(s), and extra time is something they may not have a lot of these days.

Or food prep skills, either.

"The systems currently in use were not designed to operate efficiently under substantially greater volume and stress."

That's a lie.

"I'm done."

Another lie, unfortunately.

" Scalability has to be designed into the system."

It's already there, dumfuq. Why are you pretending it's not?

" That is my opinion."

You're giving your opinion because you have no proof, and can't deal with the facts.

Heck, you can't even admit how many legal votes you'd be willing to suppress to enact your system.

" We need stronger authentication built into a system that is scalable."

You can't find ACTUAL PROBLEMS in the current system. Everything on your wishlist is already addressed ... except for the part where you want to dictate to others what THEY do.

You're not interested in preventing the illegal vote, you're interested in suppressing the LEGAL vote.

" with stronger built-in voter authentication."

Every state with UMB has a way the legal voter to confirm their legal vote.

YOU KEEP MAKING UP DOOMSDAY PROBLEMS WITH ZERO PROOF.

And you've yet to propose ANYTHING that suppresses less legal votes than thwarts illegal ones.

FFS, you're not even willing to admit how many legal votes you'd be willing to suppress.

#40

I haven't blamed ANY PARTY for our education shortcomings. I've merely pointed out ECD is underfunded, and thought you could relate to it happening in your own state.

But since you mentioned it, for the record, Sam Brownback is a Republican, who finally told other Republicans to override his veto and reinstate the income tax on pass-thrus that Republicans had originally authored.

"Dan is from CA if I recall"

You don't.

"we tried everything else"

Except for fully funding pre-natal care and pre-K development.

In Kansas, Sam Brownback even raided the Early Childhood Development monies to cover his historical blunder of not taxing pass-throughs.

IIRC, Koch Industries had 8 of the 10 most lucrative tax breaks. KU Basketball Coach Bill Self was one of those ten as well.

"USPS says uniquely serialized Intelligent Mail barcodes can facilitate tracking individual ballots to and from individual voters. "

Each ballot is already serialized and tracked. Watermarked as well.

And what percentage of accuracy are you expecting on the registry of allowed voters? Because 99.99% means you'd suppress more votes in your home state of Virginia IN ONE CYCLE than of all the voter fraud convictions in VA in the last 20 years.