Saik0

This article is referencing new bills that will disenfranchise legitimately registered voters

No. This is what you stated. Instead of showing where any disenfranchisement would happen you quoted

Some Democrats contend the measures could create hurdles for legal voters

This is not evidence of any disenfranchisement is occurring Instead you’re just wildly speculating that there’s some random clear pattern of some sort that simply doesn’t exist.

Some people believe the world is flat. That doesn’t make the statement true. They provided no clear example of how any of it could be doing what they claim it would do. So that random statement starting with “some democrats”… is meaningless.

By changing the language from “all citizens”, it sets up opportunities to selectively disenfranchise those citizens who are able and registered to vote.

No it doesn’t because the verbiage is “ONLY citizens” as the replacement. It’s still VERY clear that citizens are to vote. What it clears up is any argument that non-citizens should also be allowed to vote.

All of the legislation and proposals in this area come from Republicans trying to make it harder for non-citizens to vote.

Yes… Which they can’t do anyway.

https://lemmy.saik0.com/comment/3543053

The ballot initiatives only clarifies and fixes verbiage to make it more clean. Nothing about this is actually making it any harder for legitimate citizens to vote.

I might even go another step and say that it’s an effort to delegitimize our elections by claiming fraud to pave the way for illegitimate power grabs (like Jan 6).

If you say so.

This article is referencing new bills that will disenfranchise legitimately registered voters

Please quote where it says that. I see no such statement.

What’s on the ballot?

Republican-led legislatures in eight states have proposed constitutional amendments on their November ballots declaring that only citizens can vote.

Proposals in Iowa, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wisconsin would replace existing constitutional provisions stating that “every” citizen or “all” citizens can vote with new wording saying “only” citizens can vote. Supporters contend the current wording does not necessarily bar noncitizens from voting.

In Idaho and Kentucky, the proposed amendments would explicitly state: “No person who is not a citizen of the United States” can vote. Similar wording won approval from Louisiana voters two years ago.

Voters in North Dakota, Colorado, Alabama, Florida and Ohio passed amendments between 2018 and 2022 restricting voting to “only” citizens.

What about changing verbiage to be clear is “Disenfranchise”?

Nothing disenfranchising about unlinking 2 completely different systems that really shouldn’t have been linked to begin with. Licensing drivers and voting together automatically doesn’t make sense if you’re granting licenses to those who aren’t eligible to vote…

If it happens so little that it doesn’t matter, then why relax the standard? It’s clearly working then. You spook people who think it could happen when you do that. There’s no positive to doing that. So why do it?

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

You have a better chance of getting a clear picture of Bigfoot than you do of having a voter fraud incident in your jurisdiction.

Just because you don’t see it. doesn’t mean it’s not there. It would be entirely possible that there is no enforcement… and thus no records of those events happening.

Just like “illegal” border crossings. Current numbers state “Nationwide Encounters” is the number that CBP publishes. That’s not the number of border crossings. That’s the number of people that law enforcement has encountered and handled. This clearly ignores those who weren’t “encountered” but still made it over. Part of that “encountered” number would be things like, “how many border guards do we have to actually ‘encounter’ these people?” If you fired 100% of the border guard force. Well your “Nationwide Encounters” stats would also drop to near 0. That doesn’t mean that there are no longer any border crossings.

Poll workers collecting votes on voting day have no way to validate if your voter registration is not valid. It’s either you’re on the list or not. And in a lot of jurisdictions, simply getting a driver’s license is enough to get your name on that list, even if you aren’t allowed to vote otherwise.

Let’s make some safe presumptions. There are at least some non-zero amount of people who vote illegally (ignore if they’re “illegal immigrants” or not, just in general). How is discarding their votes and pursuing those felony charges enforced? Is that effective? If the answer is “poll workers”, how are they supposed to know who on their registers are not supposed to be there in states that do auto-registration? There is discussion to have here without even bringing up a singular specific source of fraud like this article does.

I run a dedi server in my garage. Me and my kids still play it at least 2-3 times a week. Far from dead. People have just settled into their servers and the general hype train loons have moved on.

Maybe, just maybe, players want more new ideas rather than live services.

I’m not sure I understand why this statement is here. Palworld isn’t a live services game. This isn’t a “new idea”… this is how it’s been for most games since the dawn of gaming… You can play offline just fine. You can run a dedi host just fine. It’s a decent (not “great” but unique) genre of game that works great for my family. If it was live services it would no longer work for my family. I don’t let my children onto those types of games. They’re not old enough and for sure not mature enough.

It still gets updates, and before I click my dedi server I see the lobbies… They all generally seem occupied. According to https://steamdb.info/app/1623730/charts/ there’s nearly 50k players playing right now… That’s not a small number and puts it in top 30 overall.

It’s a laziness thing. Easier to just cut around “problems” then to actually get a good take in.

So it isn’t whether you’re using Azure, it’s whether you’re using CrowdStrike (Azure related or not)

No. Azure platform is using Crowdstrike on their hypervisors. So simply using Azure could be sufficient to hurt you in this case even if your Azure host isn’t using Crowdstrike itself. But yes, otherwise it’s a mix of Windows+Crowdstrike.

Yes, but Azure platform itself was using it. So many of those systems were down overnight (and there’s probably still stragglers). The guy you responded to specifically called out Azure-based services.

LMFAO Blizzard still hasn’t fucking learned? I walked away from them years ago. But I thought the point of WoW Classic was for them to just leave it the fuck alone. The game was already at it’s peak. Stop fucking with it.

Agreed, I don’t blame the publishers for this. It’s clearly working on some amount of population that makes it worthwhile when they do the spreadsheets. The only beta game I’ve purchased recently lets you self-host servers and I was happy with the state it was in even if it was dropped and died all together. I refuse to purchase just about anything else that is still in “beta” or “early access”. I remember when “Beta” meant “download this game and play it… If you like it you can buy it next month”.

It’s that population that actively makes games worse for all of us as publishers can choose to just be lazy. I was stupid happy when BG3 got the praise it got on launch. That’s what it used to be… that’s how it should be.

We get it, you’re a Trump supporter.

LMFAO. Yeah sure. If you actually read my posts you’ll see that I want both parties to be better. Neither candidate is worth my vote. And I’ve never voted Trump.

I’m glad you felt safe during his presidency, unfortunately an easy 45% of the American population (queer and minority groups) did not feel this way and were vilified by Trump and his supporters during his presidency

I’m in a (several) minority group. Don’t speak for me.

so that “assassination” attempt that definitely wasn’t staged

Man… And you idiots call the right leaning groups conspiracy nuts. It’s impossible to have a discussion with any of you when you say really dumb shit like this. 1 person is dead. 2 are in hospital. You think that was staged? Killing people on live TV was staged?

All the hatred and vitriol he created just poof wiped away because supposedly a leftist “shot a pellet” at him, which is an assassination attempt?

A PERSON IS DEAD. THE “PELLET” KILLED 1 AND PUT 2 MORE IN HOSPITAL. https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/14/politics/corey-comperatore-trump-shooting-victim/index.html

Trump will kill more Palestinian’s in a year through his rhetoric

Ah cause so many are making it through now right? Israel is doing so much worse because Biden or Trump is in office! Holy shit you’re something special.

I have nothing I can positively say to you. You’re hook line and sinker for the cult of Biden. God forbid we acknowledge even basic facts like someone fucking died.

Edit: Corrected a sentence… missed a couple of words.

Edit2: Oh and to clarify, I’m not counting the shooter in the dead count. There’s really 2… But who gives a shit about someone who kills random civilians.

So the person in the stands that died protecting their family… That’s special effects?

How about the other 2 that are in the hospital? That’s special effects?

Please tell me you’re not that stupid.

All of your points boil down to things that actually can’t be found in Project2025 it seems. Removal of DEI is the only point I see here that is actually in there… And honestly… DEI just doesn’t/isn’t work/working IMO. Working for an R1 University, I sat on the board that hired people in my department. Those with qualifications were overlooked and were not hired… those without qualifications were voted against by the board and were still hired… They held some form of desired racial quality.

Those links… none of them actually state what parts of the Project2025 say these things. It’s more of the same handwavy “well it says it somewhere in there” with no direct quotes or evidence otherwise.

Also, I’m sorry if I made you feel disrespected, I wasn’t trying to do that.

I don’t expect civilians to understand military at all. I don’t hold you to any standard in that respect (unless you try to speak authoritatively on any of it). However, commander in chief, I would hold to the highest standard.

But I still think Trump is clearly the more dangerous choice - hell any Republican would be seeing what they’ve done in red states, not to mention how he plans on not conceding if he loses. (Not how democracy works)

Not from my perspective. And especially not after seeing the assassination attempt of Trump on the news literally an hour ago.

Edit: fixed a non-clear point… poor wording.

Of Biden? No… of the commenter for claiming the speech was “Fantastic” when it was just read off a teleprompter? Yes…

Otherwise you are supporting the felon, Putin, Orban and insanity.

And this is where you’re wrong. I can support “nothing”. Until either side actually puts up a reasonable fucking choice. I’ll choose to support myself, and that’s it.

Edit: Are you vote botting yourself? The same people are upvoting your comment… hours apart. Very odd that the same couple people are upvoting all your stuff hours apart on a thread they presumably would read once and move on from.