71Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

GMP said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Quote:

---

It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.

---

Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.

---

Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.

https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/

---

I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.

This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.

That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.

---

There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.

If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.

In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.

---

You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.

My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?

---

Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.

We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.

Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.

---

That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.

---

It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.

I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.

---

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.

---

That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.

---

Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.

---

Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?

As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).

Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.

This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.

And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.

---

Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.

---

Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.

---

Sounds like a "conservative" alright.

If voter fraud was a real systemic issue, why can't the alarmists provide evidence to demonstrate it? It's not from lack of trying. Remember the president's commission on voter fraud that spent 7 months spinning its wheels (and millions of tax dollars) trying to back up Trump's claim that millions of illegal votes were cast for Clinton? Disbanded without reporting findings. And par for the course, those running the "investigation" engaged in comically unnecessary subterfuge to arrive at their lack of findings. What possibly justifies the Republican members of the commission making the commission's documents secret? Nothing. We know that because a federal judge ordered the commission to turn the documents over. Of course Trump refused and that was the last we ever heard of any attempt by the administration to substantiate this particular dog whistle.

Heritage put together a database of all the proven voter fraud cases they could find going back over 20 years and it totals 1,285 cases. That is from all of the following causes/actions: impersonation, false registration, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots, buying votes, illegal influence at polling places, ineligible voting, altering vote counts, and ballot petition fraud. Billions of votes have been cast in local, state and federal elections over that span and all they could present were 1,285 verified cases.

This is an embarrassingly bad hill to make a stand on. Whatever point about the Covid management you think it proves becomes more suspect just by association.

---

---

Rushin...

Although I disagree with you most of the time, I just chalk you up as "misguided".

On this issue, you have really lost your way.

"Voter fraud" is nothing more than thinly veiled racism. It is a totally discredited accusation. Heck, even the incumbent President had to throw in the towel because the committee he appointed lacked credibility and, of course, was unable to find any wrongdoing by the opposition party. Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do".

The efforts to suppress qualified individuals from voting is most evident in states with a history of racist policies. The effort to disenfranchise qualified minority populations in those states is an unconscionable violation of their basic rights.

Every eligible voter should be encouraged to vote regardless of their political leanings. Every state should structure their system to make it as easy as possible to vote.

Of course, here in the Golden State, we are, once again, leading the way. Nearly 70% of all ballots cast in March were by mail. The future is vote by mail. It is safe, it is easy and it enables qualified voters with an option that, in many cases, makes voting possible.

---

Cal_79 said:

---

With regard to your second point about reopening the economy and the effects of a second wave, it sure would have been valuable for 60 Minutes to have asked:

What happens to the economy, the country, and to people's well-being if the country were kept under indefinite lockdown for the next several months?

---

You miss the point. He was not talking about opening the country vs not opening the country.

He said ( in as guarded language as he could in view of the opinions of the man who appointed him) he wanted to open the country but to do so carefully and according scientific standards. Otherwise rushing to open the country could have the reverse effect of undermining the economy and putting it and us in a worse position. (Remember this is an economist talking not a physician.)

Using a poor Cal football analogy (lest we forget, this is a Cal football board) it would be like JT not allowing Longshore to fully heal and bringing him in to play in games while still partially injured. We lost more games than we would have if he had allowed Riley to finish those games.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

With regard to your second point about reopening the economy and the effects of a second wave, it sure would have been valuable for 60 Minutes to have asked:

What happens to the economy, the country, and to people's well-being if the country were kept under indefinite lockdown for the next several months?

---

Using a poor Cal football analogy (lest we forget, this is a Cal football board) it would be like JT not allowing Longshore to fully heal and bringing him in to play in games while still partially injured. We lost more games than we would have if he had allowed Riley to finish those games.

---

This is a great analogy that will fall on deaf ears. The original Trump guidelines called for reopening areas that showed a 14 day decrease in new cases (among other things) but people are now clamoring to open areas where the pandemic is still on the rise.

We have to hope for the best because we are trotting Longshore out in the second quarter with a broken leg and no cast (after a 10 minute break to get some cortisone) and hoping it heals on its own during the course of the game.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

With regard to your second point about reopening the economy and the effects of a second wave, it sure would have been valuable for 60 Minutes to have asked:

What happens to the economy, the country, and to people's well-being if the country were kept under indefinite lockdown for the next several months?

---

Using a poor Cal football analogy (lest we forget, this is a Cal football board) it would be like JT not allowing Longshore to fully heal and bringing him in to play in games while still partially injured. We lost more games than we would have if he had allowed Riley to finish those games.

---

This is a great analogy that will fall on deaf ears. The original Trump guidelines called for reopening areas that showed a 14 day decrease in new cases (among other things) but people are now clamoring to open areas where the pandemic is still on the rise.

We have to hope for the best because we are trotting Longshore out in the second quarter with a broken leg and no cast (after a 10 minute break to get some cortisone) and hoping it heals on its own during the course of the game.

---

And we hope that he will not throw a pick-six.

71Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

GMP said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Quote:

---

It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.

---

Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.

---

Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.

https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/

---

I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.

This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.

That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.

---

There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.

If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.

In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.

---

You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.

My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?

---

Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.

We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.

Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.

---

That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.

---

It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.

I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.

---

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.

---

That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.

---

Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.

---

Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?

As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).

Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.

This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.

And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.

---

Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.

---

Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.

---

Sounds like a "conservative" alright.

If voter fraud was a real systemic issue, why can't the alarmists provide evidence to demonstrate it? It's not from lack of trying. Remember the president's commission on voter fraud that spent 7 months spinning its wheels (and millions of tax dollars) trying to back up Trump's claim that millions of illegal votes were cast for Clinton? Disbanded without reporting findings. And par for the course, those running the "investigation" engaged in comically unnecessary subterfuge to arrive at their lack of findings. What possibly justifies the Republican members of the commission making the commission's documents secret? Nothing. We know that because a federal judge ordered the commission to turn the documents over. Of course Trump refused and that was the last we ever heard of any attempt by the administration to substantiate this particular dog whistle.

Heritage put together a database of all the proven voter fraud cases they could find going back over 20 years and it totals 1,285 cases. That is from all of the following causes/actions: impersonation, false registration, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots, buying votes, illegal influence at polling places, ineligible voting, altering vote counts, and ballot petition fraud. Billions of votes have been cast in local, state and federal elections over that span and all they could present were 1,285 verified cases.

This is an embarrassingly bad hill to make a stand on. Whatever point about the Covid management you think it proves becomes more suspect just by association.

---

---

Rushin...

Although I disagree with you most of the time, I just chalk you up as "misguided".

On this issue, you have really lost your way.

"Voter fraud" is nothing more than thinly veiled racism. It is a totally discredited accusation. Heck, even the incumbent President had to throw in the towel because the committee he appointed lacked credibility and, of course, was unable to find any wrongdoing by the opposition party. Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do".

The efforts to suppress qualified individuals from voting is most evident in states with a history of racist policies. The effort to disenfranchise qualified minority populations in those states is an unconscionable violation of their basic rights.

Every eligible voter should be encouraged to vote regardless of their political leanings. Every state should structure their system to make it as easy as possible to vote.

Of course, here in the Golden State, we are, once again, leading the way. Nearly 70% of all ballots cast in March were by mail. The future is vote by mail. It is safe, it is easy and it enables qualified voters with an option that, in many cases, makes voting possible.

---

Does it needed to be pointed out that the fraud in

Quote:

---

Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do"

---

is explicitly legal and encouraged in California? Specifically sending people to "help" people fill out ballots and return them. Its called ballot harvesting, and while it was rampant in California before 2016, AB-1921 (2016) made it legal in California. It is exactly what caused the overturn of an election in North Carolina, and also what flipped a bunch of seats in California (like NC, also by margins that didnt reflect the registration numbers).

California sure is leading the way in legalizing voter fraud, I guess.

Californians citing NC Republican fraud is one of the most ironic thing possible in politics. Not above closeted gay Republican Senators gay rights voting records, but up there.



That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

LunchTime said:

---

That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

LunchTime said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

GMP said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Quote:

---

It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.

---

Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.

---

Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.

https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/

---

I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.

This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.

That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.

---

There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.

If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.

In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.

---

You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.

My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?

---

Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.

We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.

Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.

---

That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.

---

It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.

I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.

---

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.

---

That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.

---

Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.

---

Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?

As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).

Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.

This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.

And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.

---

Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.

---

Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.

---

Sounds like a "conservative" alright.

If voter fraud was a real systemic issue, why can't the alarmists provide evidence to demonstrate it? It's not from lack of trying. Remember the president's commission on voter fraud that spent 7 months spinning its wheels (and millions of tax dollars) trying to back up Trump's claim that millions of illegal votes were cast for Clinton? Disbanded without reporting findings. And par for the course, those running the "investigation" engaged in comically unnecessary subterfuge to arrive at their lack of findings. What possibly justifies the Republican members of the commission making the commission's documents secret? Nothing. We know that because a federal judge ordered the commission to turn the documents over. Of course Trump refused and that was the last we ever heard of any attempt by the administration to substantiate this particular dog whistle.

Heritage put together a database of all the proven voter fraud cases they could find going back over 20 years and it totals 1,285 cases. That is from all of the following causes/actions: impersonation, false registration, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots, buying votes, illegal influence at polling places, ineligible voting, altering vote counts, and ballot petition fraud. Billions of votes have been cast in local, state and federal elections over that span and all they could present were 1,285 verified cases.

This is an embarrassingly bad hill to make a stand on. Whatever point about the Covid management you think it proves becomes more suspect just by association.

---

---

Rushin...

Although I disagree with you most of the time, I just chalk you up as "misguided".

On this issue, you have really lost your way.

"Voter fraud" is nothing more than thinly veiled racism. It is a totally discredited accusation. Heck, even the incumbent President had to throw in the towel because the committee he appointed lacked credibility and, of course, was unable to find any wrongdoing by the opposition party. Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do".

The efforts to suppress qualified individuals from voting is most evident in states with a history of racist policies. The effort to disenfranchise qualified minority populations in those states is an unconscionable violation of their basic rights.

Every eligible voter should be encouraged to vote regardless of their political leanings. Every state should structure their system to make it as easy as possible to vote.

Of course, here in the Golden State, we are, once again, leading the way. Nearly 70% of all ballots cast in March were by mail. The future is vote by mail. It is safe, it is easy and it enables qualified voters with an option that, in many cases, makes voting possible.

---

Does it needed to be pointed out that the fraud in

Quote:

---

Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do"

---

is explicitly legal and encouraged in California? Specifically sending people to "help" people fill out ballots and return them. Its called ballot harvesting, and while it was rampant in California before 2016, AB-1921 (2016) made it legal in California. It is exactly what caused the overturn of an election in North Carolina, and also what flipped a bunch of seats in California (like NC, also by margins that didnt reflect the registration numbers).

California sure is leading the way in legalizing voter fraud, I guess.

Californians citing NC Republican fraud is one of the most ironic thing possible in politics. Not above closeted gay Republican Senators gay rights voting records, but up there.



That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I do NOT agree that voter fraud is the greatest threat to Democracy. It happens so rarely and in so few numbers as to have little significant impact on the elections where millions and millions of people vote.

What is a greater threat to democracy is a president who ignores congressional oversight. Refuses to provide any information to oversight committees. Refuses to allow key witnesses to speak before congress. Willingly accepts electoral support frOm foreign countries. Terminates inspector generals in many agencies. Undermines whistleblower protections. Fills senior positions in high government offices with his lackeys. Takes advantage of his position to line his pockets and those of his cronies. Refuses to comply with laws passed by the Congress. Refuses to follow congressional funding restrictions on government funding approved by congress and diverts those funds to his pet projects. Appoints many "acting" heads of offices since he knows that he cannot get congressional approval of these people as permanent heads.
The list goes on and on.
Basically he acts like a king not a president.
(He knows he can get away with such action sine his enablers in the Senate won't do anything to stop him so long as he gets them what they want.)
If he is a king what does that do to our Democracy?

UrsaMajor said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

---

Both are threats. Those entitled to vote, should be voting if they choose. All for it. Those who are not entitled to vote should not be voting. Also, all for that. Get over a Dem/Repub bias---voter suppression is bad as is illegal voting.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

GMP said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Creeping Incrementalism said:

---

Quote:

---

It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.

---

Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.

---

Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.

https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/

---

I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.

This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.

That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.

---

There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.

If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.

In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.

---

You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.

My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?

---

Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.

We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.

Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.

---

That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.

---

It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.

I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.

---

Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.

---

That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.

---

Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.

---

Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?

As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).

Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.

This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.

And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.

---

Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.

---

Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.

---

Sounds like a "conservative" alright.

If voter fraud was a real systemic issue, why can't the alarmists provide evidence to demonstrate it? It's not from lack of trying. Remember the president's commission on voter fraud that spent 7 months spinning its wheels (and millions of tax dollars) trying to back up Trump's claim that millions of illegal votes were cast for Clinton? Disbanded without reporting findings. And par for the course, those running the "investigation" engaged in comically unnecessary subterfuge to arrive at their lack of findings. What possibly justifies the Republican members of the commission making the commission's documents secret? Nothing. We know that because a federal judge ordered the commission to turn the documents over. Of course Trump refused and that was the last we ever heard of any attempt by the administration to substantiate this particular dog whistle.

Heritage put together a database of all the proven voter fraud cases they could find going back over 20 years and it totals 1,285 cases. That is from all of the following causes/actions: impersonation, false registration, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots, buying votes, illegal influence at polling places, ineligible voting, altering vote counts, and ballot petition fraud. Billions of votes have been cast in local, state and federal elections over that span and all they could present were 1,285 verified cases.

This is an embarrassingly bad hill to make a stand on. Whatever point about the Covid management you think it proves becomes more suspect just by association.

---

---

Rushin...

Although I disagree with you most of the time, I just chalk you up as "misguided".

On this issue, you have really lost your way.

"Voter fraud" is nothing more than thinly veiled racism. It is a totally discredited accusation. Heck, even the incumbent President had to throw in the towel because the committee he appointed lacked credibility and, of course, was unable to find any wrongdoing by the opposition party. Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do".

The efforts to suppress qualified individuals from voting is most evident in states with a history of racist policies. The effort to disenfranchise qualified minority populations in those states is an unconscionable violation of their basic rights.

Every eligible voter should be encouraged to vote regardless of their political leanings. Every state should structure their system to make it as easy as possible to vote.

Of course, here in the Golden State, we are, once again, leading the way. Nearly 70% of all ballots cast in March were by mail. The future is vote by mail. It is safe, it is easy and it enables qualified voters with an option that, in many cases, makes voting possible.

---

Does it needed to be pointed out that the fraud in

Quote:

---

Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do"

---

is explicitly legal and encouraged in California? Specifically sending people to "help" people fill out ballots and return them. Its called ballot harvesting, and while it was rampant in California before 2016, AB-1921 (2016) made it legal in California. It is exactly what caused the overturn of an election in North Carolina, and also what flipped a bunch of seats in California (like NC, also by margins that didnt reflect the registration numbers).

California sure is leading the way in legalizing voter fraud, I guess.

Californians citing NC Republican fraud is one of the most ironic thing possible in politics. Not above closeted gay Republican Senators gay rights voting records, but up there.



That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I do NOT agree that voter fraud is the greatest threat to Democracy. It happens so rarely and in so few numbers as to have little significant impact on the elections where millions and millions of people vote.

What is a greater threat to democracy is a president who ignores congressional oversight. Refuses to provide any information to oversight committees. Refuses to allow key witnesses to speak before congress. Willingly accepts electoral support frOm foreign countries. Terminates inspector generals in many agencies. Undermines whistleblower protections. Fills senior positions in high government offices with his lackeys. Takes advantage of his position to line his pockets and those of his cronies. Refuses to comply with laws passed by the Congress. Refuses to follow congressional funding restrictions on government funding approved by congress and diverts those funds to his pet projects. Appoints many "acting" heads of offices since he knows that he cannot get congressional approval of these people as permanent heads.
The list goes on and on.
Basically he acts like a king not a president.
He knows he can get away with such action sine his enablers in the Senate won't do anything to stop him so long as he gets them what they want.

---

Right now, my biggest concern about the fairness of the 2020 election -- by far -- lies in the counting of the votes.

Trump is America's Boris Yeltsin.

Voting by mail is already legal. Why are people complaining?

Cal Athletics is properly waiting to make a decision about Fall sports. And if the trajectory of the pandemic into June plays out as expected by conventional wisdom, I wouldn't have any problems with Cal starting football practices on July 1. Students aren't on campus, athletes can be isolated (amongst themselves), infections are likely to be low. A decision on playing in late August can be made up to six weeks later (in mid Aug). As I have stated in other posts, I think the whole "CFB season as normal" construct falls apart sometime in Sept, but until then, if others are proceeding, then Cal should as well.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

---

Both are threats. Those entitled to vote, should be voting if they choose. All for it. Those who are not entitled to vote should not be voting. Also, all for that. Get over a Dem/Repub bias---voter suppression is bad as is illegal voting.

---

Voter suppression is adversely affecting a heck of a lot more people and a heck of a lot more elections than illegal voting.
They cannot be equated unless you want to accomplish more voter suppression

GivemTheAxe said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

---

Both are threats. Those entitled to vote, should be voting if they choose. All for it. Those who are not entitled to vote should not be voting. Also, all for that. Get over a Dem/Repub bias---voter suppression is bad as is illegal voting.

---

Voter suppression is adversely affecting a heck of a lot more people and a heck of a lot more elections than illegal voting.
They cannot be equated unless you want to accomplish more voter suppression

---

And what the heck do you not understand about a position that both be accomplished, not equated. Get over your bias. I am trying with mine. Let those who are legal to vote, vote. A problem?

philbert said:

---

---

You are amazingly fast in posting this. I am just watching this public briefing.
I am more and more impressed with Newsom. His approach to reopening the economy is thoughtful and backed by science. ( as mentioned before I did not like him when he was elected governor. I thought he was a lightweight compacted to Jerry Brown. )
I especially liked his explanation that the state was looking at the rates of positivity not just at the gross numbers of positive cases.
One would expect the gross numbers of positive cases to go up as testing increased. But he is looking at whether the rates of positivity are also going up. He says that the rates of positivity seem to be holding steady. (A very good sign).
His briefing is night and day better than anything coming out of Washington or some other state capitals. "Let's just do it and see what happens. By the way you can't look at the data we used to make our decision."

UrsaMajor said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

---

There have been a few, in my opinion, myopic posts that ignore the totality of situation and take current laws for granted.

I do not see a significant difference between owners of people taking those peoples votes for themselves, even at a discount, and those people, when made citizens, being prevented from voting. BOTH are taking away someones voice in a democracy and both are very bad for democracy. We, generally as a people (considering where the laws have taken us), have agreed that both of those are problems. First by saying ripping off your "properties" right to vote shouldn't be given the same weight, and then the, still in progress, fight towards permitting all eligible people to vote.

Filling out someones ballot for them is bad for democracy. We shouldn't have let the slave owners in the south do it. My evidence is that it caused a LOT of problems through shifting power where it should not have been. That this threat doesnt exist today in such an obvious way doesnt change the significance of the threat.

As a current day example; Turkey is in the middle of a voter fraud situation now. Turkey is not some backwater Middle Eastern country where dictators run elections and get 100% of the vote. Turkey is an EU democracy that let voter fraud get out of control. Effectively they harvested votes, stuffing ballot boxes. They took someones vote and filled it in for themselves.

I feel confident that I can absolutely defend my position that voter fraud (even legal voter fraud) is as serious a threat as voter suppression, and fundamentally not much different.

They are two sides to the same coin. You act fraudulently until they stop you, then you disallow voting. OR you disallow voting until they stop you, and then you act fraudulently (eg husbands filling out their wives ballots).



The fact that one is a bigger problem this minute, in this country, doesnt change that they are both very very bad for how a democracy operates. The fact that that the problem created a bad outcome doesnt make the outcome worse than the problem. The outcome was created by the problem.

I'm not sure I have seen it put this way before, but regarding procedural protections for criminal defendants, it is often said better to allow 10 guilty people go free than to wrongly convict on innocent person. This is apparently from Blackstone's ratio: It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio

So how many fraudulent votes should potentially be allowed to leak through to avoid one legit voter's vote being excluded or prevented? [Don't get me wrong here, I believe that actual voter fraud in the US is extremely rare] Maybe this is just the wrong construct, because any significant amount of voter fraud could create a perceived lack of legitimacy to an election (but I suppose information that votes are suppressed would have the same injury).

GivemTheAxe said:

---

philbert said:

---

---

You are amazingly fast in posting this. I am just watching this public briefing.
I am more and more impressed with Newsom. His approach to reopening the economy is thoughtful and backed by science. ( as mentioned before I did not like him when he was elected governor. I thought he was a lightweight compacted to Jerry Brown. )
I especially liked his explanation that the state was looking at the rates of positivity not just at the gross numbers of positive cases.
One would expect the gross numbers of positive cases to go up as testing increased. But he is looking at whether the rates of positivity are also going up. He says that the rates of positivity seem to be holding steady. (A very good sign).
His briefing is night and day better than anything coming out of Washington or some other state capitals. "Let's just do it and see what happens. By the way you can't look at the data we used to make our decision."

---

I agree.

I reluctantly voted for Newsom and was very sorry to see Brown retire. However, he has demonstrated that he is up to the task with his handling of this crisis. I have been impressed with his ability to carefully balance the need to keep an eye on the economy while maintaining a safe environment in which to live. The state is definitely hurting but it will be ok in the long run thanks to thoughtful leaders like GN.

LunchTime said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

---

There have been a few, in my opinion, myopic posts that ignore the totality of situation and take current laws for granted.

I do not see a significant difference between owners of people taking those peoples votes for themselves, even at a discount, and those people, when made citizens, being prevented from voting. BOTH are taking away someones voice in a democracy and both are very bad for democracy. We, generally as a people (considering where the laws have taken us), have agreed that both of those are problems. First by saying ripping off your "properties" right to vote shouldn't be given the same weight, and then the, still in progress, fight towards permitting all eligible people to vote.

Filling out someones ballot for them is bad for democracy. We shouldn't have let the slave owners in the south do it. My evidence is that it caused a LOT of problems through shifting power where it should not have been. That this threat doesnt exist today in such an obvious way doesnt change the significance of the threat.

As a current day example; Turkey is in the middle of a voter fraud situation now. Turkey is not some backwater Middle Eastern country where dictators run elections and get 100% of the vote. Turkey is an EU democracy that let voter fraud get out of control. Effectively they harvested votes, stuffing ballot boxes. They took someones vote and filled it in for themselves.

I feel confident that I can absolutely defend my position that voter fraud (even legal voter fraud) is as serious a threat as voter suppression, and fundamentally not much different.

They are two sides to the same coin. You act fraudulently until they stop you, then you disallow voting. OR you disallow voting until they stop you, and then you act fraudulently (eg husbands filling out their wives ballots).



The fact that one is a bigger problem this minute, in this country, doesnt change that they are both very very bad for how a democracy operates. The fact that that the problem created a bad outcome doesnt make the outcome worse than the problem. The outcome was created by the problem.

---

Turkey is not in the EU. It is a country that is run by a dictator (Erdogan) who is making every effort to transition from a secular country (following the direction established by Ataturk, the Father of modern Turkey) to an Islamic theocracy. He has done every he can to upset the democratic process in that country. No one should compare today's Turkey to the Turkey of Ataturk. Speaking as one who loves visiting Turkey, it has been very sad to see the changes that have happened their since my first visit over ten years ago.

Turkey is not part of EU, full stop.

LunchTime said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

Voter suppression has always been a much greater problem throughout all of US history than illegal voting. It is not just a "Right now" issue. As I mentioned above the number of people affected and elections affected by voter suppression is overwhelming when
compared to Illegal voting.


That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

---

There have been a few, in my opinion, myopic posts that ignore the totality of situation and take current laws for granted.

I do not see a significant difference between owners of people taking those peoples votes for themselves, even at a discount, and those people, when made citizens, being prevented from voting. BOTH are taking away someones voice in a democracy and both are very bad for democracy. We, generally as a people (considering where the laws have taken us), have agreed that both of those are problems. First by saying ripping off your "properties" right to vote shouldn't be given the same weight, and then the, still in progress, fight towards permitting all eligible people to vote.

Filling out someones ballot for them is bad for democracy. We shouldn't have let the slave owners in the south do it. My evidence is that it caused a LOT of problems through shifting power where it should not have been. That this threat doesnt exist today in such an obvious way doesnt change the significance of the threat.

As a current day example; Turkey is in the middle of a voter fraud situation now. Turkey is not some backwater Middle Eastern country where dictators run elections and get 100% of the vote. Turkey is an EU democracy that let voter fraud get out of control. Effectively they harvested votes, stuffing ballot boxes. They took someones vote and filled it in for themselves.

I feel confident that I can absolutely defend my position that voter fraud (even legal voter fraud) is as serious a threat as voter suppression, and fundamentally not much different.

They are two sides to the same coin. You act fraudulently until they stop you, then you disallow voting. OR you disallow voting until they stop you, and then you act fraudulently (eg husbands filling out their wives ballots).



The fact that one is a bigger problem this minute, in this country, doesnt change that they are both very very bad for how a democracy operates. The fact that that the problem created a bad outcome doesnt make the outcome worse than the problem. The outcome was created by the problem.

---

This thread is a very interesting and expansive read, but a quick return to the issue of Cal football this fall. The main story on the HBO show Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (that ran last night) was Sports and the Coronavirus. About 20 minutes into the show, The issues related to reopening sports was covered. The Dr. Fauci blueprint is to create "bubble" leagues, where everyone involved (players, coaches, hotel workers, bus drivers, staff, etc.) should be isolated and tested at least weekly during the season. The German professional soccer league opened (with empty stands) this weekend following that model, but 2 players were tested and found to be infected, so their entire team is now in quarantine for 2 weeks. The point of the show was not that sports should not yet reopen, but that doing it safely will not be easy. Regardless of what any of our elected officials want or say, I don't see anything happening with Cal students unless the University believes is will be safe for all involved.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

That said, I think we should all be able to agree that voter fraud is the most serious threat to a democracy, regardless of how often it happens, and should be prevented as much as possible. That should include ballot harvesting and voter suppression.

---

I don't know. Certainly voter fraud is a serious threat, but if--just for the sake of argument--we're talking about instances of fraud in the double or triple digits and voter suppression efforts that deliberately disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of individuals, can you really say the former is a greater threat?

---

Both are threats. Those entitled to vote, should be voting if they choose. All for it. Those who are not entitled to vote should not be voting. Also, all for that. Get over a Dem/Repub bias---voter suppression is bad as is illegal voting.

---

Voter suppression is adversely affecting a heck of a lot more people and a heck of a lot more elections than illegal voting.
They cannot be equated unless you want to accomplish more voter suppression

---

And what the heck do you not understand about a position that both be accomplished, not equated. Get over your bias. I am trying with mine. Let those who are legal to vote, vote. A problem?

---

The problem is that most protocols that are purported to be designed to allow only legitimate voting have been easily abused to accomplish voter suppression. And are often espoused by people who want to accomplish voter suppression.

The fact that there is very little non-legitimate voting and that there is a heck of a lot of voter suppression warrants taking major efforts to remedy The much greater problem of voter suppression and only lesser and more measured efforts to reduce whatever non-legitimate voting that does exist (if any).

IssyBear said:

---

This thread is a very interesting and expansive read, but a quick return to the issue of Cal football this fall. The main story on the HBO show Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (that ran last night) was Sports and the Coronavirus. About 20 minutes into the show, The issues related to reopening sports was covered. The Dr. Fauci blueprint is to create "bubble" leagues, where everyone involved (players, coaches, hotel workers, bus drivers, staff, etc.) should be isolated and tested at least weekly during the season. The German professional soccer league opened (with empty stands) this weekend following that model, but 2 players were tested and found to be infected, so their entire team is now in quarantine for 2 weeks. The point of the show was not that sports should not yet reopen, but that doing it safely will not be easy. Regardless of what any of our elected officials want or say, I don't see anything happening with Cal students unless the University believes is will be safe for all involved.

---

I would be surprised if there is football.But maybe we can have a voting tournament.

philbert said:

---

---

and to be back on topic, seems like college football practice by June 15 along with plans to play the regular season assuming if trend lines continue positive. I suspect whether there will fans at games depends on subsequent trend lines. Newsom seems really focused on reducing serious hospital cases and the percentage of positive tests.

This would also be interesting and a potential game changer. Not sure how you can breathe heavily through N95 masks...

philbert said:

---

> NFL testing modified facemasks containing surgical or N95 material .. ..

This would also be interesting and a potential game changer. Not sure how you can breathe heavily through N95 masks...

---

Russian proverb: "doveryai no proveryai" (trust, but verify)

-------------------------
spam-ish offers on contentious BearInsider bbs just now..

see & say no evil, hear plenty much

philbert said:

---

This would also be interesting and a potential game changer. Not sure how you can breathe heavily through N95 masks...

---

Great idea. It would minimize the rate of infection among the players.

wifeisafurd said:

---

philbert said:

---

---

and to be back on topic, seems like college football practice by June 15 along with plans to play the regular season assuming if trend lines continue positive. I suspect whether there will fans at games depends on subsequent trend lines. Newsom seems really focused on reducing serious hospital cases and the percentage of positive tests.

---

Practice would normally begin roughly four/five weeks before the first game. Of course, in a normal year, the players would be working out on their own for several weeks before practice formally starts. This year, I am guessing the players will have to be cleared to informally practice for at least a couple weeks before official practices can kick off. In other words, the guys need to be on the field by early July to be able to effectively play by the end of August.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

philbert said:

---

This would also be interesting and a potential game changer. Not sure how you can breathe heavily through N95 masks...

---

Great idea. It would minimize the rate of infection among the players.

---

And increase the rate of heart failure and stroke...

I mean - breathing through an N95 mask is not easy and certainly not for kids who are weighing 350 pounds and going all out. There may be some negative repercussions of kids who are on the team from COVID, but a mask on the field is not going to solve the issues of the ball transferring virus, the sidelines where they congregate and get in groups, breathing oxygen on the sideline, etc. This, at best, would be window-dressing just to get the public to not revolt. Are they going to be required to wear this while puking?

Let them play. If they have issues (asthma, Diabetes) exclude them - pros or college. Do a baseline lung function and track that daily. Take a daily temp, make sure they are generally isolated from the rest of society and move on. If there are no fans, this seems like a very simple process. Make sure flights for travel are charter flights, make sure hotels have full floors dedicated to teams, etc. It is not foolproof but it will be good enough for the actual risk these folks will have.

Frankly being on campus is much more of a concern than playing football.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

philbert said:

---

This would also be interesting and a potential game changer. Not sure how you can breathe heavily through N95 masks...

---

Great idea. It would minimize the rate of infection among the players.

---

lol

71Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

philbert said:

---

---

and to be back on topic, seems like college football practice by June 15 along with plans to play the regular season assuming if trend lines continue positive. I suspect whether there will fans at games depends on subsequent trend lines. Newsom seems really focused on reducing serious hospital cases and the percentage of positive tests.

---

Practice would normally begin roughly four/five weeks before the first game. Of course, in a normal year, the players would be working out on their own for several weeks before practice formally starts. This year, I am guessing the players will have to be cleared to informally practice for at least a couple weeks before official practices can kick off. In other words, the guys need to be on the field by early July to be able to effectively play by the end of August.

---

The point, which has been stated over and over, is the decision needs to be made around June 15 so you can plan/implement the camp. That has been the internal decision date, and Knowlton has said so publicly. Now will it be the end of the world if they have to make the decision in late June, probably not. But 100 plus guys just don't move from home and start practice overnight. There are huge logistics that take time.

the furd comments are great too

wifeisafurd said:

---

71Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

philbert said:

---

---

and to be back on topic, seems like college football practice by June 15 along with plans to play the regular season assuming if trend lines continue positive. I suspect whether there will fans at games depends on subsequent trend lines. Newsom seems really focused on reducing serious hospital cases and the percentage of positive tests.

---

Practice would normally begin roughly four/five weeks before the first game. Of course, in a normal year, the players would be working out on their own for several weeks before practice formally starts. This year, I am guessing the players will have to be cleared to informally practice for at least a couple weeks before official practices can kick off. In other words, the guys need to be on the field by early July to be able to effectively play by the end of August.

---

The point, which has been stated over and over, is the decision needs to be made around June 15 so you can plan/implement the camp. That has been the internal decision date, and Knowlton has said so publicly. Now will it be the end of the world if they have to make the decision in late June, probably not. But 100 plus guys just don't move from home and start practice overnight. There are huge logistics that take time.

---

Deadlines do have a way of slipping. But one would think that mid to late June is definitely as far out as decision makers can go.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.

This just isn't our decision.

---

Even if most players catch the disease, there is at most a 0.1% chance of any given young healthy individual dying of it. Obviously almost every individual wants to play and I would too. But what everyone else had to keep in mind is there is still a fair chance of _someone_ in a conference dying of it, and likely several more will get very sick but make it. There is no practical way to keep all college student-athletes "in a bubble" -- just one guy will get it, and he will transmit it to many others in just one day before the results of his test are in... winners and losers will be decided by the random chance of a contagious disease and how many players it takes out.

The point on my mind is if those are the odds, and players are allowed to play, then students should be allowed to go to campus too.

So you pick one or the other A) damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead, or B) stay in your hidey-hole. Nothing in between will work well.

There is an article today that the pro sports leagues are beginning to admit they will go with proposition A) -- even if a one player gets it, they will just keep on playing. I'm sure they will try to isolate the sick players, but my prediction is people will soon realize how stupid that is and just play ball anyway. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/05/its-probably-not-safe-for-sports-yet-that-may-not-matter.html