The Trump Presidency

[Write4U]

Question; If a person is prevented from voting for a representative, are they still obligated to pay taxes?

No taxation without representation?

American Revolution

Bronze sculpture of James Otis, Jr stands in front of the Barnstable County Courthouse.

The phrase had been used for more than a generation in Ireland.[8][9] By 1765, the term was in use in Boston, and local politician James Otis was most famously associated with the phrase, "taxation without representation is tyranny."[10] In the course of the Revolutionary era (1750–1783), many arguments were pursued that sought to resolve the dispute surrounding Parliamentary sovereignty, taxation, self-governance and representation.[11][12][13][14][15][16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation#

 

[(Q)]

Seems you can't be bothered to simply read the linked article. She went to a private island with Clinton and Epstein, and claims she was raped by Epstein several times.
If anyone knew what Epstein was up to, it was Clinton.

So, Epstein raped the girl right in front of Clinton? Or, did Epstein just admit to Clinton he raped the girl?

Tell us how you know these things?

 

[Vociferous]

Question; If a person is prevented from voting for a representative, are they still obligated to pay taxes?

No one is stopping anyone from voting in person, or even by existing absentee ballot.

So, Epstein raped the girl right in front of Clinton? Or, did Epstein just admit to Clinton he raped the girl?

Tell us how you know these things?

Again, learn to read. I said "if anyone knew".

 

[Write4U]

No one is stopping anyone from voting in person, or even by existing absentee ballot.

That is a terrible evasion and does not acknowledge the concerted effort by the Trump administration to control who gets to vote and who does not, practically speaking. "No one is stopping anyone" is a terribly misleading statement.

 

[Vociferous]

That is a terrible evasion and does not acknowledge the concerted effort by the Trump administration to control who gets to vote and who does not, practically speaking. "No one is stopping anyone" is a terribly misleading statement.

The Trump administration hasn't done a single thing to stop anyone from voting. But go ahead, keep believing Democrats lies and conspiracy theories. It's a good look on you. Well, it at least explains your know-nothing confidence.

 

[paddoboy]

 

[(Q)]

The Trump administration hasn't done a single thing to stop anyone from voting.

No one has started voting yet, that happens in November, but that doesn't stop Trump from trying any underhanded, dishonest and almost criminal efforts to do so.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...aunched-three-pronged-attack-election/615034/

 

[Write4U]

Here is a taste of Donald Trump, the current president of the US:

“President Trump just announced that the ‘biological’ lab in Wuhan where the COVID-19 virus was created was ‘funded’ by President Barak (sp) Hussein Obama in 2015 to the tune of $3,800,000 American dollars!”

By Jon Greenberg • April 30, 2020

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?category=truth-o-meter&ruling=false

 

[Bells]

The Trump administration hasn't done a single thing to stop anyone from voting.

Strawman...

But go ahead, keep believing Democrats lies and conspiracy theories.

He literally said he was doing it to prevent people from voting by mail.

Trump said on Thursday that congressional negotiations over stimulus aid were held up in part because of Democratic proposals to provide $3.6bn to states to run elections and $25bn in aid to the postal service. The president, who has falsely claimed that widespread mail-in voting will lead to fraud, suggested that without the funding it would be harder to vote by mail.

“They need that money in order to have the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots,” Trump said in an interview with Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo. “If they don’t get those two items, that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting because they’re not equipped to have it.”

Congress has allocated just $400m to help states run elections, a small fraction of the $4bn the Brennan Center for Justice estimates is needed this year. Many election officials are scrambling to figure out how they will run an election where there is expected to be an unprecedented level of mail-in and in-person voting. The lack of funding may already be having an effect; in Kentucky, the state’s top election official said this week he did not support expanding mail-in voting for the fall because the state did not have the capacity to do so.​

It's a good look on you. Well, it at least explains your know-nothing confidence.

And being such a sycophant is not a great look on you.

At the end of the day, his actions will hurt the GOP the most..

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/11/8319...ail-gop-in-florida-and-elsewhere-relies-on-it
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/19/republicans-mail-in-voting-trump-398774
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2020/08/9967359/are-mailboxes-being-removed-streets-usps-reason

 

[iceaura]

The Trump administration hasn't done a single thing to stop anyone from voting

Of course they have. They've turned loose the Republican Party vote suppression machinery in dozens of States.

No one is stopping anyone from voting in person, or even by existing absentee ballot.

Republicans such as Kris Kobach have been making fulltime jobs and careers out of stopping people from voting, preventing their votes from being counted, etc.

At the end of the day, his actions will hurt the GOP the most..

Probably wishful thinking, unfortunately. The GOP is making hay in the red States by crippling Dem voting capability, and in the blue States by fostering the myth of the "moderate Republican" who strives for a return to bipartisanship and civil discourse.

To the extent the GOP can once again sell the claim of the moderate Republican, the sensible "centrist", the No Labels/Tea Party/Never Trump/Not Our Fault faction of the self-proclaimed reasonable conservative (see the career of Charlie Sykes, the Limbaugh of Wisconsin) it will benefit from Trump's destruction of democratic tradition and infrastructure. You will be able to tell that it is working, this strategy, if you see long lines at the polls in Dem districts and read about "problems" with voter registration or counting the ballots (mailed or in person).

 

[Vociferous]

The Trump administration hasn't done a single thing to stop anyone from voting.

Strawman...

Not of Write4U or iceaura.

He literally said he was doing it to prevent people from voting by mail.

Trump said on Thursday that congressional negotiations over stimulus aid were held up in part because of Democratic proposals to provide $3.6bn to states to run elections and $25bn in aid to the postal service. The president, who has falsely claimed that widespread mail-in voting will lead to fraud, suggested that without the funding it would be harder to vote by mail.

“They need that money in order to have the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots,” Trump said in an interview with Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo. “If they don’t get those two items, that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting because they’re not equipped to have it.”

Congress has allocated just $400m to help states run elections, a small fraction of the $4bn the Brennan Center for Justice estimates is needed this year. Many election officials are scrambling to figure out how they will run an election where there is expected to be an unprecedented level of mail-in and in-person voting. The lack of funding may already be having an effect; in Kentucky, the state’s top election official said this week he did not support expanding mail-in voting for the fall because the state did not have the capacity to do so.​

First, lol, The Guardian.
Second:

"They [the Democrats] want $3 1/2 billion for something that'll turn out to be fraudulent — that's election money basically," Trump said.

Continued the president: "They want $25 billion for the post office. Now, they need that money in order to have the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots. Now, in the meantime, they aren't getting there. But if they don't get those two items, that means you can't have universal mail-in voting because they're not equipped to have it."
https://www.npr.org/2020/08/13/9021...r-postal-service-to-block-more-voting-by-mail
​

It's only Democrats who are claiming people must vote by mail. Both Birx and Fauci say in-person voting, with the same precautions as going to the grocery store, is safe. IOW, Democrats have created this supposed crisis they are demanding billions to cover. Trump has pushed to restructure and privatize the failing USPS since 2018, long before any thought of universal mail-in voting.

At the end of the day, his actions will hurt the GOP the most..

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/11/8319...ail-gop-in-florida-and-elsewhere-relies-on-it
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/19/republicans-mail-in-voting-trump-398774
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2020/08/9967359/are-mailboxes-being-removed-streets-usps-reason

No one is against absentee ballots, which you have to request and require identification. There's a difference between mail-in and absentee ballots, mostly in the lack of security/verification in the former. Nor is mailing absentee ballot applications (with their requirements) the same as mailing out the ballots themselves.

And the USPS regularly removes boxes with low mail volume and adds others where needed. Routes, vehicles, fuel, and manpower to service underutilized boxes is a huge expense to an already failing USPS. You should quit buying into conspiracy theories.

 

[Write4U]

And the USPS regularly removes boxes with low mail volume and adds others where needed. Routes, vehicles, fuel, and manpower to service underutilized boxes is a huge expense to an already failing USPS. You should quit buying into conspiracy theories.

Apparently you have no inkling as to the function of the US Postal Service.

It guarantees that all people, regardless where they live will have access to mail service. It is a social service affording all citizens (residents) the right to conduct business with the US via the mail service. This is a public service provided by a non-profit US Postal Service.

OTOH, For-profit mail services will never select mail service to areas which lose profits. The USPS guarantees delivery of (official) mail to all citizens regardless where they live.

If the US Postal Service fails, rural America will suffer the most
The USPS is “a lifeline” for many remote and Native communities.

The USPS is legally required to deliver all mail, to all postal addresses in all regions, at a flat rate, no matter how far it may have to travel. The service’s accessibility and affordability are especially important to rural communities that live in poverty and topeople with disabilities, who can’t afford the cost of a private business to deliver their daily necessities. (In 2017, the rural poverty rate was 16.4 percent, compared with 12.9 percent for urban areas.)

Then there are the several small towns around the country that vote only by mail because they’re not populated enough to open up polls. In Minnesota, for example, 130,000 receive a mailed ballot every election because they live in a town with fewer than 400 people.

“USPS isn’t just a public service,” Baker said. “It’s a lifeline.”

Companies like FedEx and UPS often don’t deliver to remote rural areas.
The USPS is crucial to rural America because it is obligated by law to serve all postal addresses with no differences in the fees it charges. As required by congressional mandate, the agency ensures that all Americans are connected.

The USPS was never really meant to operate as a business but as a public service, which is why it’s been able to keep its prices lower than private companies. Businesses like FedEx and UPS don’t build offices in remote rural areas, like deep in Wyoming or in the mountains of Colorado, because it’s simply not profitable. They often rely on the Post Office for last-mile delivery; the agency delivers mail for them from major transportation hubs to the final delivery destination, often in secluded areas.

This ultimately means that without the USPS, FedEx and UPS won’t have the resources to deliver to remote rural areas, nor will they likely make investments to do so since they’ll lose money in the process. Instead, people will have to bear the burden of traveling to the companies’ offices in larger towns to meet their mailing needs. For Mary Meyer, who lives in Bucyrus, Ohio — a town with a population of about 11,000 — the closest UPS customer center is 16 miles away in Marion.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2020...hutting-down-rural-america-native-communities

 

[Vociferous]

Apparently you have no inkling as to the function of the US Postal Service.

It guarantees that all people, regardless where they live will have access to mail service. It is a social service affording all citizens (residents) the right to conduct business with the US via the mail service. This is a public service provided by a non-profit US Postal Service.

OTOH, For-profit mail services will never select mail service to areas which lose profits. The USPS guarantees delivery of (official) mail to all citizens regardless where they live.

If the US Postal Service fails, rural America will suffer the most
The USPS is “a lifeline” for many remote and Native communities.

“USPS isn’t just a public service,” Baker said. “It’s a lifeline.”
https://www.vox.com/identities/2020...hutting-down-rural-america-native-communities

And? Who's talking about shutting down the USPS altogether? Trump's not. Any possible privatization can always include stipulations about continuing to serve rural communities.
But what does any of that have to do with removing low volume boxes from urban areas? Nothing. So it's all a non sequitur.

 

[Write4U]

And? Who's talking about shutting down the USPS altogether? Trump's not. Any possible privatization can always include stipulations about continuing to serve rural communities.

No it cannot. You cannot force a non-government business to operate at a loss. How are you going to compensate these private businesses for their loss? Somebody has to pay for this universal government service. Are you suggesting that a rural retiree pay 15.00 to a private operator for mailing a letter or submit their taxes?

But what does any of that have to do with removing low volume boxes from urban areas? Nothing. So it's all a non sequitur.

You still do not understand! Volume has nothing to do with the USPS service. It is not a for-profit social service. It's intent is to provide equal opportunity for all individuals to use government services, without prejudice to location.
The US Postal Service is a social service and designed to serve everybody regardless where they live.

Shutting down any postal office that affects mail delivery to individuals is prejudicial and illegal, by law.

Again:

The USPS is crucial to rural America because it is obligated by law to serve all postal addresses with no differences in the fees it charges. As required by congressional mandate, the agency ensures that all Americans are connected.

The USPS was never really meant to operate as a business but as a public service, which is why it’s been able to keep its prices lower than private companies. Businesses like FedEx and UPS don’t build offices in remote rural areas, like deep in Wyoming or in the mountains of Colorado, because it’s simply not profitable. They often rely on the Post Office for last-mile delivery; the agency delivers mail for them from major transportation hubs to the final delivery destination, often in secluded areas.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2020...hutting-down-rural-america-native-communities

 

[Vociferous]

No it cannot. You cannot force a non-government business to operate at a loss. How are you going to compensate these private businesses for their loss? Somebody has to pay for this universal government service.

A private business would streamline and innovate to be competitive, and that would include charging other private shippers, like FedEx, more for rural deliveries those shippers do not service. So those other private shippers would pay more for the service they have been taking advantage of at the expense of all taxpayers, or just start servicing those areas themselves. It's not rocket science. Just basic market economics.

You still do not understand! Volume has nothing to do with the USPS service. It is not a for-profit social service. It's intent is to provide equal opportunity for all individuals to use government services, without prejudice to location.
The US Postal Service is a social service and designed to serve everybody regardless where they live.

Shutting down any postal office that affects mail delivery to individuals is prejudicial and illegal, by law.

Removing urban collection boxes has nothing to do with servicing rural routes. But it does have to do with removing unnecessary waste and pollution.
Again, no one is taking about shutting down any service to individual mailboxes. You do understand the difference between a mailbox and a collection box, right?

 

[Write4U]

Again, no one is taking about shutting down any service to individual mailboxes. You do understand the difference between a mailbox and a collection box, right?

Oh, my........

A mailbox is a physical or postal address for receipt of mail.
A collection box is a public address for sending of mail.

Both service addresses must be easily accessible to people who conduct their affairs via the US Postal Service.
A collection box 30 miles from where you live is not a "service", it is a hardship.

 

[Vociferous]

Oh, my........

A mailbox is a physical or postal address for receipt of mail.
A collection box is a public address for sending of mail.

Both service addresses must be easily accessible to people who conduct their affairs via the US Postal Service.
A collection box 30 miles from where you live is not a "service", it is a hardship.

You do know that a mailbox also serves as a collection box, right? 9_9

As usual, you're opining on things you don't comprehend.

 

[iceaura]

And? Who's talking about shutting down the USPS altogether?

The intellectual and media wing of the fascist movement currently embodied in the Republican Party.
It's been on their agenda for decades now. It's not a secret.

Any possible privatization can always include stipulations about continuing to serve rural communities.

The current Post Office, competently run, would be cheaper than a private one that had to cover such large operating deficits.

But what does any of that have to do with removing low volume boxes from urban areas? Nothing.

It is one step in the dismantling of the USPS, so that the Postmaster General can make larger profits on his investments in private mail services. (That used to be called a "conflict of interest").
Since it also helps in suppressing voter turnout from poorer communities and Democratic Party constituencies, it's a two-fer.

It's only Democrats who are claiming people must vote by mail.

Democrats are not saying that.

Not of Write4U or iceaura.

Strawman of me.
You slide around between "Trump administration" and "no one" - I don't.

So those other private shippers would pay more for the service they have been taking advantage of at the expense of all taxpayers, or just start servicing those areas themselves. It's not rocket science. Just basic market economics.

Everybody will have to pay more for worse mail service, while the Postmaster General profits more from his private investments. It's basic monopoly control of a captive market - socialize the costs, privatize the enlarged profits.

 

[Vociferous]

Strawman of me.

Not even kind of:

The Trump administration hasn't done a single thing to stop anyone from voting.

Of course they have. They've turned loose the Republican Party vote suppression machinery in dozens of States.

 

[Write4U]

You do know that a mailbox also serves as a collection box, right? 9_9

Yes, IF you have daily mail service at all.
Have you ever lived in a rural area? I have.

As usual, you're opining on things you don't comprehend.

As usual you present a tortured version of truth in reality.