johng

None of the changes are marked SECURITY at least. https://nginx.org/en/CHANGES

See if you see the circle that they create.

1. You can get an ID without being a citizen. 2. You are automatically registered to vote when you get an ID. 3. It's the honor system when you get your ID, you check a box if you are NOT a citizen, otherwise, you are automatically registered to vote. It's not verified ever. 4. It is ILLEGAL for anyone at a voting booth to even ask you for ID anyway, so you can still vote, even without an ID.

I saw a study, you can probably find it. Half of the people that got called in for jury duty and were unable to perform said they were not legal citizens, and thusly couldn't serve in a jury. The jury duty pool is pulled from the same pool as voting eligible citizens.

Ultimately, because CA makes the person check the box (the honor system) saying if they are legal or not legal, they can claim that they make it illegal for non-citizens to vote. But effectively because of all of the above, they make it so easy that the statement is useless. In addition, they refuse to run an audit or hand over information for the fed to run an audit. So while the number of prosecutions for voter fraud are low, we really have no idea how deep it goes.

The Nick Shirley video exposing people getting paid to both vote and sign petitions shows that fraud is, at the very least, happening quite regularly.

Republicans in CA have no chance. None whatsoever. I'm OK with that if the process is fair. But CA doesn't make it fair. You can make the same argument about gerrymandering in other places but CA takes it so far beyond just gerrymandering. It's quite egregious and sad.

I am not a republican. I consider myself a libertarian and I have very liberal ideas, though the word liberal has now been co-opted and doesn't mean what the definition of the word means.

Ultimately I would like to see the 2 party system abolished. My preference would be to start a politcal party either called the Spock party or the Logic party. Every decision's #1 criteria would be: Is it logical? Let's take emotion out of the process and just use logic.

#2 would be to make all bills require the simplest form possible. If you want to start a bill to improve veteran benefits, it should have no pork or anything unrelated to that specific goal.

#3, the bills should be named accurately based on the goal of the billl. This way, you can't make a bill that's called the "Increasing Veteran Benefits Bill" that really has to do with datacenters, and then your opponent can say "He voted against the increasing veteran benefits bill!" knowing full well it had nothing to do with that.

#4, all major issues should be voted on by all citizens. Citizens would take politics more seriously if they were able to have more direct control and vote more often. We have the technology to do it. Imagine that you are able to vote from home (or a library, or in person) weekly on issues that truly matter. The politicians would have much less power and hopefully our citizenship would start to care and educate themselves more.

Edit: Found the article. This tries to debunk it, but it doesn't mention if they were or weren't registered to vote. That's it's argument that it's fake. But it doesn't know, no one knows, and that's the problem: https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.C7UN99E