In message <rnmo6htb95cb37obj06389lqrn1mbktp4c@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 20:39:47 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

>>In message <gkln6h5vgso3d60igg3s51763ahr51put9@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 11:30:19 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
>>> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>
>>>>Add to that that Florida, specifically, removed hundreds of thousands of
>>>>voters from the roles based on their last names, trying to purge black
>>>>and Hispanic voters.
>>
>>> What's this? I have no idea what you might be thinking of, and I
>>> follow Florida news very closely.
>>
>><https://prospect.org/power/florida-s-voter-purge-hell/>
>>
>>Just one example, but there have been other instances of Florida
>>removing voters, strangely almost always minorities.

> I assume you read the article, and that whatever schools you attended
> did provide math textbooks that gave you a working knowledge of how
> numbers are represented.

> That article refers to a list of 180,000 *potential* non-citizens. The
> list was then narrowed down to 2,700 *potential* non-citizens. The
> list was based on DMV records of driver's license applications.

Yes. And that list was, please note, 180, 000.

> The narrowed-down list was then sent to county Election officials.
> Some did not take any action, and some sent out letters to those on
> the list.

The "narrowing" was a trial balloon . Nothing was ever said or even
implied that the full 180,000 were not going to be targetted.

But fine, here is another case.

<https://www.salon.com/2000/12/04/voter_file/>

Florida has also done run-arounds recently to thwart the will of those
people who WERE allowed to vote by ignoring or subverting the voter's
approval to end Florida's lifetime ban on felons. That represents a
THIRD of the black population in Florida, of course.

<https://www.huffpost.com/entry/florida-voter-purge-federal-warning_n_1564131>

Florida has a long and glorious history of suppressing the vote,
especially of minorities, going back to reconstruction.

And here is a story specifically about the efforst Florida is making to
fix the election this fall

<https://atlantadailyworld.com/2022/04/26/florida-at-it-again-more-anti-voter-laws-to-stop-voters-of-color/>

and another

<https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/florida-enacts-new-election-laws-ahead-of-2022-midterm-elections/ar-AAWEqHW>

and another

<https://floridaphoenix.com/blog/republicans-were-trying-to-thwart-voters-on-the-fl-felon-voting-rights-proposal-all-along-aclu-attorney-says-and-new-law-is-proof/>

And naother

<https://www.foxnews.com/us/federal-judge-florida-law-requiring-financial-payments-be-made-before-voting-unconstitutional>

And, if you subsribe to the Miami herald, this one

<https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article251500333.html>

How many do you need?

--
"He has Van Gogh's ear for music." - Billy Wilder

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>On 29/04/2022 1:52 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't
>>allow a school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>>along with each other.
>Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other textbook?

This might be due to the idea of "mainstreaming" as in
"gender mainstreaming".

|Mainstreaming involves ensuring that gender perspectives
|and attention to the goal of gender equality are central
|to /all/ activities
The World-Wide Web (slashes added by me [S.R.])

"/All/ activities" means that gender should be considered
even in mathematics text books.

So, may be they think that "Getting Along With Each Other"
is so important that it, too, should be considered even in
mathematics texts books.

But others think that all those "applications" are distracting
from the math! Web:

|They said students who were taught abstract math concepts
|fared better in experiments than those taught with
|real-world examples, such as story problems.
|Adding extraneous details makes it hard for students to
|extract the basic mathematical concepts and apply them to
|new problems, they said.
|"We're really making it difficult for students because we
|are distracting them from the underlying math," said
|Jennifer Kaminski, a research scientist at Ohio State
|University, whose study appears in the journal Science.
| World-Wide Web, 2008.

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 22:37:54 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

>In message <rnmo6htb95cb37obj06389lqrn1mbktp4c@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 20:39:47 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
>> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>>>In message <gkln6h5vgso3d60igg3s51763ahr51put9@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 11:30:19 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
>>>> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Add to that that Florida, specifically, removed hundreds of thousands of
>>>>>voters from the roles based on their last names, trying to purge black
>>>>>and Hispanic voters.

Well, you might want to reconsider that claim about purging Hispanic
voters. That's a problem in Florida for the politicians. There's
growing indication that the Hispanic vote is skewing to the Republican
side because a lot of those Hispanics in Florida are Cuban or of Cuban
descent.

The Republicans don't know to suppress just the Hispanics who tend to
vote for Democrats.

>>>
>>>> What's this? I have no idea what you might be thinking of, and I
>>>> follow Florida news very closely.
>>>
>>><https://prospect.org/power/florida-s-voter-purge-hell/>
>>>
>>>Just one example, but there have been other instances of Florida
>>>removing voters, strangely almost always minorities.
>
>> I assume you read the article, and that whatever schools you attended
>> did provide math textbooks that gave you a working knowledge of how
>> numbers are represented.
>
>> That article refers to a list of 180,000 *potential* non-citizens. The
>> list was then narrowed down to 2,700 *potential* non-citizens. The
>> list was based on DMV records of driver's license applications.
>
>Yes. And that list was, please note, 180, 000.

That is not "hundreds of thousands".

>
>> The narrowed-down list was then sent to county Election officials.
>> Some did not take any action, and some sent out letters to those on
>> the list.
>
>The "narrowing" was a trial balloon . Nothing was ever said or even
>implied that the full 180,000 were not going to be targetted.
>
>But fine, here is another case.
>
><https://www.salon.com/2000/12/04/voter_file/>
>
>Florida has also done run-arounds recently to thwart the will of those
>people who WERE allowed to vote by ignoring or subverting the voter's
>approval to end Florida's lifetime ban on felons. That represents a
>THIRD of the black population in Florida, of course.
>
><https://www.huffpost.com/entry/florida-voter-purge-federal-warning_n_1564131>

I didn't read that link because I'm already very familiar with the
subject.

The problem with using "Florida" that way is that the voters in
Florida voted to repeal the law banning felons from voting, and then
the Republican legislature did an end-run and declared that the vote
would only be restored after all fines and penalties were paid and
that felons have to through a process to have their voting rights
restored.
In other words, the Republican politicians were doing the thwarting,
and the thwartees were the citizens of Florida who voted to overturn
the ban.

>Florida has a long and glorious history of suppressing the vote,
>especially of minorities, going back to reconstruction.

Be more specific. The intent is to supress the vote of those who are
expected to vote for candidates of the party not in power.

While the effect is racial, the intent is suppress votes for
Democrats.
>
>How many do you need?
None.

I snipped the links to all of your cites. Not because I disagree or
would argue with anything in any of them, but because they are all
references to issues that I already know about, and know about in more
depth that you might have gained from reading them. For every one
you've cited, I've read six or more other articles that present the
same facts.

I follow politics, and Florida politics, quite assidiously.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

Stefan Ram pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>> On 29/04/2022 1:52 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't
>>> allow a school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>>> along with each other.
>> Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other textbook?
>
> This might be due to the idea of "mainstreaming" as in
> "gender mainstreaming".
>
>> Mainstreaming involves ensuring that gender perspectives
>> and attention to the goal of gender equality are central
>> to /all/ activities
> The World-Wide Web (slashes added by me [S.R.])
>
> "/All/ activities" means that gender should be considered
> even in mathematics text books.
>
> So, may be they think that "Getting Along With Each Other"
> is so important that it, too, should be considered even in
> mathematics texts books.
>
> But others think that all those "applications" are distracting
> from the math! Web:
>
>> They said students who were taught abstract math concepts
>> fared better in experiments than those taught with
>> real-world examples, such as story problems.
>> Adding extraneous details makes it hard for students to
>> extract the basic mathematical concepts and apply them to
>> new problems, they said.
>> "We're really making it difficult for students because we
>> are distracting them from the underlying math," said
>> Jennifer Kaminski, a research scientist at Ohio State
>> University, whose study appears in the journal Science.
>>
> World-Wide Web, 2008.

Pretty useless quotation without a proper cite.

/dps

--
"I'm glad unicorns don't ever need upgrades."
"We are as up as it is possible to get graded!"
_Phoebe and Her Unicorn_, 2016.05.15

On 30/04/22 06:43, Lewis wrote:
> In message <t4gios$p8e$1@dont-email.me> Peter Moylan
> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>> We vote for two houses of parliament. In the House of
>> Representatives vote there are almost never more than ten
>> candidates per electorate, and typically you get only four or five.
>> Under those conditions, having to number every square is not a
>> problem.
>
> It is if you are expected to know anything at all about more than
> three or four of them.

As it happens, my voting papers are right beside me, and I'll probably
fill them in this afternoon. (The election is still a few weeks away,
but I applied for a postal vote because of covid-19.) There are nine
candidates in my electorate. My main problem in deciding how to vote is
that I want to put four of them equal last.

One party is called "Informed Medical Options Party". You might think
that they want to press the government to listen to medical advice. It's
actually the opposite: an anti-vaccination party.

For the other three, we have one racist party, one independent who used
to belong to the racist party, and one party whose sole raison d'etre is
to promote the business interests of a billionaire. And that's not even
counting one mainstream party whose policies are anathema to me.

I'm now leaning towards the idea of favouring optional preferential
voting, where you don't have to number all the squares. We already have
that in state elections.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On 29/04/22 23:16, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 29/04/2022 1:52 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:

>> Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't allow a
>> school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>> along with each other.
>
> Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other
> textbook? Putting it in the Mathematics textbook means either less
> room for teaching mathematical skills (so less fit for purpose) or a
> bigger book (so more expensive). I suppose these getting along with
> each other skills are being shoehorned into Physics books and
> Chemistry books and French books and Economics books, making them all
> either less fit for purpose or more expensive? What a bloody stupid
> idea!

The impression I got from an upthread discussion is that the people
criticising these books are refusing to say which books they are talking
about, making their claims impossible to check.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On 29/04/22 22:52, Tony Cooper wrote:

> The individual election offices in each county attempt to purge
> their lists of names of people who are no longer in the county and
> are registered somewhere else. That's a valid reason to purge the
> list.
>
> We are not required to notify the election office when we move to a
> different county, and can register at the county where we move to,
> so some names are on multiple county's polls.
>
> The requirement to show identification at the time we vote prevents
> someone voting in two places, though. The identification must show
> the current address.

The system would be much simpler if you had, as we do, a single national
body in charge of running elections. When we register a change of
address with the Electoral Office, all relevant rolls are updated. If we
fail to register the change of address, we must vote in the old
electorate. (This also happens if the change of address is too close to
an election date.)

To forestall an obvious objection: voting in the old electorate does not
require a physical trip to the old address. Absentee votes are
available. If I happen to be travelling I can vote anywhere in the
country. (Or, in the case of a state election, anywhere in the state.)

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On 30/04/22 08:35, Stefan Ram wrote:
> Dingbat <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> quotes:

>>>> teach Critical Race Theory,
>
> There it is! "Critical Race Theory"!
> (So far, I was only aware of "Cathode Ray Tube".)

It did occur to me to wonder whether any textbooks had been banned for
mentioning cathode ray tubes.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On 30/04/2022 3:11 am, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 29/04/22 23:16, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 29/04/2022 1:52 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>>> Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't allow a
>>> school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>>> along with each other.
>>
>> Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other
>> textbook? Putting it in the Mathematics textbook means either less
>> room for teaching mathematical skills (so less fit for purpose) or a
>> bigger book (so more expensive). I suppose these getting along with
>> each other skills are being shoehorned into Physics books and
>> Chemistry books and French books and Economics books, making them all
>> either less fit for purpose or more expensive? What a bloody stupid
>> idea!
>
> The impression I got from an upthread discussion is that the people
> criticising these books are refusing to say which books they are talking
> about, making their claims impossible to check.

Cross-thread alert! Elsewhere, we have people claiming that Tucker
Carlson (whoever that might be) is a racist but refusing to provide any
supporting evidence for that claim. The answer in both cases is
Hitchens's Razor, surely?

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:11:16 +1000, Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 29/04/22 23:16, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 29/04/2022 1:52 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>>> Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't allow a
>>> school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>>> along with each other.
>>
>> Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other
>> textbook? Putting it in the Mathematics textbook means either less
>> room for teaching mathematical skills (so less fit for purpose) or a
>> bigger book (so more expensive). I suppose these getting along with
>> each other skills are being shoehorned into Physics books and
>> Chemistry books and French books and Economics books, making them all
>> either less fit for purpose or more expensive? What a bloody stupid
>> idea!
>
>The impression I got from an upthread discussion is that the people
>criticising these books are refusing to say which books they are talking
>about, making their claims impossible to check.

It's an ongoing process. Some previously rejected books have been
re-evaluated and accepted. Some publishers are making some changes
that will make the books acceptable.

When the next school year begins, all schools will have math textbooks
available.

It's not to the Administration's benefit to make it clear why the
books were originally rejected or what changes are made. What
DeSantis wants is that the electorate remembers that he stepped in and
stopped the publishers from poisoning the minds of children. That he
did it, not why he did it, is the message.

What has not been brought up is whether or not the books are effective
tools for teaching math. Not a whisper about that.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:19:24 +1000, Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 29/04/22 22:52, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> The individual election offices in each county attempt to purge
>> their lists of names of people who are no longer in the county and
>> are registered somewhere else. That's a valid reason to purge the
>> list.
>>
>> We are not required to notify the election office when we move to a
>> different county, and can register at the county where we move to,
>> so some names are on multiple county's polls.
>>
>> The requirement to show identification at the time we vote prevents
>> someone voting in two places, though. The identification must show
>> the current address.
>
>The system would be much simpler if you had, as we do, a single national
>body in charge of running elections.

Impossible here. For that to happen would require a Constitutional
Amendment. the Constitution of the United States reads: "Article I,
Section 4, Clause 1: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections
for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by
the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make
or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing [sic]
Senators."

To "alter such Regulations" means that a majority of the members of
Congress would have to vote for their state to relinquish the right of
their state to conduct the elections. That ain't gonna happen.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On 4/29/2022 9:08 PM, Snidely wrote:
> Stefan Ram:
>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>>> Tony Cooper wrote:

>>>> Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't
>>>> allow a school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>>>> along with each other.
>>> Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other textbook?

>>   This might be due to the idea of "mainstreaming" as in
>>   "gender mainstreaming".

>>> Mainstreaming involves ensuring that gender perspectives
>>> and attention to the goal of gender equality are central
>>> to /all/ activities
>> The World-Wide Web (slashes added by me [S.R.])

>>   "/All/ activities" means that gender should be considered
>>   even in mathematics text books.

>>   So, may be they think that "Getting Along With Each Other"
>>   is so important that it, too, should be considered even in
>>   mathematics texts books.

>>   But others think that all those "applications" are distracting
>>   from the math! Web:

>>> They said students who were taught abstract math concepts
>>> fared better in experiments than those taught with
>>> real-world examples, such as story problems.
>>> Adding extraneous details makes it hard for students to
>>> extract the basic mathematical concepts and apply them to
>>> new problems, they said.
>>> "We're really making it difficult for students because we
>>> are distracting them from the underlying math," said
>>> Jennifer Kaminski, a research scientist at Ohio State
>>> University, whose study appears in the journal Science.

>> World-Wide Web, 2008.

> Pretty useless quotation without a proper cite.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1154659

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 12:04:20 AM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:19:24 +1000, Peter Moylan
> <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> >On 29/04/22 22:52, Tony Cooper wrote:

> >> The individual election offices in each county attempt to purge
> >> their lists of names of people who are no longer in the county and
> >> are registered somewhere else. That's a valid reason to purge the
> >> list.
> >> We are not required to notify the election office when we move to a
> >> different county, and can register at the county where we move to,
> >> so some names are on multiple county's polls.
> >> The requirement to show identification at the time we vote prevents
> >> someone voting in two places, though. The identification must show
> >> the current address.
> >The system would be much simpler if you had, as we do, a single national
> >body in charge of running elections.
>
> Impossible here. For that to happen would require a Constitutional
> Amendment. the Constitution of the United States reads: "Article I,
> Section 4, Clause 1: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections
> for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by
> the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make
> or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing [sic]
> Senators."
>
> To "alter such Regulations" means that a majority of the members of
> Congress

2/3 of the members of each House

> would have to vote for their state to relinquish the right of
> their state to conduct the elections.

AND 3/4 of the states (38 of them) would have to ratify it.

Someone didn't bother to scroll down to Article V.

> That ain't gonna happen.

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 10:19:32 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 29/04/22 22:52, Tony Cooper wrote:

> > The individual election offices in each county attempt to purge
> > their lists of names of people who are no longer in the county and
> > are registered somewhere else. That's a valid reason to purge the
> > list.
> > We are not required to notify the election office when we move to a
> > different county, and can register at the county where we move to,
> > so some names are on multiple county's polls.
> > The requirement to show identification at the time we vote prevents
> > someone voting in two places, though. The identification must show
> > the current address.
>
> The system would be much simpler if you had, as we do, a single national
> body in charge of running elections. When we register a change of
> address with the Electoral Office, all relevant rolls are updated. If we
> fail to register the change of address, we must vote in the old
> electorate. (This also happens if the change of address is too close to
> an election date.)
>
> To forestall an obvious objection: voting in the old electorate does not
> require a physical trip to the old address. Absentee votes are
> available. If I happen to be travelling I can vote anywhere in the
> country. (Or, in the case of a state election, anywhere in the state.)

Do you have constituencies smaller than states?

If we move out of a district (congressional or state/local legislative),
we have to change our registration, because the districts are drawn
by population (very strictly), and someone living in another district
doesn't get to choose the representatives for where they used to live.

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 07:48:01 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 10:19:32 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 29/04/22 22:52, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> > The individual election offices in each county attempt to purge
>> > their lists of names of people who are no longer in the county and
>> > are registered somewhere else. That's a valid reason to purge the
>> > list.
>> > We are not required to notify the election office when we move to a
>> > different county, and can register at the county where we move to,
>> > so some names are on multiple county's polls.
>> > The requirement to show identification at the time we vote prevents
>> > someone voting in two places, though. The identification must show
>> > the current address.
>>
>> The system would be much simpler if you had, as we do, a single national
>> body in charge of running elections. When we register a change of
>> address with the Electoral Office, all relevant rolls are updated. If we
>> fail to register the change of address, we must vote in the old
>> electorate. (This also happens if the change of address is too close to
>> an election date.)
>>
>> To forestall an obvious objection: voting in the old electorate does not
>> require a physical trip to the old address. Absentee votes are
>> available. If I happen to be travelling I can vote anywhere in the
>> country. (Or, in the case of a state election, anywhere in the state.)
>
>Do you have constituencies smaller than states?
>
>If we move out of a district (congressional or state/local legislative),
>we have to change our registration, because the districts are drawn
>by population (very strictly), and someone living in another district
>doesn't get to choose the representatives for where they used to live.

As far as I know, no state requires a person to de-register when the
move from one district to another. What is required to vote is to
register in the new district.

Theoretically, my name appears on the registered voter rolls in two
Indiana districts, three Illinois districts, and three Florida
districts. My name may have been purged from any or all except my
current district's roll, but I did not remove my name from them.

I don't know if any of the districts was registered in, but no longer
live in, purged the list of inactive names.

I am only eligible to vote in one Florida district. When I next vote,
the address on the ID I'll present must agree with the address on
registered voter list for that district.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 11:06:00 AM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 07:48:01 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 10:19:32 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >> On 29/04/22 22:52, Tony Cooper wrote:

> >> > The individual election offices in each county attempt to purge
> >> > their lists of names of people who are no longer in the county and
> >> > are registered somewhere else. That's a valid reason to purge the
> >> > list.
> >> > We are not required to notify the election office when we move to a
> >> > different county, and can register at the county where we move to,
> >> > so some names are on multiple county's polls.
> >> > The requirement to show identification at the time we vote prevents
> >> > someone voting in two places, though. The identification must show
> >> > the current address.
> >> The system would be much simpler if you had, as we do, a single national
> >> body in charge of running elections. When we register a change of
> >> address with the Electoral Office, all relevant rolls are updated. If we
> >> fail to register the change of address, we must vote in the old
> >> electorate. (This also happens if the change of address is too close to
> >> an election date.)
> >> To forestall an obvious objection: voting in the old electorate does not
> >> require a physical trip to the old address. Absentee votes are
> >> available. If I happen to be travelling I can vote anywhere in the
> >> country. (Or, in the case of a state election, anywhere in the state.)
> >Do you have constituencies smaller than states?
> >If we move out of a district (congressional or state/local legislative),
> >we have to change our registration, because the districts are drawn
> >by population (very strictly), and someone living in another district
> >doesn't get to choose the representatives for where they used to live.
>
> As far as I know, no state requires a person to de-register when the

Did anyone suggest that they do?

Stop inventing non-problems to try to start fights about.

> move from one district to another. What is required to vote is to
> register in the new district.

On 29 Apr 2022 22:35:35 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram)
wrote:

>Dingbat <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> quotes:
>>>>teach Critical Race Theory,
>
> There it is! "Critical Race Theory"!
> (So far, I was only aware of "Cathode Ray Tube".)

Me too.

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 09:01:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 11:06:00 AM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 07:48:01 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 10:19:32 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> >> On 29/04/22 22:52, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> >> > The individual election offices in each county attempt to purge
>> >> > their lists of names of people who are no longer in the county and
>> >> > are registered somewhere else. That's a valid reason to purge the
>> >> > list.
>> >> > We are not required to notify the election office when we move to a
>> >> > different county, and can register at the county where we move to,
>> >> > so some names are on multiple county's polls.
>> >> > The requirement to show identification at the time we vote prevents
>> >> > someone voting in two places, though. The identification must show
>> >> > the current address.
>> >> The system would be much simpler if you had, as we do, a single national
>> >> body in charge of running elections. When we register a change of
>> >> address with the Electoral Office, all relevant rolls are updated. If we
>> >> fail to register the change of address, we must vote in the old
>> >> electorate. (This also happens if the change of address is too close to
>> >> an election date.)
>> >> To forestall an obvious objection: voting in the old electorate does not
>> >> require a physical trip to the old address. Absentee votes are
>> >> available. If I happen to be travelling I can vote anywhere in the
>> >> country. (Or, in the case of a state election, anywhere in the state.)
>> >Do you have constituencies smaller than states?
>> >If we move out of a district (congressional or state/local legislative),
>> >we have to change our registration, because the districts are drawn
>> >by population (very strictly), and someone living in another district
>> >doesn't get to choose the representatives for where they used to live.
>>
>> As far as I know, no state requires a person to de-register when the
>
>Did anyone suggest that they do?
>
>Stop inventing non-problems to try to start fights about.

My post was intended to add additonal information, not to contradict.

However, a "change" is an action that alters something. No change is
made to the records of the district one leaves, and the record in the
new district is an addition, not a change.

My post brought out the fact that no change is made to the records in
the previous district in the US system. In Peter Moylan's case, a
change is made to the records when an old address is changed to a new
address.

I do note that you have maliciously snipped my additional information
and presented a "snippet" of that post. Tut, tut.
>
>> move from one district to another. What is required to vote is to
>> register in the new district.
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

* Peter Moylan:

> On 30/04/22 08:35, Stefan Ram wrote:
>> Dingbat <ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> quotes:
>
>>>>> teach Critical Race Theory,
>>
>> There it is! "Critical Race Theory"!
>> (So far, I was only aware of "Cathode Ray Tube".)
>
> It did occur to me to wonder whether any textbooks had been banned for
> mentioning cathode ray tubes.

Textbooks mentioning those might be up for a purge for being outdated.
Today's students might have never seen a cathode ray tube.

--
For since no male
Has ruled me or has fed,
I think my own thoughts
In my woman's head. -- Lesbia Harford, Fatherless

In message <kkso6h11gs5apiuqv7auhfah524of3vghd@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 22:37:54 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

> Well, you might want to reconsider that claim about purging Hispanic
> voters. That's a problem in Florida for the politicians. There's
> growing indication that the Hispanic vote is skewing to the Republican
> side because a lot of those Hispanics in Florida are Cuban or of Cuban
> descent.

> The Republicans don't know to suppress just the Hispanics who tend to
> vote for Democrats.

They do, if you're in Miami, you're OK. If you're elsewhere in the state,
you re liberal scum.

>>Yes. And that list was, please note, 180, 000.

> That is not "hundreds of thousands".

It is two hundred thousand, and it is not the only time that numbers
that high have been targeted. So yes, it is hundreds of thousands.

--
oh no! there's been unauthorized access to my paypal account!!! ...
how nice of someone at a grade school in korea to notice and
inform me of it

In message <t4i5s5$65s$1@dont-email.me> Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> On 29/04/22 23:16, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 29/04/2022 1:52 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:

>>> Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't allow a
>>> school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>>> along with each other.
>>
>> Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other
>> textbook? Putting it in the Mathematics textbook means either less
>> room for teaching mathematical skills (so less fit for purpose) or a
>> bigger book (so more expensive). I suppose these getting along with
>> each other skills are being shoehorned into Physics books and
>> Chemistry books and French books and Economics books, making them all
>> either less fit for purpose or more expensive? What a bloody stupid
>> idea!

> The impression I got from an upthread discussion is that the people
> criticising these books are refusing to say which books they are talking
> about, making their claims impossible to check.

they are also refusing to say WHY the books they are banning fail their
'test'. Or say anything at all.

It's all bullshit posturing by the TreasonParty in their effort to
spread disinformation and instill a sense of panic, hoping that they mange
to keep enough power until they can try again to overthrow the
government. This time they will have a better plan.

--
I went down the street to the 24-hour grocery. When I got there, the
guy was locking the front door. I said, "Hey, the sign says
you're open 24 hours." He said, "Yes, but not in a row." --
Steven Wright

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 18:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

>In message <t4i5s5$65s$1@dont-email.me> Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>> On 29/04/22 23:16, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 29/04/2022 1:52 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>>>> Who wouldn't believe anything said about a state that won't allow a
>>>> school to use a math textbook that encourages childrens to get
>>>> along with each other.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't that stuff be in the Getting Along With Each Other
>>> textbook? Putting it in the Mathematics textbook means either less
>>> room for teaching mathematical skills (so less fit for purpose) or a
>>> bigger book (so more expensive). I suppose these getting along with
>>> each other skills are being shoehorned into Physics books and
>>> Chemistry books and French books and Economics books, making them all
>>> either less fit for purpose or more expensive? What a bloody stupid
>>> idea!
>
>> The impression I got from an upthread discussion is that the people
>> criticising these books are refusing to say which books they are talking
>> about, making their claims impossible to check.
>
>they are also refusing to say WHY the books they are banning fail their
>'test'. Or say anything at all.
>
>It's all bullshit posturing by the TreasonParty in their effort to
>spread disinformation and instill a sense of panic, hoping that they mange
>to keep enough power until they can try again to overthrow the
>government. This time they will have a better plan.

You do offer some over-the-top opinions.

I agree it's posturing, but discount the rest of your description.

My take: DeSantis is doing it the way does in order to establish
himself as a defender of children and an advocate of parental rights
to restrict unwanted messaging to the children. He isn't interested
in providing specifics because he's just interested in creating the
image. So far, that's working.

He already has the power and is in no danger of losing it. He's a
sure bet for re-election to the governorship of Florida, and the
odds-on favorite to be President of the United States starting with
the election in 2024 or 2028.

If Trump runs in 2024, DeSantis may not. (I would not bet money that
he *will not* run in 2024 even if Trump runs)

I wish I could describe the situation in other terms, but I'm
realistic enough to know that the dreadful scenario I'm describing
above is probably dead-on.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 6:37:58 PM UTC-4, Lewis wrote:
> In message <rnmo6htb95cb37obj...@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 20:39:47 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> > <g.k...@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
> >>In message <gkln6h5vgso3d60ig...@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonyco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 11:30:19 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> >>> <g.k...@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

> >>>>Add to that that Florida, specifically, removed hundreds of thousands of
> >>>>voters from the roles based on their last names, trying to purge black
> >>>>and Hispanic voters.
> >>> What's this? I have no idea what you might be thinking of, and I
> >>> follow Florida news very closely.
> >><https://prospect.org/power/florida-s-voter-purge-hell/>
> >>Just one example, but there have been other instances of Florida
> >>removing voters, strangely almost always minorities.
> > I assume you read the article, and that whatever schools you attended
> > did provide math textbooks that gave you a working knowledge of how
> > numbers are represented.
> > That article refers to a list of 180,000 *potential* non-citizens. The
> > list was then narrowed down to 2,700 *potential* non-citizens. The
> > list was based on DMV records of driver's license applications.
> Yes. And that list was, please note, 180, 000.
> > The narrowed-down list was then sent to county Election officials.
> > Some did not take any action, and some sent out letters to those on
> > the list.
>
> The "narrowing" was a trial balloon . Nothing was ever said or even
> implied that the full 180,000 were not going to be targetted.

Don't forget about the attempt to violate the XXIVth Amendment
by requiring all former convicts to pay all the fees and fines and
whatnot incurred during their legal procedures and confinement
before registering to vote.

"AMENDMENT XXIV"
Passed by Congress August 27, 1962. Ratified January 23, 1964.

"Section 1.
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or
other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President
or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall
not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason
of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

"Section 2.
"The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation."

Interestingly, it was proposed and ratified well before the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

On 30-Apr-22 3:05, Peter Moylan wrote:
>
> I'm now leaning towards the idea of favouring optional preferential
> voting, where you don't have to number all the squares. We already have
> that in state elections.

Where there are large numbers of candidates, and you are asked to number
them in order of preference...
Is there any rule which states you must use the decimal numbering system?

--
Sam Plusnet

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 18:13:53 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

>In message <kkso6h11gs5apiuqv7auhfah524of3vghd@4ax.com> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 22:37:54 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
>> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>> Well, you might want to reconsider that claim about purging Hispanic
>> voters. That's a problem in Florida for the politicians. There's
>> growing indication that the Hispanic vote is skewing to the Republican
>> side because a lot of those Hispanics in Florida are Cuban or of Cuban
>> descent.
>
>> The Republicans don't know to suppress just the Hispanics who tend to
>> vote for Democrats.
>
>They do, if you're in Miami, you're OK. If you're elsewhere in the state,
>you re liberal scum.

Your map of Florida omits Tampa and the surrounding counties? The
those-of-Cuban-descents in that area are mostly third- and
fourth-generation, though, and less of a voting bloc. Still, there
are about 80,000 in Tampa, and that's a lot of votes to go after.

Actually, the city in Florida that has the highest Cuban-American
population is Hialeah at 73.3% of the city's population.
>
>>>Yes. And that list was, please note, 180, 000.
>
>> That is not "hundreds of thousands".
>
>It is two hundred thousand, and it is not the only time that numbers
>that high have been targeted. So yes, it is hundreds of thousands.

I think your school must have provided a deficient math textbook.
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.