11 hours ago, dinsdale said:

The states need to supply voter rolls. What are you on about? Red states are doing it. Blue states don't want to. Why not?

Wrong.....the citizenship registers are being generated by the DHS.

For the 2026 U.S. midterms, voter registration lists are being constructed using federal data. States receive “citizenship lists” compiled from federal records (SSA, DHS SAVE, naturalization databases), while individual voters may be asked to show documentary proof of citizenship such as a U.S. passport or birth certificate depending on state law.

2 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

Wrong.....the citizenship registers are being generated by the DHS.

For the 2026 U.S. midterms, voter registration lists are being constructed using federal data. States receive “citizenship lists” compiled from federal records (SSA, DHS SAVE, naturalization databases), while individual voters may be asked to show documentary proof of citizenship such as a U.S. passport or birth certificate depending on state law.

States, as it stands, do not have to comply with generating voter lists for the Feds (and most of the blue states aren't) and this ruling by SCOTUS for this case (new executive postal rule) has nothing to do with it. This is about a lawsuit that claims the executive order will cause harm to the states of which SCOTUS has ruled 6-3 that no harm to the states can be demonstrated for now as the rule has yet to be implemented.

Barcodes on mail in ballots. So what. What's the big deal?

Edited August 25Aug 25 by dinsdale

22 hours ago, MIke B Bad said:

So, the DHS, run by a plumber, will now issue lists to the states of who is allowed to vote in the midterms......little or no oversight....state lists are now totally redundant......and............. the DoJ has been told to prosecute any election officials who allow someone, whose details aren't identical to the DHS list, to be prosecuted.

Once this happens every person and his dog who is denied a vote will sue......absolute chaos***.......only then will SCOTUS look at Trump's EO to see if it did indeed "cause harm".

---

***Is this the whole point of the EO though?

I think the whole point of this, and many other measures is to create such utter chaos in both the voting and counting processes that the case can be made for simply abandoning the elections and allowing the status quo to continue. The argument will be that, because of this chaos ( blamed on The Democrats and others - up to and possibly including the vengeful ghost of Hugo Chavez!) that the results, tainted by fraud, can not be trusted and should be set aside.

Maybe the solution will be some sort of body or commission to look at each result and rule on whether it should stand. That of course will be suitably "managed".

Edited August 26Aug 26 by JAG

57 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

States, as it stands, do not have to comply with generating voter lists for the Feds (and most of the blue states aren't) and this ruling by SCOTUS for this case (new executive postal rule) has nothing to do with it. This is about a lawsuit that claims the executive order will cause harm to the states of which SCOTUS has ruled 6-3 that no harm to the states can be demonstrated for now as the rule has yet to be implemented.

Barcodes on mail in ballots. So what. What's the big deal?

Wrong again......SCOTUS ruled that no harm has been shown YET "not ripe".......as soon as the DHS lists are imposed and the inevitable mistakes are made, voters disenfranchised, then the law suits begin and SCOTUS will then have to make a ruling.

2 minutes ago, JAG said:

I think the whole point of this, and many other measures is to create such utter chaos in both the voting and counting processes that the case can be made for simply abandoning the elections and allowing the status quo to continue. The argument will be that, because of this chaos ( blamed on The Democrats and others - up to and possibly including the vengeful ghost of Hugo Chavez(!) that the results, tainted by fraud, can not be trusted and should be set aside.

Agree.......he's not bothered about citizenship lists and voter rolls......it's all designed, as you suggest, to create chaos and have the midterms abnadonded.

5 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

Agree.......he's not bothered about citizenship lists and voter rolls......it's all designed, as you suggest, to create chaos and have the midterms abnadonded.

Chaos? If the injunction wasn't put in place by an activist leftist judge months ago this would all be done and dusted.

Just now, dinsdale said:

Chaos? If the injunction wasn't put in place by an activist leftist judge months ago this would all be done and dusted.

And if Trump hadn't issued an EO instructing states to comply with his dreamt up citizenship list based on totally spurious claims of voter fraud.........everything would have run smoothly.......the last thing he wants.

2 hours ago, MIke B Bad said:

And if Trump hadn't issued an EO instructing states to comply with his dreamt up citizenship list based on totally spurious claims of voter fraud.........everything would have run smoothly.......the last thing he wants.

There's no illegal aliens voting. There might be some illegal aliens voting. There are illegal aliens voting but not enough to change results. Just like covid the truth is starting to come out.

13 hours ago, dinsdale said:

And the SCOTUS stay of the Lower Court injunction by the Obama appointed leftist judge Indira Talwani doesn't change this. She ordered that the executive order would cause harm to states. SCOTUS's decision states that the injunction lacks standing and that no harm to states can be demonstrated. This is about the postal service which falls under the Office of the Executive being able to track votes.

and that is only one of two lawsuits...the other from league of womens voters which does have standing and has a stronger injunction that probhibits trump and the feds violating the constitution by meddling in elections which per the constitution are run by the states...supremes have not removed that injunction or ruled on it so nothing has changed and trump is still blocked for now...

9 hours ago, pomchop said:

and that is only one of two lawsuits...the other from league of womens voters which does have standing and has a stronger injunction that probhibits trump and the feds violating the constitution by meddling in elections which per the constitution are run by the states...supremes have not removed that injunction or ruled on it so nothing has changed and trump is still blocked for now...

No. This too has been vacated as it was essentially the same as the other and would face the same result in the Supreme Court. However, what is happening is that the blue states have now unleashed multiple new suits in an effort to once again block the executive order to put barcodes on mail in ballot envelopes. There is no constitutional violation.

Edited August 26Aug 26 by dinsdale

On 8/25/2026 at 1:53 AM, SunnyinBangrak said:

This sounds disastrous. How are the democrats going to ever win if only actual citizens are able to vote. Boo hoo

Do you enjoy living in your fantasy land? Have years of investigations by people desperate to find fraud but found nothing not taught MAGA types anything?

On 8/25/2026 at 5:35 AM, dinsdale said:

Maybe you should read why it was a 6-3 decision. They've overridden a District Court judge in favour of the Executive. All it really means is that the US Postal Service will be able to track via a barcode on the envelope if incoming ballots are coming from registered voters i.e. US citizens and by way of this track if ballots have been posted to and by non-citizens who do not have the right to vote. Odd that it's the blue states that don't want this to happen. I wonder why?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/26a124_hgci.pdf

Two questions:

What about states that don't have this bar code you mention and don't have time to revamp their system and order ballots with the bar code before the election?

What makes you think the DHS has a complete list of all registered voters in the US?

On 8/25/2026 at 1:53 AM, SunnyinBangrak said:

This sounds disastrous. How are the democrats going to ever win if only actual citizens are able to vote. Boo hoo

Do you enjoy living in your fantasy land? Have years of investigations by people desperate to find fraud but who have found nothing not taught MAGA types anything?

On 8/25/2026 at 5:39 AM, dinsdale said:

Very dangerous indeed. How can anyone think that only citizens of a country have the right to vote in that country's elections.

Of course you have no evidence of fraud, but you don't need evidence, do you? You have the word of the most notorious liar in the world.

On 8/25/2026 at 5:39 AM, dinsdale said:

Very dangerous indeed. How can anyone think that only citizens of a country have the right to vote in that country's elections.

Of course you have no evidence of fraud, but you don't need evidence, do you? You have the word of the most notorious liar in the world.

On 8/25/2026 at 8:17 AM, dinsdale said:

The states need to supply voter rolls. What are you on about? Red states are doing it. Blue states don't want to. Why not?

Really? Where in the US Constitution does it say that?

On 8/25/2026 at 7:30 PM, MIke B Bad said:

Wrong.....the citizenship registers are being generated by the DHS.

For the 2026 U.S. midterms, voter registration lists are being constructed using federal data. States receive “citizenship lists” compiled from federal records (SSA, DHS SAVE, naturalization databases), while individual voters may be asked to show documentary proof of citizenship such as a U.S. passport or birth certificate depending on state law.

"are being generated"? You mean they're not done yet?

Also, why should we believe the federal government is better at creating and maintaining such a list as the states?

On 8/25/2026 at 7:39 PM, dinsdale said:

States, as it stands, do not have to comply with generating voter lists for the Feds (and most of the blue states aren't) and this ruling by SCOTUS for this case (new executive postal rule) has nothing to do with it. This is about a lawsuit that claims the executive order will cause harm to the states of which SCOTUS has ruled 6-3 that no harm to the states can be demonstrated for now as the rule has yet to be implemented.

Barcodes on mail in ballots. So what. What's the big deal?

Don't you think it's somewhat late for requiring states to set up a bar coding system and order and distribute millions of compliant ballots for the 2026 election?

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

"are being generated"? You mean they're not done yet?

Also, why should we believe the federal government is better at creating and maintaining such a list as the states?

Plumber boy has been given 60 days (I think) to massage the lists to his King's liking.

The aim is unlikely to make "better" lists.........but more restrictive lists, in lieu of a total ban on mail-in voting......OR............ to simply sow more chaos, as pointed out by one of dissenting voices on SCOTUS.

On 8/25/2026 at 7:54 AM, Luuk Chaai said:

this is where we get to see all the lefty anti American socialists ( communists) doing their wicked witch of the west interpretation... you know, the part where she gets doused with a bucket of water

People who post reasoned arguments based on facts come across as clever. Guess what you come across as.

Judge Talwani has just given Roberts the finger and blocked Trump again........at least until Sept 3 when she will hear arguments with a view to extending the block.........does the winning never stop?

4 hours ago, MIke B Bad said:

Plumber boy has been given 60 days (I think) to massage the lists to his King's liking.

The aim is unlikely to make "better" lists.........but more restrictive lists, in lieu of a total ban on mail-in voting......OR............ to simply sow more chaos, as pointed out by one of dissenting voices on SCOTUS.

When in doubt, strike the names out. Especially if they are in blue states.

Of course the list can't be made public with sufficient time for people to review it and challenge omissions. That would defeat the purpose.

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

People who post reasoned arguments based on facts come across as clever. Guess what you come across as.

Did anyone ever accuse you of being clever?

On 8/25/2026 at 7:39 PM, dinsdale said:

States, as it stands, do not have to comply with generating voter lists for the Feds (and most of the blue states aren't) and this ruling by SCOTUS for this case (new executive postal rule) has nothing to do with it. This is about a lawsuit that claims the executive order will cause harm to the states of which SCOTUS has ruled 6-3 that no harm to the states can be demonstrated for now as the rule has yet to be implemented.

Barcodes on mail in ballots. So what. What's the big deal?

the USPS published the rule on friday and the incompetent supremes ruled on monday not even recognizing the very rule they talked about was actually passed on friday...now it goes back to supremes as that was their "excuse" to make such a wishy washy ruling....unless they are totally corrumpt they will not allow the executive branch to meddle in elections as that power is NOT in any way part of the execuctive office power...states and in rare cases congresss can amend per the constitution... clarence thomas and alito are too busy accepting corrupt gifts from their big donor buddies to actually read the law/constitution....the big deal is called the us constitution and the law which is very clear that neither the usps or exect office has ANY power to mess with any part of elections...the big deal is trump wants ballots mailed ONLY to those on his approved list......he knows there is going to be a massive blue wave in november and the cheater in cheif and his boot lickers are trying their best to hold on to their dwindling cult power....

12 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Did anyone ever accuse you of being clever?

Indirectly. National Merit Scholarship, award for improving efficiency through data sharing during developmental and operational data or new generations of satellites, membership in high IQ societies, stuff like that.

You?

Apologies. Even clever people can get careless on editing. I meant to post:

Indirectly. National Merit Scholarship, award for improving efficiency through data sharing during developmental and operational data or testing of new generations of satellites, membership in high IQ societies, stuff like that.

You?

21 hours ago, heybruce said:

People who post reasoned arguments based on facts come across as clever. Guess what you come across as.

guess you don't get out much .. do you have purple hair ?

34 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Apologies. Even clever people can get careless on editing. I meant to post:

Indirectly. National Merit Scholarship, award for improving efficiency through data sharing during developmental and operational data or testing of new generations of satellites, membership in high IQ societies, stuff like that.

You?

No

18 hours ago, heybruce said:

When in doubt, strike the names out. Especially if they are in blue states.

Of course the list can't be made public with sufficient time for people to review it and challenge omissions. That would defeat the purpose.

....and then the law suits will kick in....in their thousands......a total cluster****......??? By design????

33 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

....and then the law suits will kick in....in their thousands......a total cluster****......??? By design????

Perhaps by stupidity. I don't think that's any better.

23 hours ago, heybruce said:

Do you enjoy living in your fantasy land? Have years of investigations by people desperate to find fraud but found nothing not taught MAGA types anything?

Two questions:

What about states that don't have this bar code you mention and don't have time to revamp their system and order ballots with the bar code before the election?

What makes you think the DHS has a complete list of all registered voters in the US?

How much time should they have? They've already had five months.

Edited August 29Aug 29 by Yellowtail

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

How much time should they have? They've already had five months.

That's not long for a project like this. Plus the highest levels of the administration are filled with loyal sycophants, not competent managers.

If they want a reasonably complete list with correction and appeals procedures in place and administered by competently trained people, 2028 is a more realistic goal. That would be assuming they got an order to proceed immediately, and there weren't any political or judicial impediments.