Doug Morris

If a state's way of conducting elections is to mail a ballot to each registered voter and to let each registered voter mail it back, and appropriate safeguards are used, then yes, those ballots are legal documents to be used in the voting process.

Nothing in this latest link about elections, Politifact, or Factcheck.org.

Politifact says Trump's claims are "mostly false". Factcheck.org says they are "unsupported".

World Business Markets Breakingviews Video More 2020 CANDIDATE SLIDESHOWS SEPTEMBER 11, 20203:22 PMUPDATED 2 YEARS AGO Fact check: Clarifying Trump’s 80 million ‘unsolicited’ ballots claim By Reuters Staff 9 MIN READ With 54 days until the Nov. 3 presidential election, President Donald Trump said on Twitter ( here ) and Facebook ( here ) on Thursday that 80 million mail-in ballots were being sent to voters who had not requested them, calling the situation “unfair and a total fraud in the making.” While certain states are automatically sending ballots to their voters for this election, in many others, these still need to be requested. U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign event at MBS International Airport, in Freeland, Michigan, U.S., September 10, 2020. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst Voting by mail has a long history of reliability in the United States, serving as the primary method of voting in Colorado, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Hawaii, which automatically send registered voters mail-in ballots. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, California, Nevada, New Jersey, Vermont, and Washington, D.C. have introduced the same procedure for the 2020 vote ( here ) . Benjamin Hovland, commissioner of the independent, bipartisan U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC, here , www.eac.gov/about-the-useac ) echoed to Reuters via phone that “in more states than ever, election authorities will automatically send a ballot to each registered voter.” According to Reuters’ calculations, there are an estimated 44.2 million registered voters, or about half the number mentioned by President Trump, in the 10 states and jurisdictions automatically sending out ballots for the Nov. 3 election. Reuters found this number by adding up the latest available voter registration statistics for Colorado ( here ); Hawaii, ( here ); Oregon ( here ); Utah ( here ); Washington ( here ); California ( here ); Washington, D.C ( here ); Nevada ( here ); New Jersey ( here ); and Vermont ( here ). “On the states where these ballots are sent automatically, those were state-legislated decisions to make those policies,” Commissioner Hovland said, adding that “those states have implemented security measures on their respective mail-in processes.” For the remaining states not sending out proactive ballots, Hovland noted “votes still require an affirmative request from the voter.” The millions of voters in these states would have to actively solicit or request a ballot. It is possible that Trump’s 80 million unsolicited ballot claim stemmed from an Aug. 14 analysis from the New York Times ( here ), which stated that experts predict “roughly 80 million mail ballots will flood election offices this fall.” The president first mentioned this figure during his Labor Day press conference on Sept. 7, referring to “the issuance of 80 million ballots, unrequested” as “the dirtiest fight of all” ( here ). Linking the high volume of “unsolicited” mail ballots to voter fraud, he said, “People are going to get ballots; they’re going to say, ‘What am I doing?’ And then they’re going to harvest. They’re going to do all the things.” The claim feeds into a narrative echoed by President Trump that mail-in voting, expected to nearly double due to the COVID-19 pandemic, will increase voter fraud ( here ). After weeks of repeatedly raising concerns about mail-in voting, Trump on Aug. 4 called Florida’s election system “Safe and Secure, Tried and True” and urged voters in the Republican state to vote by any means, including by mail ( here). Experts say that election fraud is very rare in the United States, where nearly one in four voters cast a mail-in or absentee ballot in 2016 (here). There are multiple layers of security in place for mail-in ballots, also known as “absentee” ballots, including the Electronic Registration Information Center ( www.ericstates.org ) and adherence to the National Voter Registration Act’s list of maintenance procedures ( here , here). The National Conference of State Legislatures provides information on home voting, including a section on security features in place here . Measures to counter voter fraud include hand-marked paper ballots, signature verification, examining and processing ballots ahead of election day to allow for more verification time, up-to-date address information, security cameras during storage, and many more (see Security Features of Voting by Absentee/Mailed Ballots section here bit.ly/33vUvBA ). Further information on security measures to ensure ballot integrity can be found here . Commissioner Hovland told Reuters these sort of unfounded claims “ignore the repeated calls of elections professionals, both Democrat and Republican, that say this is a safe, normal process with procedures in place to ensure the process upholds the integrity of an election.” The Reuters Fact Check team has previously debunked several viral claims linking the use of mail-in ballots to voter fraud: here , here , and here . VERDICT False. 80 million “unsolicited” mail-in ballots will not be sent to voters ahead of the 2020 presidential election. Ten states and jurisdictions are proactively sending out ballots, some for the first time due to the coronavirus pandemic, for an approximately 44.2 million registered voters in total. This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact-checking work here . Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. TRENDING STORIES Authentication services firm Okta says it is investigating report of breach El Salvador postpones bitcoin bond issue, expects better conditions Fact Check-Women’s swimming contest photo shared ‘out of context’, says pictured athlete Fact Check-Video clip on social media does not show Russian hypersonic Kinzhal missile launch in March 2022 Quantum startup Sandbox AQ spins off from Alphabet, gains 'nine figures' in funding Apps Newsletters Advertise with Us Advertising Guidelines Cookies Terms of Use Privacy Do Not Sell My Personal Information All quotes delayed a minimum of 15 minutes. See here for a complete list of exchanges and delays. © 2022 Reuters. All Rights Reserved.

This is evidence of incompetence, but not of stealing. Why? Trump was controversial; this would bring out voters on both sides. Fewer people were working because of the pandemic; this would make for greater election turnout. *** You seem to be drawing a distinction between absentee and mail-in ballots. Aren't they the same thing?

Dangerous hyperbole. The officials running the election had to run as fair an election as possible during a pandemic which made it dangerous to vote normally. This had to include giving people safer ways to vote. It's about a century since the last time this happened. There is evidence that some of them made mistakes. There is no evidence of a stolen election. The claim of a stolen election is an arbitrary figment of Trump's need to prop up his pseudo-self-esteem.

I would say "None of those categories applies to me." This would probably get me tabulated as refusing to answer.

The New York Times recently conducted a poll on the relationship between political views and Covid-19 views. From the article reporting the results: "This time, to go deeper than partisan identification, we asked respondents to choose one of seven labels: very liberal, liberal, slightly liberal, moderate, slightly conservative, conservative or very conservative." How would you react if a pollster asked you to make this choice?

My understanding is that Lillian's bottom line was hatred of the good for being the good, and that she married Rearden because she wanted to bring him down, degrading and humiliating him.

I vaguely remember talking to someone who reacted very negatively to this. I wasn't sure how to answer them. I guess the key part of the answer would be "It doesn't mean chaining in any negative sense. it means that the actual act of sex involves the woman submitting to the man." I remember once quoting from somewhere in Objectivist writings that the man penetrates and the woman is penetrated. The person replied "Why not say the woman is engulfing the man?". I guess the key point is that usually the man is active and the woman is passive.

Why did it take so long for this to come out? How much difference did it make? How different is it from get-out-the-vote efforts traditionally practiced by both parties? How is it grounds for decertification?

All philosophy is ultimately about how to flourish as a human being. It is a very bad blunder to equate this question to questions about who gets to be the boss in society. No one should rule over anyone. This should be decided by a truly free market, not by politics. In a truly free market, a person will have to be a lot more productive than a toilet cleaner to get to the corner office and to keep it. This is a noble statement. It makes sense that they would do this. Of course, they are badly mistaken about what the truth is. Also they tend to have unrealistic, simplistic notions of what it should take to win someone over. Trying to understand what could cause the end of civilization and what will help it flourish in the long run, and trying to understand the role of religion and philosophy in causing or preventing the end of the world, and trying to help others understand these things, can accomplish very much indeed, but over a long time frame.

There are three different questions which may have three different answers. What should the Constitution say? What did the writers of the Constitution intend it to say? What will the Supreme Court say the Constitution says? For some time to come, the answer to the last question will be decided in a context in which most people hold badly mistaken fundamental principles. It's been said that we may be tired of Covid-19, but Covid-19 is not tired of us. I propose a similar statement: high stakes power politicians may be tired of philosophical errors, but philosophical errors are not tired of high stakes power politics.

As I understand it, metaphysics does not mean "beyond physics" in some mystical sense. It means "after physics" in the sense that, in the usual physical ordering of Aristotle's books, metaphysics comes after physics. Metaphysics includes the primacy of existence and the principle that each thing has an identity. This is not obsolete. Not just survival, but flourishing. This doesn't prove anything. Some people would say something similar about Ayn Rand.

If what your link says is correct, that is cause for concern.

There's a New York Times article about this as well.

I'd heard of redlining, a discriminatory practice of labeling whole neighborhoods as bad risks for home loans. I was under the impression that "private" banks were responsible. An NPR article on current pollution in neighborhoods that were redlined says the practice was started by a federal agency, the Home Owners' Loan Corporation, under FDR. The Wikipedia article on that agency says the same. One paragraph in the Wikipedia article indicates the situation may be more complicated.

The Beethoven/Schiller lyrics you quote sound to me more like a celebration of friendship, with a nod to romantic love, than an expression of a desire to serve or be served. This could be asked about a lot of Ayn Rand's views. For many of her views the answer now would be "It certainly wouldn't help." This says something about the current state of most people's ideas. It says nothing about the quality of Ayn Rand's ideas. Not so much in light of this, but in light of other things, yes. It's probably a good idea, if their purpose is to get elected, to lie as well about the cost of their promises. Again, this says something about the current state of most people's ideas. It says nothing about the quality of Ayn Rand's ideas. Why do you love the music of Beethoven in general. What do you love about it? Why do you love the 9th Symphony in particular. What do you love about it? In the long run, Ayn Rand's philosophy will achieve this. Ayn Rand's philosophy is the only way to achieve this in a stable, enduring manner. I think Kyary Pamyu's post is helpful here. I'll wait and see if there is any further discussion of this point before attempting further comment. So what? If you're going to bring this up, we should begin by getting clear exactly what he meant by this.

Nobody is questioning this. What we are questioning is your suggestion that Objectivism is tainted with certain prescientific gobbledygook.

That's harder to find.

There are people who disbelieve Alex Jones and his InfoWars: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search "Info Wars" redirects here. For the 2004 film, see Info Wars (film). InfoWars Home page Type of site Fake news[1] Far-right politics[2] Conspiracy theories[3] Available in English Owner Alex Jones (via Free Speech Systems LLC) URL infowars.com Registration None Launched March 6, 1999; 22 years ago[4] Current status Active InfoWars is an American far-right[2] conspiracy theory[3] and fake news website[1] owned by Alex Jones.[35][36] It was founded in 1999, and operates under Free Speech Systems LLC.[37] Talk shows and other content for the site are created primarily in studios at an undisclosed location in an industrial area in the outskirts of Austin, Texas.[38] Reports in 2017 stated that the InfoWars website received approximately 10 million monthly visits, making its reach greater than some mainstream news websites such as The Economist and Newsweek at the time.[39][40] The site has regularly published fake stories which have been linked to harassment of victims.[47] In February 2018, Jones, the publisher, director and owner of InfoWars, was accused of discrimination and sexually harassing employees.[48] InfoWars, and in particular Jones, advocate numerous conspiracy theories, particularly around purported domestic false flag operations by the U.S. government (which they allege include the 9/11 attacks and Sandy Hook shootings). InfoWars has issued retractions various times as a result of legal challenges.[43][44] Jones has had contentious material removed, and has also been suspended and banned from many platforms for violating their terms of service, including Facebook,[49] Twitter,[50] YouTube,[51] iTunes,[52] and Roku.[53] InfoWars earns revenue from the sale of products pitched by Jones during the show, including dietary supplements. It has been called as much "an online store that uses Mr. Jones's commentary to move merchandise" as a media outlet.[54]

A drastic accusation. How well does it hold up? Even a totally false, easily refutable accusation could affect the stock market.

There is a certain sense in which Objectivism is a form of Aristotelianism. There is a certain sense in which Christianity is a form of Judaism. There is a certain sense in which Einstein's Theory of Relativity is a form of Newtonianism. I understand Einstein himself considered his work to be carrying on the tradition of Newton. But in each case there are important differences that we must consider if we are to understand the systems involved. (Emphasis added.) Please note that it was not just the use of the label Aristotelianism that dream_weaver was calling quite the leap. Your leap becomes even wilder in light of this: This is a completely inaccurate portrayal of Aristotle. The soul is something like life force, and only living things have one. Rocks and water do not have souls. He even criticized those ideas directly, and wrote arguments why love is not a cause of change and movement. Certainly love for God has nothing to do with it. In the passage you quoted, I said elsewhere that I think he was speaking metaphorically when he said that heavenly bodies move based on their love of the unmoved mover. In fact, he does say that the unmoved mover causes movement in the metaphorical sense that a lover is affected by the loved, even if the loved doesn't react. Besides the unmoved mover is not God, it isn't really even sentient. Also, you have not yet tried to answer my question:

Here is a quote from the Wikipedia article on A Song to Remember . Though Chopin was a true Polish patriot, Vidor highly romanticizes Chopin's patriotism in the film, which was produced during World War II. He fictionalizes Chopin's relationship with Elsner (who did not really accompany him to Paris) and greatly distorts Chopin's relationship with Sand to produce a "good vs. evil" struggle for Chopin's soul between Elsner and Sand. The script occasionally sounds more like propaganda for wartime self-sacrifice over individualism than like the real story of Chopin's life. Ayn Rand was sharply critical of the film, strongly taking the side of the George Sand character as against the Polish nationalist ones – a value judgment diametrically opposite to that taken by the film makers: "George Sand, according to the film, is evil because she provides a beautiful, private retreat where Chopin can live in peace and luxury, because she takes care of his every need, attends to his health, and urges him to forget the world and devote himself exclusively to the work of writing music, which he is desperately eager to do. The young Polish girl, according to the film, is good because she urges Chopin to drop the work that he loves and go out on a concert tour to collect money 'for the people', for a cause that is identified as national or revolutionary or both, and this is supposed to justify everything – so she demands that Chopin renounce his genius, sacrifice his composing and go out to entertain paying audiences – even though he hates concert playing, is ill with tuberculosis and has been warned by the doctors that the strain of a tour will kill him".[3] Victor Brown noted that "The breakup of George Sand's relationship with Chopin was for personal reasons completely different from those shown in the film – mainly Chopin's siding with Sand's estranged daughter against her mother. In fact, George Sand was an outspoken supporter of the Polish national cause in her own right, an allegiance which lasted long past the end of the relationship with Chopin. During the Revolution of 1848 in France, George Sand took part in a Polish solidarity demonstration held in Paris on May 15, 1848, calling for the French Army to be sent to liberate Poland".[4]

Here are a couple of examples from a Wikipedia article. Examples included The Best Years of Our Lives (because it portrayed businessmen negatively, and suggested that bankers should give veterans collateral-free loans), and A Song to Remember (because it implied without historical evidence that Chopin sacrificed himself for a patriotic cause rather than devoting himself to his music).[14]