I'm fine with building a wall but that's because I was told Mexico would be paying for it. Have we got anymore details on that aspect?

What a futile waste of money.

http://time.com/money/4639544/trump-...et-budget-cut/

I mean, these will pay for part of the wall.

He said Mexico was paying for it.

Sure, but are they going to pay for the moat, too??

The Mexicans in this article do make a compelling point - their government is still even more corrupt and incompetent than ours. And as the author points out there's enough indirect ways to do so (taxing remittances, increasing border tolls, attaching it as an increase in foreign debt) that Trump will at least be able to convince his supporters that Mexico is paying for it, even if a deep dive into the numbers show they don't add up. Economics are not the hoi polloi's strong suit.

Can I just say that this is one of the reasons why I love FOFC. This thread is way better than the shit I see in the comment sections of so-called news sites whose main objective is to divide and conquer - and by so-called news sites I mean all of them. They're all slanted one way or the other. Can anyone please show me a decent, neutral news organization that doesn't inject bias into their stories?

Anyway, I digress. My point is that it is refreshing to see intelligent discussion and debate by people passionate about their convictions, without name-calling, mama-insulting, racial insult-spewing, war-sowing language. Love you guys. Carry on.

So I'm not buying this talk for one minute that Trump is cleverly creating distractions and has diabolical hidden agendas when he sends out dumb tweets like this morning's "I'm gonna have a federal investigation into the millions of people who voted illegally in an election that I won" stuff.

No.

Just no.

He is not that smart; he is not that clever; he is not that strategic. He is, however, DEEPLY insecure, and it eats at his very core that people are saying publicly that his crowd wasn't the biggest and that someone won more votes than he did. He isn't saying and doing this stuff because he's some mastermind. It's because his massive-but-extremely-fragile ego is getting hammered, and he can't take it.

BUT the GOP leaders have the sense to use that to their advantage, and they ARE strategic. He serves them beautifully in two ways. First, he's a big distraction. The media can't help but focus on him instead of policy matters, which lets the GOP slip through unpopular parts of its agenda while everyone is looking at Trump acting like an ass. Second, he does not care about policy, and they have craftily surrounded him with advisers who will make sure that he signs the right bills, issues the right orders, and appoints the right judges.

The GOP is an order of magnitude better at politics than every democrat not named Obama. Being a Democrat right now is like cheering for a team coached by Rich Kotite going against Bill Belichick.

Sigh.

dola:

If I were the Democrats, I would at least try to judo Trump's insecurity against the GOP. It might not work, but it seems worth trying. I'd make ads playing clips of Trump saying populist things and getting cheered on by the crowds. Then I'd portray some pending GOP bill as the opposite of that and the cheering stops. Then I'd craft some message along the lines of "We didn't elect him to be Paul Ryan's bitch. So why's he acting like it?"

I don't disagree with any of that. I guess basically I'm saying, that's it's an effect, not a cause, of his crazy tweeting. So many people are suggesting (if not flat-out saying) that we are witnessing "Trump The Evil Genius" in action; I think we're witnessing "Trump The Incredibly Fragile."

I expect that's coming when the cuts to Medicare and Social Security are debated.

So, is there any reason to believe that any "independent" body or whatever that Trump gets to do an election audit won't turn up "evidence?" This just seems like the next totalitarian step on his list. He's already lied about God knows what, its well within reason to assume they'll create "evidence" to show fraud to drastically purge rolls/change voting rules.

I didnt realize you were Trumps counselor. Because that would really be the only way you know if he is DEEPLY insecure.
Because, I doubt a man who has done what he has is DEEPLY insecure.

:lol:

I originally thought it was master levels of strategery by Trump as well with his deflecting, but I'm coming around to your way of thinking. I think these pointless things actually bug the shit out of him.

It is amazing to watch these things play out now because anything stupid he does is him messing with the media. He's not accountable for anything. I know this is always the case with politicians and their supporters but seems like we've ratcheted it up to 11 now.

We live in odd times.

Yeah, I needed to be brought back around to this POV. The "create a distraction" effect is a by-product, but the design. I agree.

I don't think it takes a trained psychiatrist to know he's got massive insecurity issues.

I still really doubt we'll see cuts to either. I know it's Ryan's big thing but there are not enough Republican members that will go along with it. And Trump still runs on a populist message and cutting Medicare or Social Security just doesn't fit that message.

Again, just looking at the women he married. Yeah he has a ton of money. but usually, hot chicks are not attracted to insecurity. No matter the size of the bank account.

his ego may be fragile (which I doubt), but I dont think he is insecure.

I hope so, but his OMB pick yesterday was talking about how they will need to do cuts to Medicare and Social Security. I think entitlement cuts are very high on Pence's list and he seems to be running a lot of policy.

Its funny (not really) that politicians want to cut SS and medicare. Considering taxpayers pay into those two accounts specifically. They are not just regular tax dollars.

It is a sign of corruption when the government steals from the population.

This should have been dealt with years ago.

Kris Kobach will probably run the investigation and he's been at the front of the voting restrictions movement. His meeting notes with Trump seemed to show a push for nationwide restrictions, so I'm sure this will be the "evidence" for some national restrictions and/or VRA rollback.

Sort of. That's been true of Social Security, but Medicare isn't fully funded by FICA taxes.

It also depends on what you consider a "cut". For instance, I think Trump has said he'd like to change it so that Medicare can negotiate with drug companies. This was something that they currently cannot do which is insane in my opinion.

So if that is changed and the government saves massive amounts of money (like the VA does) by negotiating for the best price, isn't that a cut? You're technically spending less on Medicare than you did before.

Dont get me started on insurance and the health care industry.

As much as I pay into medicare, as do all taxpayers, you would think it would be fully funded.

But my point stands. These are the only safety nets that I am 100% behind. And cutting these puts millions at risk, and will end up costing us more in the long run.

Im ok if this is the type of "cut" they are talking about. This makes sense.

I hope he throw in a rider about capping the amount medications cost the consumer. But i digress.

Being able to buy overseas would help a lot too. For some reason this country gets played like suckers on drug prices. Everyone else negotiates for a great price and we are the one's paying whatever they tell us since we can't legally purchase elsewhere.

If you look at the Ryan budget and the Heritage budget plan, which the WH has said will be the model for their budget, the cuts are likely to be much deeper than negotiating drug prices. Both put Medicare into a premium support program rather than an entitlement, and both limit growth to overall inflation rather than medical inflation.

I wonder...

Insecurity doesn't go away because you've been arguably successful - in fact insecurity can lead to someone BEING successful because they might strive harder to fight that off.

In my experience insecurity comes from your upbringing, the situation you were in and the way you were treated - from what I've heard of Mr Trumps father I can understand why he's somewhat insecure.

B I N G O

The guy is massively insecure. He can't handle insults, he can't handle being wrong and he can't handle losing on any level. Everything else is going to be a byproduct.

The frightening thing is what happens as his ego continues to get hammered. I think the democrats best strategy is to attack the policies and not Trump. We saw what happened with Hillary in the general when she kept trying to "GOTCHA" Trump. Same thing happened in the republican primary.

Don't drop yourself to what he is. Focus on the issues, give him rope and watch him to the noose and stick his neck in it.

While I don't for one minute think I have you vast experience with hot chicks ...

You're presuming his insecurity is a disadvantage in seducing ladies, I'd say it only is if its easily visible - his comes out as aggression which can be seen as confidence in many cases and extravagant gestures ... both of which I'd expect some women find attractive.

One of the sneaky things in that budget plan I noticed was that SS cuts wouldn't start right away. Obviously they realize they can't cut current benefits because they'd lose those voters. So the cuts start down the road. Basically if you are planning to be on SS in 20 years, you'd be the one getting fucked.

The Medicare thing looks like a mess. How do you tell people who spent 40 years paying into it that they're no longer entitled to that benefit? It's like putting into a savings account and having them tell you that your interest rate is slashed retroactively.

This is true. They attacked the hell out of Trump in the general election, and he won. Personal attacks are not enough.

Also, let's say they spend all of their time attacking Trump and somehow succeed. They have done nothing at that point to educate/persuade the public about their policies.

If you attack, say, turning Medicare into block grants, and you win that argument, then you've helped build support for the policy you want.

This is happening already at the state level. My mother lives in Ohio and was promised healthcare for life as the spouse of a state employee. She stayed home, raised a family, and had basically no income or savings or retirement plan to draw from in her old age. She did what women of her era were expected to do.

And now the state has pulled her healthcare and given her premium support of something like 250 a month. 250 for a woman in her eighties. At the end of the day spending less is more important than honoring promises.

Some are already helping Trump get to the bottom of this:

Steve Bannon Is Registered to Vote in Two States

Heh. I'm not a Bannon fan by any means, but in fairness to him, I blame the lack of communication between government agencies for this. I moved from SC in August 2014. Upon moving, I filed a change of address, registered to vote in NC within a week or so, got a NC license, etc. etc. etc. I did everything that someone should have to do when moving. However, when I had a chuckle-worthy voting experience in NC this past fall that didn't involve me needing to show anything with my address on it, out of curiosity I checked online. Sure enough, well over two years after having moved, I was still registered to vote in South Carolina. Assuming SC works like NC does now, anyone could have walked in to my polling place there and claimed to be me, recited the address, and voted.

Exactly. This is just like sports at this point. It's MY side vs YOUR side. So you attack Trump, you are attacking ME. It is highly ineffective if your goal is to change minds. Lets not kid ourselves here, minds have to be changed or there will be more Trumps. As much as the democrats want to think this is some fluke, it isn't like they won this election by 20 percentage points and lost because of a fluke. We are talking about a few million votes when 130 million or so went to the polls. This can and will happen again if they continue to campaign the way they have.

Attack this issues. Over and over and over again. Debate the issues with Trump supporters. Don't attack Trump. It's hard not to, but don't do it. In fact, I would treat Trump like an angry customer on a customer service call. Be exceedingly nice. Don't fall into his trap. Don't play the game on his level because you are going to have a tough time winning there. That's the level he LOVES to play at.

Another thing. . . if he does sign a bill that's good, don't rail on it. Be happy he did it. Let him take the credit. When you can point out good things someone does, it becomes a hell of a lot easier to convince a Trump supporter or even Trump that your disapproval of another plan is based on the opinion of the policy, not the opinion of the man.

The more people turn this personal, the more likely it is we get Trump again in 4 years.

What would have been the answer in this case, would you have to UNregister yourself in SC somehow?

edit to add: Obviously the state should be better at handling this, I'm asking what would have had to happen, not looking at what should happen.

That's my assumption, but if the government is assuming that people will be motivated to go through the extra effort to do that when it's not illegal to be registered in two states, they're crazier than even *I* thought they were. Case in point, when I found out about this, I used Google to see if I was in violation of the law. When I found out that I wasn't, of course I didn't bother finding out how to do it, (and obviously haven't in the 2 1/2 months since, given that my answer to your question starts with "that's my assumption". :p)

I'm sure I'd be considered a bit conservative on this issue, but why not tie voter registration to registering with the Selective Service? Heck tie in passports as well.

Just open it for everyone, have a little box to check if you want to be exempt for whatever reason from the draft (religious...). If you want exemptions, it requires some sort of interview. But, if you move, you have to update the registry. You can then request a new passport/ID, and that can be used for your voter ID.

I'm sure people will say, but then the government is tracking you... they already do that with state voter registrations, its no different, but centralized so that each state can reference another.

There's no reason a service like this can't be free. I can't imagine it would take up any sizeable portion of a federal budget that makes implementing this not feasible.

I'd say that most people who registered for the draft never bother to update their residency info, despite that being legally required (which I didn't even know until I Googled it). Plus, that's only true until you're 26.

And only 1/3rd of U.S. residents are believed to have a valid passport.

I ain't kicking dirt on the concept out of hand, just saying that those two thing really don't cover it. Hell, I'm not sure if anything covers it unless maybe you tie it to the social security database.

That's what I'm saying, surely rolling all of this into one service would greatly reduce government redundancy, and may actually save the government money. Think of how this could help track down tax cheats, welfare cheats, any number of people who are trying to game the system.

How do you square this with data that shows popularity of the president effects members of the same party all the way down to state level races? I'll admit this past election didn't follow that, but the data on the general effect is clear. That's why the GOP obstruct everything and delegitimize the president was so effective all the way down to the state rep level.

I'm horrible remembering the beliefs/persona of the posters here (it took me years to remember which Missouri poster was which).

Anyway, i have found that if I can attach a quote to each major poster I remember them much better.

This, my friend, will be your quote :)

So Trump is using his old, unsecure phone still... probably doesn't matter. It's not like he doesn't run and tell his boss everything anyway.

Wouldnt the whole voter fraud issue be solved by making everyone show a picture ID when they vote?

If everyone got a free ID card, sure.

Also, isn't it odd how he said there would be fraud of illegals voting; then once the results were challenged, said there was no fraud; then once people kept harping on how he got blown out in the vote, said there was fraud.

Why would it have to be free?
An ID is pretty inexpensive.

No.

Because the goal isn't to solve voter impersonation fraud. If it was we could already declare victory. If that wouldn't work we could hand out free IDs.

The goal is to make it harder for Dem groups to vote. That's why these laws are almost always paired with rules limiting early voting or reducing polling places or making it illegal for clerks to tell people where they should vote, etc.

Ok. Are you going to guarantee that the places that provide the ID are readily accessible, both as a function of distance and hours? i.e. would a single, working mother who doesn't drive be able to travel to get an ID without making any major arrangements to deal with work (many jobs aren't going to let you just take off half a day willy-nilly) or childcare?

I'm not sure I would call an ID "inexpensive" if I had to miss half of a day of work to get it. Or travel 50 miles to find the nearest office.

1) you're either willfully ignorant, or a moron. I'll let you decide.

In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - The New York Times

The Bush Administration spent FIVE YEARS chasing down this voter fraud unicorn and they found enough evidence to get 86 convictions, more than 30 of which amounted to "Sheriff Joe P. Asslicker paid voters to vote for him" sort.

2) Your lack of understanding of basic civics is showing. The 24th Amendment prohibits poll taxes - which is what Southern states used to keep those pesky darkies from voting, along with things like "was your grandfather a citizen?" and literacy tests that were literally designed in such a way that the poll worker had leeway to determine whether or not the person taking it was a "good" voter without having to admit it was about skin color.

Saying "well, an ID isn't THAT expensive" is still a financial roadblock to voting, no matter how minor you find it, and that's FUCKING UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

I mean, are we done here? Are you ready to let go of this "voter fraud is a thing and costs Republicans elections" canard, or is this math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better?

If you are going to require something for a constitutional right, should it not be free or very easy? Would you say that if I created a law that said you need a state ID to vote, but then closed down the places to get them in all the counties with large minority populations, that I am attempting to disenfranchise people? Welcome to Alabama.

By the way, check this out. I'm not overly dumb, but this is pretty confusing.

http://www.alabamavoterid.com/getfreephotovoterid.aspx

Poll workers aren't police officers or bartenders. ("He could be a fucking bartender for all we know!") I've used ID's that have very old pictures of me and look nothing like how I look now with no problem and not even a squint from the worker to see if that really is me. I bet if I found Ben's old SC driver's license lying on the ground, I could present it at his SC precinct and vote without issue.

Also, a poll tax is a poll tax, even if the tax is a very low amount. It's unconstitutional to charge for a document you need to vote.

Just show them the patriotic undies pic and you're in.

Why wouldnt you have an ID already? And are you that racist to assume that a person living in a lower socio-economic area doesnt have the wherewithall to get an ID?

How is that a poll tax? You need IDs for a lot of things in life. So it is best to have one, in general.

It's best to have health insurance, but making people buy that is apparently an act of tyranny. The cost is lower, but the principle is the same with a mandatory ID fee.

My SC license says that it is good through December 2017, so since moving I have kept it with me as a backup just in case I lose the NC one. One day last week I went to drop off my youngest at preschool and the office admin stopped me and said "Someone found your driver's license on the ground and turned it in. You haven't gotten a NC driver's license yet?"

Yeah, it was the SC license...lying on the ground...just a few days ago.

So, uh, Larry, how long ya been stalkin' me??????????? :eek::eek::eek::eek:

Apparently Trump has doubled the dues for membership at Mar-a-Lago.

Good thing we didn't elect crooked Hillary.

Are you really equating health insurance to an ID?
That has to be the weakest argument I have seen you come with.
Spending hundreds to thousands a year on something is not the same as spending $10 every 6 years. And you need an ID for multiple purposes. Not just to vote.

From your mouth to my ears. It is a great thing we didnt elect HRC

They're not even trying to hide it.

The principle is the same. If not, I'm curious at what dollar amount tyranny kicks in.

While the video is kind of funny, it doesn't appear to be the most scientific study.

Data I've seen suggests about 1 in 10 don't have IDs for whatever reason, young and haven't gotten one, old and don't need one, poor, rich and get driven everywhere, whatever. The data also shows that you are three times more likely not to have an ID if you are a minority.

So, we're basically forcing 10% of the voting population to jump through an extra hoop to vote, and it most often costs something (which is a poll tax) and data shows it disproportionately affects minorities.

It doesn't seem like a big deal because it's just a little ID, but I think it is.

Its tyranny to have a state ID? Which you need to do multiple things in life.
IDs are not required, but are recommended. They are easily obtainable. For anyone.
Why is it that big a deal to have one ot vote?
Who will it hurt?

What if you're getting a new ID? My aunt recently had to transfer her license to PA, from CA. She initially couldn't complete the process because PA found that GA (where she lived before CA) never canceled her license there, and until that got done PA couldn't do anything. She eventually got her license (btw, current license wasn't good enough, she needed her SS card too), but she spent an entire day there (possibly more - I can't find the post, but I think she had visited once and found out about the GA snafu, then had to go back again later).

My other aunt is in her 50s and just got her license. Not sure what she used as ID prior to that.

1) Oh, lots of reasons. Maybe you grew up poor. Your family couldn't afford a car, so you took public transit where you need to go. School, the store, work, whatever. Or you walked. None of those things need an ID. Maybe you're older, and were born in a time and place where registration of birth wasn't compulsory. The strictures placed on acceptable documents by Republican pushes for voter ID law mean that you may not have the ability to produce the required documents, so where you may have lived without one perfectly well before, you're now in a place where the need for one is being pressed on you by external forces and your ability to actually get one has increased difficulty attached.

2) lower socio-economic status has nothing to do with race, you dumb chucklefuck. Do areas of greater poverty have greater diversity? Frequently, yes! But to the extent that you mentally equate "poor" with "people of color," you are proving Democrats and affiliated organizations protesting these laws correct about their intent.

3) a poll tax is any compulsory financial gate between the voter and the poll. If an ID is required to vote, that means the state cannot charge for the ID. It doesn't. fucking. MATTER. How ubiquitous the uses for that ID may be outside the polling place. You cannot place a financial impediment between a prospective voter and his or her ability to cast a ballot for the politician or initiative of their choice. It doesn't matter how pure your intentions. It ain't constitutional.

"You need an ID for so many other things what's the big deal get over it prevent voter fraud" probably makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but as we've been over, oh, COUNTLESS times for the last 8 years, the prevalence of voter impersonation fraud is vanishingly low. Provable fraud in general is a fraction of a fraction of a percent of ballots cast in the last several elections - and to the extent it's provable, it's generally not impersonation fraud. It's the sort of fraud that ID doesn't catch in real time. Maybe it's getting paid off by a local candidate to vote for them. Maybe it's confusion over which precinct you're supposed to vote at and attempting to vote at multiple precincts (this, uh, is a thing that Donald Trump did, by the way). Maybe it's "it doesn't matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes," in which case ID does fuck all to preserve the integrity of elections.

Pick any or all of those. Voter ID laws make the public feel warm and fuzzy inside while a) having zero impact on electoral outcomes and b) doing precisely nothing to combat the types of fraud which actually COULD affect the outcome of races.

So minorities choose not to get an id. Which is required to do many things in life. But not to vote. Because who cares who you are? Just come on down and vote.
And that extra hoop takes all of maybe an hour. That costs all of $10?
A poll tax? How do they buy alcohol? or csh a check?

And that video shows blacks who are in a lower socio-economic area, laughing at you guys. Because you think they are too stupid or poor to get an ID.

Haha, that's hilarious. I was mostly mad that your ID was for SC and not MI/WI/PA where it could've done more good. My fraudulent vote was completely wasted in SC.

Race had already come up as a reason, and this is a personal attack. One week.

OK as a hypothetical, let's ignore the data and say you're right that I think minorities are too stupid or poor to get an ID. How does that change the fact that you're making someone jump through an extra hoop to exercise a constitutional right?

You are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

"Maybe an hour." What a moron. Also would like to hear of one specific thing besides voting that an old person who takes public transportation needs a photo ID for.

Heh, actually it looks like my aunt did have to go there twice. Also found this reply to her ordeal:


Simple!

Not at all. I think they have the same ability to get an ID as anyone else, but I believe it is harder in those areas for various reasons. I also don't believe (for reasons I stated earlier) that voter ID is an effective way to counter the minimal voter fraud that does occur. In the example we've talked about with Ben, he could vote in both GA and SC and the voter ID law in no way prevents him from doing that. There was a lady arrested in the 2016 election for early voting in two different locations. Voter ID wouldn't stop that.


Of course it is best to have one. I have one. So does pretty much everyone on this board, I'm sure. But if an ID is required to vote, then there must be a free one or it is a poll tax.

Flying

Wait, wait, wait. "Maybe an hour"???? I think we can spot the disconnect here. I have waited up to 5 hours before and that's not even in a low income area.

Sigh... the old day(s)

I havent been to an inner city DMV in about 20 years.
So it takes someone half a day. And the ID lasts ofr 6 years. Oh my, the burden. This will cause them to die because they couldnt take a half day off work.

Wait, dont you need some form of ID to get a job? Its been a long time simnce I applied for a job. But isnt that standard practice?

Serious question for everyone: how often do you use your ID in situations where a poor person wouldn't need to?

I use my driver's license...

--to drive, only if I get pulled over, of course
--to get on airplanes
--at Will Call when I buy tickets online to a sporting event or concert
--as identification when I recently bought a house
--at some places when I pay by credit card

What are the reasons an ID would be needed for a carless person who doesn't have a credit card and can't afford to fly, attend sporting events, or buy a house? I'm sure there are some; I'm just coming up blank right now.

When I moved to Missouri, It took me all of n hour to get my DL it was no hassle at all. Got in, got it done, left.

Simple!

Buy alcohol
Get a hotel room
Cash a check

1. Heh. The benefits of being in my late 40s. Don't remember the last time I've been carded, but fair point. EDIT: That said, now I'm thinking of many of the poor elderly black women who've never touched a drop of alcohol in their life..they wouldn't need it for that.
2. Ah yes...do that all that time...but again, does a poor person ever need it for that?
3. Mobile deposit ftmfw!

You don't need photo ID to fly, fwiw.

It's been awhile since I had to cash a check, but I don't remember having to show a photo ID to do so. I needed two forms of ID with my current address on it. My picture-less drivers license (back in the long long ago when that was still a thing) and my blood-donor card was all I used to show.

States like Alabama like to make it not so simple for minority areas. Charging any amount is still unconstitutional.

My dad is bedridden... my mom does almost everything for him. He doesn't drive, he doesn't really leave the house. He doesn't use a driver's license. But he does vote.

So, there's a real example of a guy who does not and will not need a driver's license or an ID, and probably won't have one when his expires next because he medically can't drive.

Dola:

Thinking of the nondescript poor elderly black woman led me to think of my mom. She stopped driving when she was around 70ish, but lived to age 85. Her world was pretty small as she aged. I doubt she had to show ID in the bank or at the pharmacy. I wonder what she did for ID after her last driver's license expired, or if she even had one.

I just show the online ticket on my phone at this point. It is nice to get carded at bars in my 40s whenever I bother to shave.

Dang, you people SMASHED my dola.

What, you don't still get carded? I have to show mine on every alcohol purchase here -- both retail & dining out -- even thought I'm pretty freakin' clearly past 21.

But yeah...what Butter said about his dad. I'm sure my mother continued to vote. She wasn't even bedridden until the last 8 days of her life (fell and broke her hip..died 8 days later,) but I can't think of a reason that she would have needed a picture ID.

I just spent two years in Honolulu for a PhD program and they offer a state ID card if you don't want a license. I didn't have a car, so I just kept my previous license, which is still good, and had the ID card for certain things (mainly store discounts for living local) around the city.

PROPOSITION: "This policy provides no benefit and will make life needlessly more difficulty/troublesome for [distinct group]. Accordingly, it is a bad policy and should be rejected."

RESPONSE: "I reject your argument because I, personally, am not a member of [distinct group]."

Unless and until we stop allowing that to be an acceptable response, public discourse will continue to degrade.

Yeah, at some point a couple years ago Portland slipped into "every body gets carded every time" territory as well.

And black people tend to look younger than we are, too. :D (All that lotion, I suspect.... ;))

Now I don't drink very often, but I'd say that I buy a bottle of wine at the grocery store probably every couple of months or so, and I'll get a glass of wine with dinner when I'm traveling for work fairly frequently (which again happens maybe once every other month,) but I can specifically recall the last time I was carded, because it happens so rarely that it surprised me: it was on my birthday....in 2014.

Maybe we need a new picture ID thread

I'm not a frequent drinker of alcohol, but I do look a lot younger than I am (when I wear a hat and hide my incredibly hilarious hair line), so getting carded has always been the norm for me. But the last several times I've been to the liquor store, I have not been carded.

I'll be honest. It hurts a bit.

Bad ol' Georgia does the same thing

Georgia ID Card for Voting Purposes Only
*Note: Must provide proof of valid voter registration
8 years No Fee when Qualified

And for those who want something more than strictly voting, there's also

Indigent ID Card
*Note: Customer must present voucher and required documents to receive ID card
8 years $5 (May be billable to shelters with agreements with DDS)