Trump to win?

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying that black people are currently unable to get drivers licenses or have to go through a far more difficult process somehow?

i mean that the id law and the closure of the dmv offices were not unrelated. they were deliberate acts to suppress african american votes.

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

Trump’s Doing Worse Than Romney Did Among White Voters


Perhaps, it would be better news for Trump if he were at least trending in the right direction with white voters. But he’s moved backward compared with polls back in May and early June. Back then, Trump led Clinton by 17 percentage points, on average, among white voters. In other words, the longer white voters have had a chance to listen to Trump’s message, the more they have been put off by it as a group. [emphasis added-jk]

To be more specific, Trump is trading one type of white voter for another. Even as he piles up support among white men without a college degree, he’s on track for a record poor performance for a Republican among white voters with a degree. And right now, that tradeoff is a net negative for Trump, compared with Romney. If a ton of new white voters without a degree flooded into the electorate, that could change the math for Trump. But such a surge doesn’t look * like it’s in the offing.



----------
* There’s just one catch: If we’re on the cusp of a blue-collar Great Awakening, it’s not yet showing up in the registration data.

[lektrode]

Re: Trump to win?

well.. speaking of white, blue collar men with no degree (read: us J6P's, aka 'the deplorables')

while this story likely wont get as much - if any - airtime as today's current 'feature' on the Clinton News Network (CNN)

• 'I think you have what it takes'
  
  clik here for the BOMBSHELL 'revelation' photo du jour
• 
  
  
  

and what could possibly be more important than... kim kardashian being... GASP!!!
robbed in paris...

5 Stories The Mainstream Media Ignored While Reporting On Kim Kardashian's Robbery

One of the saving graces of the ailing corporate media - for the folks setting the agenda, anyhow - is its relentless ability to hyper-focus the public’s attention on altogether meaningless events.

• Oct 5, 2016 11:45 AM

sides maybe... oh, i dunno, howzabout the obozo+hillbilly show setting up for the REALLY big distraction (of ww3)

but.. likely this one will be just MORE NEWS we WONT be seeing on the C...N...N...

NY AG Admits Clinton Foundation Failed To Provide 3 Years Of Tax Forms On "Donors And Contributors"

The New York attorney general's office quietly confirmed that the Clinton Foundation failed to file 3 years worth of supplemental tax disclosures regarding "donors and contributors."

That said, the AG decided not to brag about the discovery on twitter as he did with the Trump Foundation's investigation.

• Oct 5, 2016 2:49 PM

[Ellen Z]

Re: Trump to win?

Any system to verify voter identity and eligibility could in principle be used to exclude legitimate voters.

Should we therefore not test voter eligibility?

I'd like to see some discussion of ways to test voter eligibility that include safeguards so legitimate voters are protected. I assume iTulipers do want all citizens to have the ability to vote.

I think somewhere in this thread people said things like "well you have to show a photo ID anytime you fly, don't you?" (Don't have time to track down the exact quote, sorry.)

I don't see any discussion of people who don't already have photo ID, and would find it difficult to get. Elderly people. People who don't drive. People who don't have their birth certificate tucked away on the shelf.

Earlier, Milton Kuo said:
Why is it that only the U.S., which has a problem with parasitic illegal aliens, cannot require a form of registration card that nearly every other country has

I think some of those other countries have a more unified bureaucratic system that starts at birth (France happens to be the place I've read about) so you don't have 80-year-old women suddenly asked to produce their birth certificate, which they have never needed before.

From the top of my head, here are some of the special challenges the United States would face in improving our voter registration and elections system:
_____ This is such a large country, so distance and bureaucratic issues are more challenging.
_____ Voter registration is controlled by the states, which have varying rules, and people move from one state to another all the time.
_____ You could have a single national voter registration system (as we now have a single Social Security number) but wouldn’t some people object to that as an infringement on liberty?
_____ Ethnic diversity and a past history of intentional voter discrimination.
_____ A highly-charged partisan atmosphere in which both sides seek to manipulate the electoral system for their own party’s advantage.

_____ Transition costs. We could picture a system that would be better than our current system, but we also need to think about the people-hours and financial cost to get it up and running, and ensure that every citizen ends up being able to vote without a lot of hassle.

_____ Election Day: keep in mind that the people actually running the places where people vote are volunteers (they receive a minimal stipend – perhaps $20 for attending training and $100 for election day.) Each state does it differently. Each election, you have some old hands but also a new batch of people who need to be trained. It’s no surprise that occasionally a batch of ballots gets mislaid (didn’t that happen in the Iowa primary this year?) because the people collecting and storing the ballots are like PTA volunteers.

_____ It occurs to me, while doing this list, that we might also want to think about gerrymandered election districts, which I understand are having a substantial effect on elections in some localities – I forget exactly where.

Earlier someone posted a link in this thread to the 2012 Pew Center Report on the US voter registration system. I appreciated reading that, and it shifted my viewpoint.

Right now all of us in the U.S. are surrounded by a highly partisan atmosphere, with both sides playing "gotcha." As iTulipers, we have past experiences of listening respectfully to each other, gathering data, and using all sorts of data to create more complex and valuable images of reality than any of us could do on our own. I wonder if we could apply those methods to the question: how could the US voter registration system be improved?

[Ellen Z]

Re: Trump to win?

Trump’s Doing Worse Than Romney Did Among White Voters
To be more specific, Trump is trading one type of white voter for another. Even as he piles up support among white men without a college degree, he’s on track for a record poor performance for a Republican among white voters with a degree. .

I would really like to see some sort of map or graphic of the US electorate. How many people usually vote in presidential elections? How many people usually vote in off-year elections? What percentage of registered voters are "white men with college degrees" "white men without college degrees" "white women with college degrees" and all the other ways of describing the electorate?

What percentage of registered voters actually vote, generally speaking?

What percentage of adult citizens are not registered to vote?

Does anyone have this information at their fingertips? I'm used to seeing statements like "Obama brought in many people who previously were not registered," but I don't really have a picture of the whole map to which Obama, or Trump, or whoever has made/may make changes.

(Yesterday I came across a statistic saying the US population is now 70% white, 30% nonwhite. I can't remember where I heard that -- but if that's true then my image of this country is way out of date.)

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

I would really like to see some sort of map or graphic of the US electorate. How many people usually vote in presidential elections? How many people usually vote in off-year elections? What percentage of registered voters are "white men with college degrees" "white men without college degrees" "white women with college degrees" and all the other ways of describing the electorate?

What percentage of registered voters actually vote, generally speaking?

What percentage of adult citizens are not registered to vote?

Does anyone have this information at their fingertips? I'm used to seeing statements like "Obama brought in many people who previously were not registered," but I don't really have a picture of the whole map to which Obama, or Trump, or whoever has made/may make changes.

(Yesterday I came across a statistic saying the US population is now 70% white, 30% nonwhite. I can't remember where I heard that -- but if that's true then my image of this country is way out of date.)

here's at least some of the info you want
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...-the-election/

[santafe2]

Re: Trump to win?

here's at least some of the info you want
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...-the-election/

A quick review of educational demographics for "white" voters makes it clear why Trump "loves the poorly educated".

[santafe2]

Re: Trump to win?

For the 3rd time in it's 150+ year history The Atlantic magazine has endorsed a candidate for president. The first one was Lincoln, the current endorsement is for HRC. A few of their observations:

"...we are mainly concerned with the Republican Party's nominee, Donald J. Trump, who might be the most ostentatiously unqualified major-party candidate in the 227-year history of the American presidency."

"Donald Trump...has no record of public service and no qualifications for public office. His affect is that of an infomercial huckster; he traffics in conspiracy theories and racist invective; he is appallingly sexist; he is erratic, secretive, and xenophobic' he expresses admiration for authoritarian rulers, and evinces authoritarian tendencies himself. He is easily goaded, a poor quality for someone seeking control of America's nuclear arsenal. He is an enemy of fact-based discourse; he is ignorant of, and indifferent to, the Constitution; he appears not to read."

"...Trump is not a man of ideas. He is a demagogue, a xenophobe, a sexist, a know-nothing, and a liar. He is spectacularly unfit for office..."

There's more here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-trump/501161/

[Chris Coles]

Re: Trump to win?

I'd like to see some discussion of ways to test voter eligibility that include safeguards so legitimate voters are protected. I assume iTulipers do want all citizens to have the ability to vote.

I think somewhere in this thread people said things like "well you have to show a photo ID anytime you fly, don't you?" (Don't have time to track down the exact quote, sorry.)

I don't see any discussion of people who don't already have photo ID, and would find it difficult to get. Elderly people. People who don't drive. People who don't have their birth certificate tucked away on the shelf.

Earlier, Milton Kuo said:
Why is it that only the U.S., which has a problem with parasitic illegal aliens, cannot require a form of registration card that nearly every other country has

I think some of those other countries have a more unified bureaucratic system that starts at birth (France happens to be the place I've read about) so you don't have 80-year-old women suddenly asked to produce their birth certificate, which they have never needed before.

From the top of my head, here are some of the special challenges the United States would face in improving our voter registration and elections system:
_____ This is such a large country, so distance and bureaucratic issues are more challenging.
_____ Voter registration is controlled by the states, which have varying rules, and people move from one state to another all the time.
_____ You could have a single national voter registration system (as we now have a single Social Security number) but wouldn’t some people object to that as an infringement on liberty?
_____ Ethnic diversity and a past history of intentional voter discrimination.
_____ A highly-charged partisan atmosphere in which both sides seek to manipulate the electoral system for their own party’s advantage.

_____ Transition costs. We could picture a system that would be better than our current system, but we also need to think about the people-hours and financial cost to get it up and running, and ensure that every citizen ends up being able to vote without a lot of hassle.

_____ Election Day: keep in mind that the people actually running the places where people vote are volunteers (they receive a minimal stipend – perhaps $20 for attending training and $100 for election day.) Each state does it differently. Each election, you have some old hands but also a new batch of people who need to be trained. It’s no surprise that occasionally a batch of ballots gets mislaid (didn’t that happen in the Iowa primary this year?) because the people collecting and storing the ballots are like PTA volunteers.

_____ It occurs to me, while doing this list, that we might also want to think about gerrymandered election districts, which I understand are having a substantial effect on elections in some localities – I forget exactly where.

Earlier someone posted a link in this thread to the 2012 Pew Center Report on the US voter registration system. I appreciated reading that, and it shifted my viewpoint.

Right now all of us in the U.S. are surrounded by a highly partisan atmosphere, with both sides playing "gotcha." As iTulipers, we have past experiences of listening respectfully to each other, gathering data, and using all sorts of data to create more complex and valuable images of reality than any of us could do on our own. I wonder if we could apply those methods to the question: how could the US voter registration system be improved?

The first question to ask is; who are the most trusted people in each individual community? Then you will need to get them to recognise the upside potential for the entire nation, IF they get involved. Here in the UK, movement to a new location is automatically covered by a letter to establish who is eligible to vote at that address. The letter emanating from the local government for the region.

Personally, I find myself astounded to read here that the nation that tells everyone they defend the free world; has such a dysfunctional election system being actively scammed by the major parties governing bodies, such as the Democrats.

My personal gripe here in the UK is that today, every single voting slip, before it is handed to us in the voting room, has written upon it the identifying number of the voter; making it entirely possible for the civil service, the executive government for the nation, to be able to identify the vote of every single voter in the nation. Which is what happens when you allow total secrecy within such bureaucratic organisations; they become immune to law and make such immunity conventional. We all have problems, ours are simply different to yours in the US.

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to win?

Do we expect the world will shift on its axis as all those undecided "Atlantic" readers leaning toward Trump now switch to HRC on the basis of this endorsement?

Other than one more feather in the virtue signaling plumage, do endorsements like this mean anything in the ballot box? I think even less so than in a "normal" election.

And once the Wikileaks disclosures confirmed our worst suspicions of media coordination with HRC's campaign in torpedoing Bernie, I sort of stopped caring about the opinions of the top 100 editors. They crossed a line that there's no crossing back.

We know what the establishment thinks and what it wants. For goodness sake, it's the entire reason the Trump phenomena exists in the first place.

[lektrode]

Re: Trump to win?

ooops... dup deleted (like a shillary email) by my deplorable self

[lektrode]

Re: Trump to win?

A quick review of educational demographics for "white" voters makes it clear why Trump "loves the poorly educated".

uh huh, exactly what i'd expect out of those who practically brag about being 'with her'.

meanwhile, for those of US in the ranks of the 'deplorables', that is
within the 'uneducated' demographic (read un-indoctrinated by the lifetime-tenured .edu-industrial complex, who pay themselves 100's of thousands to MILLIONS of dollars per year, with their salaries overly-inflated by .gov edu-loan 'subsidies' that have created a gen or 2 of indentured serfs - even as they fatten the coffers of the financial-fraud industrial complex, while the FSA (free sh_t army) screams for MOAR -

all fanned by the fin-fraud industrial-complex OWNED lamerstream media - that then INSULTS those of us not so 'fortunate' to have been indoctrinated?

you might even remember - you know - like back when you used-to work for a living, santa?

that a lot, if not most of those of us in 'the deplorables' demograpic just happen to be the same people who do the now 'lower caste' stuff like: keep the lights ON, the airconditioning, elevators, and tesla's running, the water flowing and toilets flushing, the 5star restaurants serving (their overly-inflated egotistical diners), and even whole-wallet's all-natch, all-organic, non-gmo'd, out-of-season jet-flown fresh EVERYTHING available all winter long ?

not that any of US matter, esp to all them high-falutin cause-du-jour social-justice-warrior types (or would that be worrier types) that the obozo+hillbilly show constantly preens for?

while you in the CRONY CLASS, the beneficiaries of the all them deficit-spent subsidies, sit back comfortably and dump on those who question any of the excesses of the fin-fraud industrial complex-OWNED obozo+hillbilly administration of the past 7 or 8 years

ALL of which were entirely enabled by that very same hillbilly show's signing of both NAFTA, which eliminated MILLIONS OF OUR JOBS (down here in the lower caste) - along with REPEAL OF GLASS-STEAGALL -

which allowed the complete and utterly HOSTILE TAKEOVER of the entire us.gov, which they - in the crony class - now consider a WHOLLY-OWNED subsidiary of the Fascist State of amerika...
which is now HQ'd in lower manhattan - or chappaqua, depending on ones POV

and then expect us 'deplorables' to just lay down and accept as 'the truth' that pukes forth daily out of their ever so adoring 'admirers' within the BOUGHT-OFF lamerstream media?

Riiight!
shur, whatever you say santa.

For the 3rd time in it's 150+ year history The Atlantic magazine has endorsed a candidate for president. The first one was Lincoln, the current endorsement is for HRC....
There's more here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-trump/501161/

well.. at least they've also shown a willingness to also tell us why their endorsement of hitlery also makes their editorial board as big a bunch of hippycritters and TRAITORS to We, The Rest of The People as have ever existed in The (fka) USA

to wit:

From Whitewater to Benghazi: A Clinton-Scandal Primer

Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department, received partial immunity from the FBI during its investigation of Clinton’s emails.

and THEN the obozo+hillbilly admin-appointed FBI chief allowed the DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE ?

and what do we hear out of that very same (mostly lib-dem run), hitlery-endorsing 'establishment' media?

....

We know what the establishment thinks and what it wants. For goodness sake, it's the entire reason the Trump phenomena exists in the first place.

oh, theres more than just that....

there's THIS very poignant OP/ED piece as well

"I Listened To A Trump Supporter... Now I Understand"

... the dominant media narrative characterizing Trump supporters as a bunch of racist, uneducated brutes is pretty much just dishonest, elitist propaganda.

• Oct 6, 2016 9:14 AM

(noting where their apparent loyalties... umm... lie, or.. uhhh... have layed prev):

The following article by David A Hill Jr is simply outstanding.
Here are some powerful excerpts from the piece: I Listened to a Trump Supporter

I talked at length with a Trump supporter I grew up around. I wanted to understand. I respected her growing up. I wanted to know why a person as kind and compassionate as I remember her is voting for someone like Donald Trump.

She was a family friend, a good person. In rural Ohio, everything was tight. Money, jobs. If you really needed quick cash, she’d put you to work doing landscaping. She’d pay fairly and reliably for the area.

She’s voting for Donald Trump. I disagree with her choice, but I understand why she rejects Clinton so fiercely, and why she’s been swept up in Donald Trump’s particular brand of right-wing populism. I feel that on the left, it’s increasingly easy to ignore these people, to disregard them, to write them off as racists, bigots, or uneducated. I think that’s a loss for everyone involved, and that sometimes listening can help you to at least understand why a person is making the choices they make, so you can work on the root causes. For her, the root cause isn’t racism. In fact, I remember her as one of the only people in the area who proudly hired black workers, in a place where that was a huge issue. She fought over that choice.

But that’s enough background. Let me relay a bit of what she told me.

She’s a person who built her business from the ground up. She wasn’t rich, but was very comfortable for the area. She had a nice house, a nice car, and was stable. She achieved the American dream of not having to struggle. Things changed during the housing crisis. A landscaping business requires customers who need landscaping, and people who don’t own homes just don’t need landscaping. In some of these neighborhoods, one in five people lost their homes. That almost immediately turns a successful landscaping business into a struggling one.

Then there was a domino effect. She couldn’t pay for her lawn-care equipment leases and loans. That hurt her work efficiency. Then, she lost her car. But that didn’t stop the payments. Then, she lost her house. She slowly had to let go all of her employees, until it was just her, hand-mowing lawns for cash the way you might expect a high school student in the summertime.

She told me that every week, it seemed there was another default letter, another foreclosure, another bank demanding more blood from her dry veins. To her, that pile of default notices and demands for payment looked suspiciously similar to Hillary Clinton’s top donor list.

She lost everything she worked so hard for. Obama swore he was going to help. The Wall Street bailout did seem to help Wall Street. But it did absolutely nothing for her. She turns on the news and sees how the Dow Jones is doing better than ever. But that didn’t bring her house and livelihood back. Liberals insist that Obama’s made her life better. But, now she’s driving a car that falls apart randomly while having to pay those same banks for a car she doesn’t own and never will. It’s difficult to convince someone whose life is objectively worse that their life is better. And it’s disingenuous to try. You can break down the specifics, sure. But when someone’s hungry, and you’re busy silencing their complaints by telling them how well world hunger is improving, you’re just going to upset them.

This is not a person who is stupid or racist. She knows Bush caused the economy collapse with his irresponsible tax policies and wars. But she saw liberals as fighting for the banks’ recovery, to hell with her needs. She sees in Hillary someone who celebrates that approach. Who measures US success by the success of multinational mega corporations?—?corporations who undercut and destroy local businesses. This is a person who grew up in a town with a friendly neighborhood general store, a locally-owned hardware store, farmers’ markets, florists, and auto shops. All of these businesses closed when Walmart moved into town. All their owners now work at that Walmart for a fraction of their previous wages, no benefits, and no hope for something better, something of their own. And now, she sees a free trade supporting former Walmart executive about to come in to office, and it feels like salt in her community’s wounds.

This is a wounded person. Insulting her or continuing to hurt her isn’t going to help. She’s swept up in Trump’s message because she feels someone’s finally listening. Right-wing populism is an awful thing. But desperate people with their backs against the wall will grasp on to whatever they feel will bring a change. Neoliberal capitalism is not sustainable for these people.

Over the past few years, she tried getting back in her business. But a corporation moved in and is operating far cheaper, using undocumented immigrant labor. I should note: She specifically said she doesn’t hold it against the migrant workers. As she said, “They’ve got to take whatever jobs they can get. Just like we do. It’s not their fault. They didn’t choose to make prices so low that legal businesses couldn’t compete.” She was literally a “job creator”. And she wasbeing priced out by the very people Donald Trump insists are pricing her out. That hurts everyone, and it adds an air of authenticity to what he says.

I asked her if she supports Trump’s Mexico wall. She told me, “It doesn’t matter if I do. Hillary wants a wall, too. That wall’s gonna happen.” She wasn’t simply making this up. She’s heard this from many sources, Clinton being one of them. So to her, the idea of a border wall is a non-issue. I pressed her on the issue, and she said she thinks, “It’s a waste of money. If someone wants to cross the border, they’re gonna cross the border.”…

A few times, she seemed ashamed of things Trump’s said or done. I’d ask her to unpack her feelings. She said he sometimes upsets her, but “If you wait and wait for a flawless candidate, you’ll never find one.” She said she’d be much prouder to vote for Trump if he’d tone down his rhetoric.

This fits into my strongly held belief that people are looking for an excuse to vote for Trump. All he has to do to win is tone down some of his more heinous and idiotic tendencies.

I talked to her a bit about Bernie Sanders, to see what she thought of him. She told me, “He seemed like a nice enough guy. But I didn’t pay him much mind because there was no way he was gonna beat Clinton.” I talked with her about his platform, his policy proposals. She lit up. She told me, “It’s a real shame he didn’t make it.” She told me that if she knew him, his record, and his proposals, she’d have voted for him. I said that since the primary concluded, Hillary’s shifted some to adopt policies similar to his, and I asked if that changed her mind. She told me, “It doesn’t matter what she says. It matters what she’s done.”

No amount of insulting her from an ivory tower is going to change her mind. No amount of guffawing about her lack of education, her self-deception, her racism, or her internalized misogyny is going to change her mind. The only thing she’ll listen to is a promise of real change to the system that’s hurt her. If the Democratic Party can’t offer her a viable alternative, we’re going to see another neck-and-neck election in 2020, and in 2024, and in 2028.

These people need a populist answer. They need someone willing to listen to their very real concerns, and offer solutions that don’t look like Band-Aids on bullet wounds. If they had that on the left, we wouldn’t even be discussing Ohio as a “swing state”.

Right now, this is the discourse we’re seeing about Trump supporters. This only emboldens those attitudes. To people like her, this feels like the left is laughing at her for her unwillingness to get in line and support the things that have left her broke and broken.

The above excerpts are not the entire piece. You should read the whole thing: I Listened to a Trump Supporter.
The more deeply I think about this election, the more I agree that the above sentiments motivate Trump voters far more than feelings of racism or hate. As I noted in a piece published a few weeks ago, The Status Quo vs. Donald Trump:

This isn’t about me. This is about the American voter, and the more time passes, the more I understand the motivations of the vast majority of Trump supporters. It isn’t xenophobia or racism, it’s a vote against the status quo and the way they’ve strip mined and destroyed this country. It’s a FU vote and a major gamble, but it’s not as irrational or hateful as you might think.

This doesn’t mean that Trump won’t betray his supporters and prove to be the Republican version of Barack Obama, but it does mean that the dominant media narrative characterizing Trump supporters as a bunch of racist, uneducated brutes is pretty much just dishonest, elitist propaganda.

with emph/bold by ZH.

again, could not have said it better, MY deplorable self.

[shiny!]

Re: Trump to win?

Do we expect the world will shift on its axis as all those undecided "Atlantic" readers leaning toward Trump now switch to HRC on the basis of this endorsement?

Other than one more feather in the virtue signaling plumage, do endorsements like this mean anything in the ballot box? I think even less so than in a "normal" election.

And once the Wikileaks disclosures confirmed our worst suspicions of media coordination with HRC's campaign in torpedoing Bernie, I sort of stopped caring about the opinions of the top 100 editors. They crossed a line that there's no crossing back.

We know what the establishment thinks and what it wants. For goodness sake, it's the entire reason the Trump phenomena exists in the first place.

It's pretty funny that the Atlantic thinks being secretive and a liar disqualifies a candidate, yet gives HRC a pass. Trump might be unqualified, but when I look at what the "qualified" politicians have done to this country...

[lektrode]

Re: Trump to win?

It's pretty funny thatthe Atlantic thinks being secretive and a liar disqualifies a candidate, yet gives HRC a pass. Trump might be unqualified, but when I look at what the "qualified" politicians have done to this country...

funny?
its downright HILARIOUS...

and we wont EVEN get into what the 'affirmative action candidate & constitutional law perfessah' has done...

or rather, make that 'ENABLED and EMPOWERED'

aint it somethin....

[Polish_Silver]

The national ID card

I'd like to see some discussion of ways to test voter eligibility that include safeguards so legitimate voters are protected. I assume iTulipers do want all citizens to have the ability to vote.

I think somewhere in this thread people said things like "well you have to show a photo ID anytime you fly, don't you?" (Don't have time to track down the exact quote, sorry.)

I don't see any discussion of people who don't already have photo ID, and would find it difficult to get. Elderly people. People who don't drive. People who don't have their birth certificate tucked away on the shelf.

. . .

The question of a national ID moves in and out of public attention.
I think it would solve far more problems than it creates.

In fact, for the most important purposes, it would not even need your name on it.
(It would need some sort of number, to avoid vote duplication).
It would only need to have your picture or some sort of bio-metric ID capability,
which could index the data base to resolve questions such as:

This person is a US citizen and entitled to vote,

or ,

this person is a legal US resident and entitled to work,

or

none of the above.