Name Change Texas Setting Request: Fill & Download for Free

A2A.I’ve already written several answers on the Taiwanese elections (Jamin Chen's answer to Why did Taiwanese vote not to become independent from Taiwan Election 2018?), so to make this post a bit more interesting, I’ll list the highlights from the recent elections and my initial responses to these highlights as I was following the elections online.The blue wave. Obviously that’s the main takeaway from the 2018 elections — the DPP lost big while the KMT retook several competitive districts and traditionally DPP-leaning areas, not so different from how the DPP steamrolled the KMT four years earlier. That was the first thing I learned when I woke up in the morning and started following the elections on Taiwanese television (We interrupt your regular programming…). I was really ecstatic for a moment because the anti-China party lost, but then I realized this could just be the continuation of a never-ending cycle where one party assumes absolute control, screws up, then gets decimated by the other party. Then I sobered up and wrote this answer: Jamin Chen's answer to What is the future of the DPP after their disastrous losses in the November 24, 2018 city and county elections?The Han wave. Han Guoyu, against all my expectations, defeated the DPP candidate in the DPP stronghold in Kaohsiung. Those who follow me know that I base a lot of my assumptions about Taiwanese politics on American politics, so I expected Han to lose to Chen Qimai by a small margin similar to how Beto O’Rourke fought a hard campaign in Republican Texas but ultimately lost to Ted Cruz. So when I saw Han delivering his victory speech before thousands of supporters, I was surprised and excited. But again, the soberness kicked in — Ma Ying-jeou’s political career went downhill the moment he won by a landslide in 2008; Comrade Cai Yingwen’s career went downhill the moment she won by a landslide in 2016. People are treating Han like the savior of Taiwan, but will his victory spell his doom?Taipei. When the votes were still being voted, I went on UDN and saw Ding Shouzhong leading Ke Wenzhe by around a thousand votes. Minutes later, I turned on the television and Ke was leading by a thousand votes. The election in Taipei would drag on for hours; I remember watching the votes being counted on television and the “updated” number of votes for each candidate would be flashed once every ten seconds — even when the numbers wouldn’t change! At around 3 or 4pm EST, word got out that Ke won, although Ding requested a recount because the election was so close. But by then, my gut told me Ke has Taipei for another four years. Which I guess is not a bad thing from a KMT perspective, because that means he won’t run for a higher position in 2020. Plus, Ding didn’t deserve to win with his cringe PR. Jamin Chen's answer to What is the best and worst political ad you’ve ever seen?The referendums. This was probably the second most shocking highlight after Han’s victory in Kaohsiung. My eyes were especially set on the referendum on replacing “Chinese Taipei” with “Taiwan” in Tokyo 2020. I was expecting most voters to support a name change — since that’s what everyone seems to have been craving for all along — but only a whopping 24% of registered voters ended up supporting the name change! I think those who voted “no” made the right choice — “Chinese Taipei” might sound weird, but it’s better than calling an entity something it isn’t. And depriving Taiwanese athletes of their ability to participate in the Olympics.Green tears. I sarcastically called the elections a “setback for democracy” — turns out that’s actually how some people see this. Reactions from the anti-China media ranged from denial (People are not fed up with the DPP, says pro-DPP commentator) to bewilderment (Taipei Times: Taiwanese voters were misinformed) to absolute “sour graping” (China subverted Taiwan’s election, says cult). I’m not ready to call the DPP’s demise because of this “blue wave” — I know better — but if the separatists love making a lot of noise when they get their way (and when they don’t), I think I’ll pop the cork for once.Now if you don’t mind…One cork = One Taipei Times editorial about 11/24. Please join me. :)

Hello!Droopy-eyed Bilious Billy Barr got quite testy and arrogant with Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday during his interview when the CNN host asked him if Barr’s main client President Strokahontas was encouraging his supporters to commit voter fraud among other things:Attorney General Barr to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Trump tweet: “If you know what he’s saying, why’re you asking me what he’s saying?”pic.twitter.com/vmvBhSQ2vt— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) September 2, 2020Wolf: Quoting Trump: “So let them send it in the vote by mail and let them go vote the ballot. Let them send in the ballot and then let them go vote and if the system is as good as they say it is then obviously they won’t be able to vote. It sounds like he’s encouraging people to break the law and try to vote twice?”Barr: “ I don’t know exactly what he was saying but it seems to me what he’s saying is he’s trying to make the point that the ability to monitor this system is not good and if it was so good if you tried to vote a second time, you would be caught if you voted in-person…”Wolf: ““That would be illegal if somebody mailed in a ballot and then actually showed up to vote in person. That would be illegal.”Barr: “ “I don’t know what the law in the particular state says.”Wolf: “You can’t vote twice!”Barr: “ I don’t know what the law in the particular state says and when that vote becomes final.”Wolf: “Is there any state that says you can vote twice?”Barr: ““Maybe there are some that maybe you can change your vote up to a particular term, I don’t know what the law is. “Why are you asking me what he’s saying?”Wolf:“He doesn’t believe in the mail-in voting and you’re the attorney general of the United States, He said if you expand mail-in voting…”Barr: Wolf, this is a sort of cheap talk to get around the fundamental problem, which is the bipartisan commission chaired by Jimmy Carter and James Baker set back in 2009 that mail-in voting is fraught with the risk of fraud and coercion.”Wolf: But sence then…”“Let me talk!” he yelled.Wolf: “Please.Barr: “And since that time, there have been in the newspapers, in networks, academic studies saying it is open to fraud and coercion. The only time the narrative changed is after this administration came in. But elections that have been held with mail have found substantial fraud and coercion. For example, we indicted someone in Texas, 1,700 ballots collected from people who could vote. He made them out and voted for the person he wanted to. That kind of things happens with mail-in ballots…”Bullcrap! Let me first of all debunk his 1,700 Texas ballots claim. There has never been anyone in Texas charged with fraudulently casting 1,700 ballots.“The only mention of that number with alleged voter fraud is a race several years ago where – in a race where it was alleged hundreds of people received *absentee ballot APPLICATIONS* the winning candidate won by 1,700 votes. Jessica Huseman (@JessicaHuseman) | TwitterThe number of absentee ballot requests that were initially considered “suspicious” was actually 1,200. Again, NOT BALLOTS.” Criminal investigation opens into West Dallas voter fraud after 'off the charts' allegationsSo Bill Barr lied and made things up… But he can clear this up immediately and provide the name of the case but he’s never going to do that of course because there simply is not a case.So what this scumbaggery basically means comes down to this. Trump ~ “ The 2020 election will be the most rigged election in American history” Also Trump ~ You are encouraged to vote for me twice so I rig the election.Don’t think for one minute that Barr’s as sharp as a marble. Far from it, he excels in corruption yet he’s no evil genius. We just have to remain vigilant. But just think of it, The United States Attorney doesn’t have a problem with that because he supposedly isn’t sure if voting twice is illegal. It’s unbelievable.He knows the law precisely. He doesn't give a rat's azz and will subvert it seven ways to Sunday if it will get his guy reelected. He’s an AG loyal to Trump at the expense of the country. I know this though, you can’t spell EMBARRASSMENT without Barr…

Here are a couple of paragraphs that a popular Quora Top Writer had to say about me this morning:Yet Charles Tips and his ilk have the hubris to believe they know more than the scientists who have dedicated their lives and talents to science. This contempt for hard work and education typifies today’s Republican Party, which has, one by one, abandoned everything I thought made a Republican a Republican back in Eisenhower’s day.And:See [names other writer]’s answer for more on how Quora has been debased and degraded by the Charles Tips’ of the world. If you go to the scientists you’ll learn the truth—not from the anti-science trolls here on Quora.A good start would be [site link], which lists and debunks in clear layman’s terms every denialist myth being promoted by Tips and his ilk. BTW you won’t see my comments on Tips’ answer because he likes his comments to be a cozy mutual backpatting club of his admirers. More hubris.Then here’s a paragraph from the referenced answer by the named writer:And so Quora started being very aggressive about being nice to conservative science deniers. I was slapped with BNBR violations just for pointing out the global nature of Quora vs the tiny minority status of US conservatives. Others felt the same thing.And here are a couple of comments from that answer (from another TW):“Especially on the climate change front, a very large number of climate change deniers are retired, old, white men with literally nothing better to do with their time than poison Quora and other sites with disinformation.”God this is sooo accurate. I’m glad somebody said it!There are a bunch of popular names coming to mind immediately, one of whom is abbreviated CT.Like seriously — don’t they have anything better to do with their fucking time?And a comment to that comment:“There are a bunch of popular names coming to mind immediately, one of whom is abbreviated CT.”I got blocked by him because I pointed out hypocrisy in his statements. I was not rude to him in anyway, but apparently not agreeing with him gets a block. My comment was also deleted. All of a sudden, it made sense why I could never find comments that disagreed with many of his flawed answers.Frankly, it was a relief. I was fucking exhausted of looking at the name ‘Otto von Bismarck’ every time a question related to universal healthcare came up.Back to the first commenter:Yeah, it doesn’t matter how civil you are, he doesn’t like anyone challenging him, at all. He wants a safe space free of criticism, like many of Quora’s conservatives.Let me make it clear right up front that the attacks on me do not bother me. I’m tickled to be the bee in these guys’ baseball caps.What bothers me is that they don’t grasp Quora, and so they diminish the site.The topics I mainly write in—climate change, politics, economics—are controversial. I got on Quora back early in 2014 when there were far fewer libertarian and conservative voices here.Some of my answers led to real donnybrooks in the comments sections. I had zero problem with that. I never reported anyone. I never blocked anyone. I never deleted a comment. I simply tried to stay on the sunny side of a BNBR (be nice, be respectful) violation myself.Many months into my Quora career, I was contacted by one of Quora’s chief moderators and told I really needed to dial it down in my comments section. She was not referring to me; she told me they’d combed through my comments carefully and did not find a single BNBR violation from me. However, there were violations galore on the part of those having at me.So? How is that on me?She continued: We want you to use the tools we provide: Delete. Block. Report. You may not be in violation, but you are allowing the discussions in your threads to get way out of hand.I could easily see her point. I found out shortly after from a “little birdy” that several Quorans, including three Top Writers, had received permanent bans when others later reported their comments in my threads.Well bad news travels fast. Between the chief perpetrators no longer being on the site and the rumors running around, it got quite a bit quieter in my comments sections. I still didn’t have to take action on anyone.But back almost exactly three years to the run-up to the 2016 elections, all of a sudden I was getting multiple drive-by snark comments daily. I’d look at the profile. Typically it had a double-digit number of answers, if any. The profile was not filled out. It had the default avatar and often an obviously made-up name. The answers that were there were quite poorly written, usually only two or three sentences long and with few if any upvotes. Automatic BLOCK.By the time Trump got elected I had blocked a couple of hundred of these accounts.I love adverse comments… intelligent ones. I relish people taking me on. My start in opinion writing came more than half a century ago my freshman year of college as an editorial opinion writer for the University of Texas student newspaper back in the tumultuous 60s. I enjoyed printing letters to the editor taking me on—free publicity.After losing the notion of hosting Quora’s most rowdy comments section, I decided to attempt to host the most informative one. I am very proud to have so many people enjoy commenting and learning more in my comments sections. I do not get excited about “attaboy” comments—pats on the back. What I love most is feedback that is adverse or challenging—they allow me to expound on my answer and make things much more interesting for readers.I have only ever blocked anyone for snark.If someone is a real contributor on Quora, I will not block them. I’ll simply delete a snarky comment or hint that the exchange seems done. If they ignore those signals, I’ll block.I have only ever reported anyone for clear BNBR violations, and that’s not often.All of that is by request of Quora as they wish to set a respectful tone on the site.What bothers me then is writers who have been on Quora a long time without catching on that the point of being here is to reply to those answers you do not agree with with a better answer of your own. If they are so convinced my view is not just wrong but seriously wrong-headed, they should be able to set readers of the answer thread straight with their own superior answer. Carping as they do does not help grow Quora.By the way, both of the answers I referred to above are collapsed.