| Author |
Message |
|
| mpdodgson |
Posted - 7/28/2012 10:04:01 PM | show profile | flag this post
Please pay attenion.
Regarding 1960...("Bury this so others won't become aware of it...")
I brought that up before you hours ago, so I don't know what you mean by burying it. Interesting notes from Wiki;
"In Illinois, Schlesinger and others have pointed out that, even if Nixon carried Illinois, the state alone would not have given him the victory, as Kennedy would still have won 276 electoral votes to Nixon's 246 (with 269 needed to win)."
Furthermore, there were signs of possible irregularities in downstate areas controlled by Republicans, which Democrats never seriously pressed, since the Republican challenges went nowhere. More than a month after the election, the Republican National Committee abandoned its Illinois voter fraud claims.
However, a special prosecutor assigned to the case brought charges against 650 people, which did not result in convictions. Three Chicago election workers were convicted of voter fraud in 1962 and served short terms in jail"
In other words--a whole lot of accusations--some in my opinion probably true--but AGAIN very few hard facts. One more time--"Allegations of..." does NOT prove fraud. Besides all that--that was 52 years ago you realize. If that's the best you've got, I'd say it was pretty lame.
But you are persistent, I always give you that.
|
|
| cruiser |
Posted - 7/29/2012 2:39:07 AM | show profile | flag this post
Your problem seems to be
that you always cherry-pick the 'net (which you said earlier is not an authoritative source) for that one article that supports your viewpoint.
|
|
| Grateful Deadline |
Posted - 7/29/2012 12:12:05 PM | show profile | flag this post
This thread needs to go away, cruiser, for your own sake. It's apparent after a page-plus that you're arguing to preserve your scanty knowledge of voter registration and present-day voting.
Given your disinterest, it's prudent to let 'er sink. There must be something better in the news today anyway over which to pick a fight.
|
|
| cruiser |
Posted - 7/29/2012 1:25:12 PM | show profile | flag this post
ROFL
I've got WAY more than "scanty knowledge" of this topic, dearie. It's been on my study list for decades.
You want this thread to go away because it tacitly questions one of the core values of left wingers, and that is anything that advances the left wing agenda is acceptable. IOW, the end justifies the means.
|
|
| orthicon |
Posted - 7/29/2012 1:28:58 PM | show profile | flag this post
this whole thread is shakespearean in nature..
"..much ado about nothing.."
just cruiztwit and his ilk creating an issue where none exists..
|
|
| etaoin shrdlu |
Posted - 7/30/2012 10:47:58 AM | show profile | flag this post
Blacked...
I challenge you to show where -- at any time in the 2000 or 2004 election that there were accusations of people voting repeated times -- or under false identities.
My statement above is correct. Cases of voter fraud are so small and insignificant that they are unable to influence the outcome of any federal election.
Now, voter suppression is another matter. Removing millions of eligible voters from the rolls CAN affect an election's outcome -- especially if you target one specifice party's core of voters.
|
|
| cruiser |
Posted - 9/5/2012 7:50:10 PM | show profile | flag this post
"cruise keeps harping on 'registration'
and not 'actual voting'"
So good of you to ask. Let's look at Arkansas:
http://www.fox16.com/news/local/story/Ark-lawmaker-pleads-guilty-to-election-charge/qjc8PtXwfkC8frDCgwLNrg.cspx
This was interference with "actual voting."
I will keep this thread alive as long as it is pertinent.
|
|
| cruster |
Posted - 9/5/2012 8:10:11 PM | show profile | flag this post
Yes! This Thread MUST Remain Alive!
Until real voter fraud is found!
Sure there is no hard evidence of any genuine voter fraud impacting elections in the U.S. now
But just wait!
If Obama wins, you'll be hearing LOTS about it!!!
|
|
| mpdodgson |
Posted - 9/5/2012 9:46:23 PM | show profile | flag this post
cruise??
"I will keep this thread alive as long as it is pertinent."
It's not. As I have reported: "Gov. Tom Corbett's administration admitted last week that it lacked a single instance of in-person voter fraud, which is what the law is supposed to stop. So the only "problem" it actually addresses is that too many young, elderly, disabled, low-income and minority folks have been voting. They're the ones least likely to hold a valid drivers license or U.S. passport that would serve as ID. Did I mention that these folks tend to vote Democratic?
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/sally-kalson/voter-id-is-the-fraud-646634/#ixzz25e6ozssJ
Fake issue. Just an attempt to keep Dems from voting.
You're a joke we all laugh at.
|
|
| cruiser |
Posted - 9/5/2012 10:01:11 PM | show profile | flag this post
You cannot...
CANNOT...just make a contribution to the discussion without feeling obligated to add your little personal insults. You greatly diminish the credibility of your argument by so doing.
I was in the habit of responding in kind and throwing trash right back at you radical left wingers but I've been trying to clean up my act. I'd invite you to consider joining me.
|
|
| etaoin shrdlu |
Posted - 9/6/2012 9:49:17 AM | show profile | flag this post
And how, cruzo...
would Voter ID laws have prevented what this guy did?
You don't have an answer for that, do you?
|
|
| cruiser |
Posted - 9/6/2012 11:09:55 AM | show profile | flag this post
That's not an appropriate question.
|
|
| livinliberal |
Posted - 9/6/2012 11:30:36 AM | show profile | flag this post
A recent study shows...
There is about one case of in-person voter fraud for every 15 million votes cast. The republicans' way of fixing that is to deny millions of qualified Americans their right to vote because they might just be one of those people. You can't be too careful! Of course, the people they are keeping away from the polls are the poor and minorities who tend to vote for Democrats. Talk about voter fraud! The whole republican strategy is voter fraud.
|
|
| mpdodgson |
Posted - 9/6/2012 11:43:09 AM | show profile | flag this post
Say whaaaaaa?
"That's not an appropriate question"
THAT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE QUESTION??????????
You started the damn thread about ELECTION FRAUD. Not voter registration fraud--which doesn't, obviously lead to ELECTION FRAUD.
etaoin asked a perfectly legit question. You just blew it off. You also casually tossed out "And since you live in Pennsylvania perhaps you're aware that several Philadelphia precincts regularly show MORE THAN 100 percent of the registered Democrats voting". Wrong. Lie. Myth. As I pointed out ""Gov. Tom Corbett's administration admitted last week that it lacked a single instance of in-person voter fraud, which is what the law is supposed to stop"
So either you know something the Republican Governor of Pennsylvania does...or you're just listening to one of your unknown secret sources...
For the umpteenth time--I have no problem with picture ID voter cards--as long as they are free and easily purchased...and NO, making an 86 yr old get a ride to a Department of Motor Vehicles three counties away is not convenient.
Why can't you just admit it's more than a coincidence that Republicans are demanding stricter voter id laws when they desperately need to keep Dems from voting??
|
|
| etaoin shrdlu |
Posted - 9/6/2012 11:52:03 AM | show profile | flag this post
That's the ONLY question...
cruzo and other cons complain about "voter fraud" and say we need those Voter ID laws to prevent it.
But they can't seem to show how those laws would prevent any voter fraud.
Voter ID laws are merely a return to Jim Crow laws designed to keep poor and minorities from voting.
It looks like, in this case, existing laws against voter fraud worked.
|
|
| mpdodgson |
Posted - 9/6/2012 11:55:01 AM | show profile | flag this post
PS What was I thinking??
OF COURSE cruise knows more than the Gov of Pennsylvania...because if you remember, cruise claimed he was more knowledgeable about the Constitution (2nd Amend debate) than the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
take it from there.
|
|
| cruiser |
Posted - 9/6/2012 12:16:35 PM | show profile | flag this post
"Say whaaaaaa?"
I started the goddamn thread and I can make it about anythng I choose. The title says "election fraud" and it is not limited to any particular class of dishonesty. It concerns ALL acts of election fraud...and the case I posted certainly fits that description.
You people are just pissed because your wholly dishonest contention that Democrats don't engage in election fraud has been tossed into a cocked hat.
|
|
| etaoin shrdlu |
Posted - 9/6/2012 2:54:28 PM | show profile | flag this post
Then tell us how...
you would address election fraud, cruzo.
Your party's ONLY solution has been Voter ID laws.
And that would not have prevented this case nor cases where Republicans have gone to jail or received other punishments for committing voter fraud.
What OTHER solutions have you or your party ever offered?
|
|
Log in to customize alerts, subscribe to newsletters, and apply to jobs.
June 4, 2013 | San Francisco
