IDs could cause enough of a dropoff in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3 percent

[Soggy in NOLA]

Seems like.. I dunno... around 2000.... remember? Voter fraud was RAMPANT. Remember Ohio? Then again in 2004.. and miracuously, it vanished in 2008.

 

[Truthmatters]

The Truth About Fraud: Case Studies by Issue



Among Republicans it is an 'article of religious faith that voter fraud is causing us to lose elections,' [Royal] Masset[, former political director of the Republican Party of Texas,] said. He doesn't agree with that, but does believe that requiring photo IDs could cause enough of a dropoff in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3 percent to the Republican vote.

Thre truth is in the words of this republican leader

That is one man's OPINION. It is in no way FACT.

Do you know the difference?

Rick

Why did he say it?

 

[hboats]

So because the republicans entered a consent decree instead of allowing the court ot find them innocent then the cold hard evidence means nothing?


So if you avoid trial the crime never took place?

No, but the question you've REFUSED to answer is if there was so much evidence against the Republicans why did the Democrats allow the case to be dropped? Why didn't they pursue it to the end?

One of two possible reasons. Either there was not nearly enough evidence to get a finding of guilt. Or the Republicans had just as much dirt on the Democrats and both decided to drop the whole thing to keep both sides from being found guilty.

Rick

they entered a consent decree, you must also remember the republicans were no exsonerated either.


The evdince still exsists.

And its damning

Obviously not since there was no FINDING OF GUILT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And if it was so damning why did the Democrats let them out of it by the consent decree? Why do you refuse to answer that question?

All you have are ALLEGATIONS. No guilt was found.

Rick

 

[Truthmatters]

Seems like.. I dunno... around 2000.... remember? Voter fraud was RAMPANT. Remember Ohio? Then again in 2004.. and miracuously, it vanished in 2008.

Who said it vanished , they just did not cheat well enough to win.

 

[hboats]

Thre truth is in the words of this republican leader

That is one man's OPINION. It is in no way FACT.

Do you know the difference?

Rick

Why did he say it?

Because it's his OPINION.

Is he not allowed to say his opinion? Because he states his opinion does it automatically make it FACT in your mind?

Rick

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Ya'll leave Truthy alone... shit, the poor simp has a picture of McVeigh's shirt.. WTF? Point?

This is not a bright person.

 

[Truthmatters]

No, but the question you've REFUSED to answer is if there was so much evidence against the Republicans why did the Democrats allow the case to be dropped? Why didn't they pursue it to the end?

One of two possible reasons. Either there was not nearly enough evidence to get a finding of guilt. Or the Republicans had just as much dirt on the Democrats and both decided to drop the whole thing to keep both sides from being found guilty.

Rick

they entered a consent decree, you must also remember the republicans were no exsonerated either.


The evdince still exsists.

And its damning

Obviously not since there was no FINDING OF GUILT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And if it was so damning why did the Democrats let them out of it by the consent decree? Why do you refuse to answer that question?

All you have are ALLEGATIONS. No guilt was found.

Rick

They were not let out of it they saved the money of a trial because the republicans in the consent decree had to allow any of their actions to be supervised by the courts.

They of course broke the rules of the consent decree repeatedly.



http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/dnc_v_rnc_consent_decree/

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Thre truth is in the words of this republican leader

That is one man's OPINION. It is in no way FACT.

Do you know the difference?

Rick

Why did he say it?

Same reason you write the stupid shit you do..... there IS NO POINT other than to spin his own agenda.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You guys get out before Truth's brain rot takes ahold of you.

 

[hboats]

they entered a consent decree, you must also remember the republicans were no exsonerated either.


The evdince still exsists.

And its damning

Obviously not since there was no FINDING OF GUILT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And if it was so damning why did the Democrats let them out of it by the consent decree? Why do you refuse to answer that question?

All you have are ALLEGATIONS. No guilt was found.

Rick

They were not let out of it they saved the money of a trial because the republicans in the consent decree had to allow any of their actions to be supervised by the courts.

They of course broke the rules of the consent decree repeatedly.

One more time......

If the evidence was so damning why would they allow them to sign a consent decree? Why not follow through with it to make sure that the whole world knew the evidence against them?

Once again, because either the evidence was not as damning as you seem to want it to be, or there was just as much evidence against the Democrats that a trial would have made public.

Rick

 

[AllieBaba]

This is where TM takes a break.

 

[Truthmatters]

I already told you they did the consent decree because it was quicker and cheaper than a trial and in a consent decree they thought they could stop the activity right then by having the cort demand that the RNC was no longer allowed to do any poll cleansing efforts.

Tell me WHY the RNC agreed to have it hands tied rather than seeking to be cleared of the charges in court?

 

[Immanuel]

86 people in a period of five years coutnry wide is next to non exsistant.

Is that threatening elections in this country Immie?

Thank you... you have actually just admitted that you are a damned hypocrite as well as a liar.

How many hours have you spent screaming about unproven vote fraud in the RNC and excused a very evident case of attempted voter intimidation and now when you see that there have been convictions you say that it doesn't matter? Hypocrite!

Whether or not it actually changed the outcome of a single election is immaterial. There is the potential that it may someday. That is why this is significant and why this nation should do everything in its power to fight against vote fraud no matter which party is involved.

Immie

 

[hboats]

I already told you they did the consent decree because it was quicker and cheaper than a trial and in a consent decree they thought they could stop the activity right then by having the cort demand that the RNC was no longer allowed to do any poll cleansing efforts.

Tell me WHY the RNC agreed to have it hands tied rather than seeking to be cleared of the charges in court?

But, if as you state over and over, the Republicans repeatedly break this decree, then why is there not one single finding of guilt against them?

Do you know what a consent decree is? In very basic terms it says that we'll drop the case this time if you promise not to do it again. But, if you are caught doing it again, not only will we go to court for the new allegations, but we can re open this case.

So, why has the consent decree not been re opened and why have there not been ANY findings of guilt against the Republicans for this?

Because the evidence does not support a finding of guilt. That's why.

Rick

 

[Immanuel]

Ive got a better one for you TM. How about we start fingerprinting all thoes who vote?

No need to carry anything with you. You cant "forget" to bring your fingerprints with you. No need to be filling out any forms.

You also have to be alive and not someones pet dog. And if for some reason your prints ping back as a felon, oops cant vote then either.


And before you get all pissy and over the cliff about fingerprints, remember if you want to drive or carry ID in this country its required to give a fingerprint.

Or cash a check at a bank either.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

The real question here is why does Truthdoesn'tmatter insist on not letting the voter registrations be cleaned up.

Why do you insist on letting convicted felons vote?

Why do you insist on letting registered voters who are deceased have a fraudulent vote?

Why do you insist on letting people bus the elderly to voting locations to have them fill out their ballots for them?

What's wrong with making sure that only registered voters who are actually not felons and are still alive vote?

Why the resistance to cleaning up the voter registrations?

Rick

TM, please answer the above questions. This is the fourth time I've asked you to respond.

Why can't you?

Rick

I have asked basically the same questions at least three times. She won't answer them. She just keeps ignoring them.

Immie

 

[rightwinger]

If you had a National ID card you could log in and vote from home

It would increase the number of voters and reduce fraud

 

[Truthmatters]

http://projectvote.org/images/publications/Voter Caging/DNC_v_RNC_1986_Consent_Decree_1.pdf

I have answered you two, the fraud you claim does not exsist in any significant numbers to warrent billions being spent and thousands of voters being knocked off the roles even though they are legal voters.

Now go read this link and realise you misread Malone. I went back and lokked it up because you said it was dismissed, It was not dismissed until well after the election adn in fact the Rs were told to stop certain actions until AFTER the election.

the judge ordered the Rs to stop their voter poll cleansing

 

[Truthmatters]

If you had a National ID card you could log in and vote from home

It would increase the number of voters and reduce fraud

Do you have any studies to back your assumption?

 

[syrenn]

Ive got a better one for you TM. How about we start fingerprinting all thoes who vote?

No need to carry anything with you. You cant "forget" to bring your fingerprints with you. No need to be filling out any forms.

You also have to be alive and not someones pet dog. And if for some reason your prints ping back as a felon, oops cant vote then either.


And before you get all pissy and over the cliff about fingerprints, remember if you want to drive or carry ID in this country its required to give a fingerprint.

Or cash a check at a bank either.

Immie

or get into disneyworld parks. The list goes on and on with providing fingerprints.

You do see that TM is avoiding this one with a ten foot pool.