October surprise is here

[thereisnospoon]

It has nothing to do with me or you. An October Surprise is some damaging scandal that breaks about a candidate within a few days of the election that can have an adverse affect on that candidate's performance in the election, like the infamous Tom Brokaw Bush letter in 2004.

This is not a scandal. This is a software malfunction on some voting machines.

Would it be a scandal if it was found out the machine's were munipulated by a democrat?

They weren't.

...and you have evidence to support your proof of a negative.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They weren't.

How do you know they haven't been? This election cycle isn't even over yet.

We believe there's no dem fraud for the same reasons we believe you have no brains - We've seen no evidence that suggest either exists

Strange if this was favoring the republicans I wouldn't be defending it. But you say " We believe there's no dem fraud" Wheres your proof?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Only a retard would think you have to poll every conservative when everyone knows they only have one thought between all of them

LIberals always attack conservatives by saying we "march in lockstep"...
That's the pot calling the kettle "black"....
More hypocrisy from the lib moonbats...

The proof is that ALL conservatives agree about Palast. That's why all the wingnuts are running away from my challenge - Link to a post where a conservative doesn't either ignore or dismiss Palasts' claims

Dude how can anyone run from your challenge? Because it was shot dead before it left the gate.

 

[sangha]

Greg Palast Purging the Purgers


The phrase "voter fraud" appears 9 times. In an article written by Palast, on his own website.

Here's some more articles, written by him, specifically on Voter Fraud.

Greg Palast Don’t Fire Gonzales

Greg Palast Drinking the Kool-Aid How Cries of Voter Fraud Cover Up GOP Elections Theft

You want more...or are you done looking like a dumbass yet?

Your links prove that you're both wrong and a liar.

Every mention of "voter fraud", EVERY SINGLE MENTION, is in relation to the GOP's false claims of "voter fraud". IOW, Palast doesn't write about "voter fraud"; He writes about how the GOP uses "Cries of Voter Fraud" to "Cover Up GOP Elections Theft"

Here's what Palast says about "voter fraud"

Months ago, we obtained, as part of our investigation for Rolling Stone magazine, the Republican's list the GOP alleged were the very worst cases of vote and registration fraud by ACORN and similar groups. We went through the names the GOP asserted were "obviously, undeniably and clearly fraudulent" voter registrations.

First, there was Melissa Tais, a dubious ACORN registrant. Her two voter registration forms show, admittedly, suspiciously different signatures. Republicans suggested Melissa was part of a massive fraud to allow Democrats to vote twice.

They were wrong. Ms. Tais, a Cerrillos, New Mexico, waitress, told us she had signed one form on a table and one form holding the paper in her hand. Hence, a second, wobbly signature.

Then there was Patricia White, who Republicans claimed was a fictitious voter. When we filmed her at home in Albuquerque, she seemed real enough.

And so on, through the entire GOP list -- not one fraud. And these were their best cases out of the five million "illegal voters" who Republican leaders claim have infiltrated America's voting rolls.

Palast claims there was "not one fraud" and you think Palasts' writings have focused on voter fraud

I said he focused on Voter Fraud.

You said he focused on Voter Fraud. He doesn't. He dismisses the claims of widespread voter fraud. He thinks those claims are lies the GOP tells to distract attention away from GOP electoral fraud and voter suppression, which are the two topics Palast does concentrate on.

You said he doesn't because he focuses on GOP claims of voter fraud? How is this not focusing on voter fraud?

No, Einstein. I said he doesn't focus on voter fraud because he proved the GOP claims of voter fraud are lies.

I never said "he focuses on GOP claims of voter fraud?". I said he dismisses the GOP claims of voter fraud.

And then you ignore the first link where he lays out his case for GOP perpetuated voter fraud? How is this not focusing on voter fraud?

I guess the answer to my last question was a resounding "no"?[/quote]

You guessed wrong. My answer to your last question is "You are lying or retarded when you claim your first link was to an article where Palast 'lays out his case for GOP perpetuated voter fraud'"

The article is about "caging" which is not "voter fraud"; it's a form of electoral fraud which suppresses the vote.

Focusing on caging is not focusing on voter fraud, Einstein. You're just too ignorant to understand the difference.

Dumbass. You just proved it for me.

If you didn't lie, you'd have nothing to say

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Would it be a scandal if it was found out the machine's were munipulated by a democrat?

They weren't.

...and you have evidence to support your proof of a negative.

You want me to show proof of nothing happening? Stop being a bunch of dumb asses. How about showing some evidence that they cheated first. Then we'll talk further.

If those voting machines had Angle's name checked instead of Reid you'd be agreeing with me. Bottom line.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Your links prove that you're both wrong and a liar.

Every mention of "voter fraud", EVERY SINGLE MENTION, is in relation to the GOP's false claims of "voter fraud". IOW, Palast doesn't write about "voter fraud"; He writes about how the GOP uses "Cries of Voter Fraud" to "Cover Up GOP Elections Theft"

Here's what Palast says about "voter fraud"



Palast claims there was "not one fraud" and you think Palasts' writings have focused on voter fraud

I said he focused on Voter Fraud.

You said he focused on Voter Fraud. He doesn't. He dismisses the claims of widespread voter fraud. He thinks those claims are lies the GOP tells to distract attention away from GOP electoral fraud and voter suppression, which are the two topics Palast does concentrate on.



No, Einstein. I said he doesn't focus on voter fraud because he proved the GOP claims of voter fraud are lies.

I never said "he focuses on GOP claims of voter fraud?". I said he dismisses the GOP claims of voter fraud.

And then you ignore the first link where he lays out his case for GOP perpetuated voter fraud? How is this not focusing on voter fraud?

I guess the answer to my last question was a resounding "no"?

You guessed wrong. My answer to your last question is "You are lying or retarded when you claim your first link was to an article where Palast 'lays out his case for GOP perpetuated voter fraud'"

The article is about "caging" which is not "voter fraud"; it's a form of electoral fraud which suppresses the vote.

Focusing on caging is not focusing on voter fraud, Einstein. You're just too ignorant to understand the difference.

Dumbass. You just proved it for me.

If you didn't lie, you'd have nothing to say

So despite what Palast calls voter fraud, you claim he doesn't talk about voter fraud. And then because Palast wrote an article disproving in his eyes GOP claims of voter fraud, he still isn't talking about voter fraud.

Face it, you've been pwned righteously.

But keep spinning

 

[sangha]

LIberals always attack conservatives by saying we "march in lockstep"...
That's the pot calling the kettle "black"....
More hypocrisy from the lib moonbats...

The proof is that ALL conservatives agree about Palast. That's why all the wingnuts are running away from my challenge - Link to a post where a conservative doesn't either ignore or dismiss Palasts' claims

Dude how can anyone run from your challenge? Because it was shot dead before it left the gate.

Dude, you've don't nothing but lie and talk big on the anonymous internet. How about a Link to a post where a conservative doesn't either ignore or dismiss Palasts' claims?

Or is this just one more wingnut bullshiter pretending declaring victory while running for the hills?

 

[Richard-H]

Ya'd think that the wingnuts here weren't around for the 2000 Presidential election!

Suddenly they're all shocked by bugs in the voting machines!

So, if the Dems win by a landslide and it's found that there were problems with the voting machines are you going to take the same position on it as you did in 2000?

No recounts, no redoing the elections. The results stand regardless of problems with the machines, right?

Hey, there's even a Supreme court decision about it aleady!

Poor richard do you know all the facts that gore wanted to do? Bushg wanted a the votes recounted gore just wanted certain county's recounted.

When exactly did the Bush campiagn file a request to have all of Florida's votes recounted? Did he take action on this?

I don't think so.

Florida law stated that a candidate has the right to have 2 (or 3) counties votes recounted. The Gore campign filed the request in keeping the Florida State law. The Bush campaign then filed a law suit to stop the recounts that Gore requested.

Never at any time did the Bush Campign file any request for any recounts whatsoever.

Are you that easily dup'd?

 

[sangha]

How do you know they haven't been? This election cycle isn't even over yet.

We believe there's no dem fraud for the same reasons we believe you have no brains - We've seen no evidence that suggest either exists

Strange if this was favoring the republicans I wouldn't be defending it. But you say " We believe there's no dem fraud" Wheres your proof?

Strange, but in the thread I linked to earlier, you defend it every time it favors the republicans and demand proof, but when it favors dems, you attack and claim it always benefits democrats.

Oh wait...You're a conservative so it's not strange that you're a liar.

 

[sangha]

You said he focused on Voter Fraud. He doesn't. He dismisses the claims of widespread voter fraud. He thinks those claims are lies the GOP tells to distract attention away from GOP electoral fraud and voter suppression, which are the two topics Palast does concentrate on.



No, Einstein. I said he doesn't focus on voter fraud because he proved the GOP claims of voter fraud are lies.

I never said "he focuses on GOP claims of voter fraud?". I said he dismisses the GOP claims of voter fraud.



I guess the answer to my last question was a resounding "no"?

You guessed wrong. My answer to your last question is "You are lying or retarded when you claim your first link was to an article where Palast 'lays out his case for GOP perpetuated voter fraud'"

The article is about "caging" which is not "voter fraud"; it's a form of electoral fraud which suppresses the vote.

Focusing on caging is not focusing on voter fraud, Einstein. You're just too ignorant to understand the difference.

Dumbass. You just proved it for me.

If you didn't lie, you'd have nothing to say

So despite what Palast calls voter fraud, you claim he doesn't talk about voter fraud. And then because Palast wrote an article disproving in his eyes GOP claims of voter fraud, he still isn't talking about voter fraud.

Face it, you've been pwned righteously.

But keep spinning

More lies. I didn't claim "he doesn't talk about voter fraud". You have to make up lies just to have an argument

I said that Palast does not FOCUS on voter fraud, and that he only writes about it in order to debunk the GOP's lies about voter fraud and how the GOP uses those lies to distract attention from the GOP's electoral fraud, which is what Palast does FOCUS on.

That's why the articles you dishonestly claim are about voter fraud are really about electoral fraud. You're just too stupid to understand what you're reading

You do know what the word "focus" means, right?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

We believe there's no dem fraud for the same reasons we believe you have no brains - We've seen no evidence that suggest either exists

Strange if this was favoring the republicans I wouldn't be defending it. But you say " We believe there's no dem fraud" Wheres your proof?

Strange, but in the thread I linked to earlier, you defend it every time it favors the republicans and demand proof, but when it favors dems, you attack and claim it always benefits democrats.

Oh wait...You're a conservative so it's not strange that you're a liar.

I favored what? I see your game it's called false accusations

 

[RadiomanATL]

You guessed wrong. My answer to your last question is "You are lying or retarded when you claim your first link was to an article where Palast 'lays out his case for GOP perpetuated voter fraud'"

The article is about "caging" which is not "voter fraud"; it's a form of electoral fraud which suppresses the vote.

Focusing on caging is not focusing on voter fraud, Einstein. You're just too ignorant to understand the difference.



If you didn't lie, you'd have nothing to say

So despite what Palast calls voter fraud, you claim he doesn't talk about voter fraud. And then because Palast wrote an article disproving in his eyes GOP claims of voter fraud, he still isn't talking about voter fraud.

Face it, you've been pwned righteously.

But keep spinning

More lies. I didn't claim "he doesn't talk about voter fraud". You have to make up lies just to have an argument

I said that Palast does not FOCUS on voter fraud,

Correct. And I have shown that he does focus on voter fraud.

and that he only writes about it in order to debunk the GOP's lies about voter fraud and how the GOP uses those lies to distract attention from the GOP's electoral fraud, which is what Palast does FOCUS on.

you actually didn't claim this until AFTER it was shown that he focuses on voter fraud. And then you decided to move the goal posts by claiming the above. Your original claim was that he does not focus on voter fraud. At all.

And then you focused in on one article out of the three. The other two he makes claims of GOP voter fraud. Which you ignored.

Dishonest of you, but we expect no less.

That's why the articles you dishonestly claim are about voter fraud are really about electoral fraud. You're just too stupid to understand what you're reading

So articles where Palast specifically calls it voter fraud, himself, are not really about voter fraud?

You = Dishonest hack.

But keep spinning

 

[sangha]

Strange if this was favoring the republicans I wouldn't be defending it. But you say " We believe there's no dem fraud" Wheres your proof?

Strange, but in the thread I linked to earlier, you defend it every time it favors the republicans and demand proof, but when it favors dems, you attack and claim it always benefits democrats.

Oh wait...You're a conservative so it's not strange that you're a liar.

I favored what? I see your game it's called false accusations

Oy vey!!

I didn't say you favored anything. Don't you even know how to read?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ya'd think that the wingnuts here weren't around for the 2000 Presidential election!

Suddenly they're all shocked by bugs in the voting machines!

So, if the Dems win by a landslide and it's found that there were problems with the voting machines are you going to take the same position on it as you did in 2000?

No recounts, no redoing the elections. The results stand regardless of problems with the machines, right?

Hey, there's even a Supreme court decision about it aleady!

Poor richard do you know all the facts that gore wanted to do? Bushg wanted a the votes recounted gore just wanted certain county's recounted.

When exactly did the Bush campiagn file a request to have all of Florida's votes recounted? Did he take action on this?

I don't think so.

Florida law stated that a candidate has the right to have 2 (or 3) counties votes recounted. The Gore campign filed the request in keeping the Florida State law. The Bush campaign then filed a law suit to stop the recounts that Gore requested.

Never at any time did the Bush Campign file any request for any recounts whatsoever.

Are you that easily dup'd?

Allow me the chance to make my point more clear
I said Bush said to recount all the county's since gore wanted to recount selectivey county's and none of the military votes.
At least according to this
Bush v. Gore: Doc Text

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Strange, but in the thread I linked to earlier, you defend it every time it favors the republicans and demand proof, but when it favors dems, you attack and claim it always benefits democrats.

Oh wait...You're a conservative so it's not strange that you're a liar.

I favored what? I see your game it's called false accusations

Oy vey!!

I didn't say you favored anything. Don't you even know how to read?

Maybe you should reread what you posted.

 

[sangha]

Correct. And I have shown that he does focus on voter fraud.

LOL! You haven't posted one Palast article about voter fraud.

and that he only writes about it in order to debunk the GOP's lies about voter fraud and how the GOP uses those lies to distract attention from the GOP's electoral fraud, which is what Palast does FOCUS on.

you actually didn't claim this until AFTER it was shown that he focuses on voter fraud. And then you decided to move the goal posts by claiming the above. Your original claim was that he does not focus on voter fraud. At all.

You haven't shown that he FOCUSES on voter fraud. You haven't even posted one article by Palast about voter fraud. You're a complete failure

And then you focused in on one article out of the three. The other two he makes claims of GOP voter fraud. Which you ignored.

You're lying. Palast has never written about "GOP voter fraud" He has written about the GOPs lies about voter fraud in articles about the GOP's electoral frauds.

Dishonest of you, but we expect no less.

That's why the articles you dishonestly claim are about voter fraud are really about electoral fraud. You're just too stupid to understand what you're reading

So articles where Palast specifically calls it voter fraud, himself, are not really about voter fraud?

Another lie. Palast does not call it "voter fraud". He calls it "GOP lies"

You = Dishonest hack.

But keep spinning

 

[RadiomanATL]

Correct. And I have shown that he does focus on voter fraud.

LOL! You haven't posted one Palast article about voter fraud.

Now you are just outright lying.

I posted three, all concerned voter fraud. One of them even had "voter fraud" in the title.

The rest of your post is more of the same. Dishonest hackery.

You've been pwned.

Live with it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Correct. And I have shown that he does focus on voter fraud.

LOL! You haven't posted one Palast article about voter fraud.

Now you are just outright lying.

I posted three, all concerned voter fraud. One of them even had "voter fraud" in the title.

The rest of your post is more of the same. Dishonest hackery.

You've been pwned.

Live with it.

It must be 40 below zero in hell right now. I agree with Radioman

 

[sangha]

Correct. And I have shown that he does focus on voter fraud.

LOL! You haven't posted one Palast article about voter fraud.

Now you are just outright lying.

I posted three, all concerned voter fraud. One of them even had "voter fraud" in the title.

The rest of your post is more of the same. Dishonest hackery.

You've been pwned.

Live with it.

Liar.

None of the articles you linked to "concerned voter fraud". The articles you linked to MENTIONED non-existent voter fraud and were FOCUSED on electoral fraud. So you lie and claim the articles are "about voter fraud". And when I prove you're lying about that, you change your tune to the articles "concerned voter fraud".

If you were honest, you would change your argument from one post to another. Only a cowardly liar runs away from their own words the way you do.

Live with it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

LOL! You haven't posted one Palast article about voter fraud.

Now you are just outright lying.

I posted three, all concerned voter fraud. One of them even had "voter fraud" in the title.

The rest of your post is more of the same. Dishonest hackery.

You've been pwned.

Live with it.

Liar.

None of the articles you linked to "concerned voter fraud". The articles you linked to MENTIONED non-existent voter fraud and were FOCUSED on electoral fraud. So you lie and claim the articles are "about voter fraud". And when I prove you're lying about that, you change your tune to the articles "concerned voter fraud".

If you were honest, you would change your argument from one post to another. Only a cowardly liar runs away from their own words the way you do.

Live with it.

Fuckwit radioman hasn't run anywhere. why do you keep saying people are running away from you?