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

[Truthmatters]

So Im wrong because you can not refute any of the facts in these court documents?

yeah pretty much sums up how the right thinks nowadays

 

[Truthmatters]

You cant comment on the court documant can you Immie?


Your little world has fallen appart and you cling to lies and slander

 

[Mini 14]

I would still like to know why democrats are less likely to have a photo id?

 

[Immanuel]

rnc in violation of consent decree



"The District Court then proceded to summerize its findings, stating:

I conclude the RNC has violated the consent decree"


Page four last paragraph

Geeez,

I wonder what it means that this case was later... DISMISSED!

law.com Law Dictionary

dismissal
n. 1) the act of voluntarily terminating a criminal prosecution or a lawsuit or one of its causes of action by one of the parties. 2) a judge's ruling that a lawsuit or criminal charge is terminated. 3) an appeals court's act of dismissing an appeal, letting the lower court decision stand. 4) the act of a plaintiff dismissing a lawsuit upon settling the case. Such a dismissal may be dismissal with prejudice, meaning it can never be filed again, or dismissal without prejudice, leaving open the possibility of bringing the suit again if the defendant does not follow through on the terms of the settlement.
See also: dismiss

law.com Law Dictionary

dismiss
v. the ruling by a judge that all or a portion (one or more of the causes of action) of the plaintiff's lawsuit is terminated (thrown out) at that point without further evidence or testimony. This judgment may be made before, during or at the end of a trial, when the judge becomes convinced that the plaintiff has not and cannot prove his/her/its case. This can be based on the complaint failing to allege a cause of action, on a motion for summary judgment, plaintiff's opening statement of what will be proved, or on some development in the evidence by either side which bars judgment for the plaintiff. The judge may dismiss on his own or upon motion by the defendant. The plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss a cause of action before or during trial if the case is settled, if it is not provable or trial strategy dictates getting rid of a weak claim. A defendant may be "dismissed" from a lawsuit, meaning the suit is dropped against that party.
See also: dismissal

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Tll me TM, if you knew someone was illegally voting for a Democrat, would you stop them? Or would you believe the fact that a Republican loses will justify an illegal vote?

Im not ignoring fraud for political purposes YOU ARE.

I dont want anyone to cheat in an election no matter who gets the vote.

You on the ohter hand keep defending what the republicans have done accourding to the courts themselves and PRETEND that there are Americans out there who are doing massive cheating by voting for dead aunt freda.


Our own government study undder Bush said it threatens no elections.

More lies by TM

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

For those to whom facts matter I have been proven right on this subject.

The studies show this type of fraud is no threat to even the smallest of elections and that people would be forced off the voting rolls even though they are legal voters by its implimentation.

Facts not feelings people

More lies by TM.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

You cant comment on the court documant can you Immie?


Your little world has fallen appart and you cling to lies and slander

Um, I have been reading to catch up in this thread.

My post #344 proves that you are too stupid to understand that the case was dismissed after your alleged proof.

You are dismissed!

Immie

 

[Foxfyre]

Apologies if I'm repeating what somebody else has said as I didn't take time to read the whole thread.

A great deal of ID is required to get a U.S. passport. Valid ID is required to get a driver's license, rent a car, buy a house, take out a loan, get into any public or private school or any university, cash a check, even to use a credit card in some places, sign up for social security and/or medicare or public assistance, pick up theater tickets, board an airplane, get into numerous high security public or private places, or when the police stop you for some infraction of the law or at a check point.

So what citizens would be disadvantaged to have to show a valid ID in order to register to vote and in order to vote?

For what purpose would anybody object to that?

 

[Avatar4321]

So Im wrong because you can not refute any of the facts in these court documents?

yeah pretty much sums up how the right thinks nowadays

No. You are wrong because you don't understand what facts are, what facts are significant, and what the facts actually say.

You have people from both the left and the right telling you that you are misrepresenting the facts, but somehow we are all Republican operatives trying to depress Democrat voters.

 

[Avatar4321]

Apologies if I'm repeating what somebody else has said as I didn't take time to read the whole thread.

A great deal of ID is required to get a U.S. passport. Valid ID is required to get a driver's license, rent a car, buy a house, take out a loan, get into any public or private school or any university, cash a check, even to use a credit card in some places, sign up for social security and/or medicare or public assistance, pick up theater tickets, board an airplane, get into numerous high security public or private places, or when the police stop you for some infraction of the law or at a check point.

So what citizens would be disadvantaged to have to show a valid ID in order to register to vote and in order to vote?

For what purpose would anybody object to that?

Notice TM doesn't address this chief question. She tries to avoid it at all costs by derailing her own thread.

 

[Care4all]

rnc in violation of consent decree



"The District Court then proceded to summerize its findings, stating:

I conclude the RNC has violated the consent decree"


Page four last paragraph

Geeez,

I wonder what it means that this case was later... DISMISSED!

law.com Law Dictionary

dismissal
n. 1) the act of voluntarily terminating a criminal prosecution or a lawsuit or one of its causes of action by one of the parties. 2) a judge's ruling that a lawsuit or criminal charge is terminated. 3) an appeals court's act of dismissing an appeal, letting the lower court decision stand. 4) the act of a plaintiff dismissing a lawsuit upon settling the case. Such a dismissal may be dismissal with prejudice, meaning it can never be filed again, or dismissal without prejudice, leaving open the possibility of bringing the suit again if the defendant does not follow through on the terms of the settlement.
See also: dismiss

law.com Law Dictionary

dismiss
v. the ruling by a judge that all or a portion (one or more of the causes of action) of the plaintiff's lawsuit is terminated (thrown out) at that point without further evidence or testimony. This judgment may be made before, during or at the end of a trial, when the judge becomes convinced that the plaintiff has not and cannot prove his/her/its case. This can be based on the complaint failing to allege a cause of action, on a motion for summary judgment, plaintiff's opening statement of what will be proved, or on some development in the evidence by either side which bars judgment for the plaintiff. The judge may dismiss on his own or upon motion by the defendant. The plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss a cause of action before or during trial if the case is settled, if it is not provable or trial strategy dictates getting rid of a weak claim. A defendant may be "dismissed" from a lawsuit, meaning the suit is dropped against that party.
See also: dismissal

Immie

I am coming in to this argument late...DID YOU post a link saying this case was dismissed immie? If not, where did you get this information?

 

[Jarhead]

So Im wrong because you can not refute any of the facts in these court documents?

yeah pretty much sums up how the right thinks nowadays

No. You are wrong because you don't understand what facts are, what facts are significant, and what the facts actually say.

You have people from both the left and the right telling you that you are misrepresenting the facts, but somehow we are all Republican operatives trying to depress Democrat voters.

Actually, based on something she said the other day, I bleieve she sees us as all Christians that have been lying to her for years.

 

[WillowTree]

rnc in violation of consent decree



"The District Court then proceded to summerize its findings, stating:

I conclude the RNC has violated the consent decree"


Page four last paragraph

Geeez,

I wonder what it means that this case was later... DISMISSED!

law.com Law Dictionary



law.com Law Dictionary

dismiss
v. the ruling by a judge that all or a portion (one or more of the causes of action) of the plaintiff's lawsuit is terminated (thrown out) at that point without further evidence or testimony. This judgment may be made before, during or at the end of a trial, when the judge becomes convinced that the plaintiff has not and cannot prove his/her/its case. This can be based on the complaint failing to allege a cause of action, on a motion for summary judgment, plaintiff's opening statement of what will be proved, or on some development in the evidence by either side which bars judgment for the plaintiff. The judge may dismiss on his own or upon motion by the defendant. The plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss a cause of action before or during trial if the case is settled, if it is not provable or trial strategy dictates getting rid of a weak claim. A defendant may be "dismissed" from a lawsuit, meaning the suit is dropped against that party.
See also: dismissal

Immie

I am coming in to this argument late...DID YOU post a link saying this case was dismissed immie? If not, where did you get this information?

he posted a link right ^^^^^^ there bimbo

 

[Care4all]

Geeez,

I wonder what it means that this case was later... DISMISSED!

law.com Law Dictionary



law.com Law Dictionary



Immie

I am coming in to this argument late...DID YOU post a link saying this case was dismissed immie? If not, where did you get this information?

he posted a link right ^^^^^^ there bimbo

what you talkin' about willow?
His link is for the legal definition of dismissal....sheesh!

 

[Immanuel]

rnc in violation of consent decree



"The District Court then proceded to summerize its findings, stating:

I conclude the RNC has violated the consent decree"


Page four last paragraph

Geeez,

I wonder what it means that this case was later... DISMISSED!

law.com Law Dictionary



law.com Law Dictionary

dismiss
v. the ruling by a judge that all or a portion (one or more of the causes of action) of the plaintiff's lawsuit is terminated (thrown out) at that point without further evidence or testimony. This judgment may be made before, during or at the end of a trial, when the judge becomes convinced that the plaintiff has not and cannot prove his/her/its case. This can be based on the complaint failing to allege a cause of action, on a motion for summary judgment, plaintiff's opening statement of what will be proved, or on some development in the evidence by either side which bars judgment for the plaintiff. The judge may dismiss on his own or upon motion by the defendant. The plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss a cause of action before or during trial if the case is settled, if it is not provable or trial strategy dictates getting rid of a weak claim. A defendant may be "dismissed" from a lawsuit, meaning the suit is dropped against that party.
See also: dismissal

Immie

I am coming in to this argument late...DID YOU post a link saying this case was dismissed immie? If not, where did you get this information?

Thank you for asking that question.

No, I did not... well, yes, actually I did. You see, TM posted the initial link that brought up the Malone case. Then when I told her the case had been dismissed she called me a liar at least a hundred (at a guess) times. I re-posted her the link for her and she has continued to call me a liar.

I'd rather not try to go back and find it, but she has posted the link many times. I don't know if a search produce a link title or not. But the link title was "DNC vs. RNC..." or something like that.

She has since posted the link as "proof" many times, but it only proves that she is wrong.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

rnc in violation of consent decree



"The District Court then proceded to summerize its findings, stating:

I conclude the RNC has violated the consent decree"


Page four last paragraph

Geeez,

I wonder what it means that this case was later... DISMISSED!

law.com Law Dictionary



law.com Law Dictionary

dismiss
v. the ruling by a judge that all or a portion (one or more of the causes of action) of the plaintiff's lawsuit is terminated (thrown out) at that point without further evidence or testimony. This judgment may be made before, during or at the end of a trial, when the judge becomes convinced that the plaintiff has not and cannot prove his/her/its case. This can be based on the complaint failing to allege a cause of action, on a motion for summary judgment, plaintiff's opening statement of what will be proved, or on some development in the evidence by either side which bars judgment for the plaintiff. The judge may dismiss on his own or upon motion by the defendant. The plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss a cause of action before or during trial if the case is settled, if it is not provable or trial strategy dictates getting rid of a weak claim. A defendant may be "dismissed" from a lawsuit, meaning the suit is dropped against that party.
See also: dismissal

Immie

I am coming in to this argument late...DID YOU post a link saying this case was dismissed immie? If not, where did you get this information?

Here ya go, Care:

DNC v. RNC Consent Decree | Brennan Center for Justice

Half way down on left hand side. Look under 2004(Ohio)

Immie

 

[SFC Ollie]

http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/Democracy/dnc.v.rnc/2004 Malone dismissal.pdf

 

[bucs90]

Yet more words right out of republican leaders mouths that keeping democrats from voting is there goal

So let me get this right.

Republicans want a system where ONE voter has to show ONE valid ID card so that they get their ONE vote in our system that allows a person to count as ONE vote.

Not doing this may allow ONE person to cast MANY votes, although the idea is that ONE person equals ONE vote.

So........why are Dem's opposed to this? Is there a problem with verifying ONE person counts as ONE vote????????????????

 

[Care4all]

Geeez,

I wonder what it means that this case was later... DISMISSED!

law.com Law Dictionary



law.com Law Dictionary



Immie

I am coming in to this argument late...DID YOU post a link saying this case was dismissed immie? If not, where did you get this information?

Here ya go, Care:

DNC v. RNC Consent Decree | Brennan Center for Justice

Half way down on left hand side. Look under 2004(Ohio)

Immie

Do you understand the terms of this dismissal and do you realize it was the DNC that requested it...the plaintiff under the rule below

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule41.htm?

 

[Foxfyre]

Yet more words right out of republican leaders mouths that keeping democrats from voting is there goal

So let me get this right.

Republicans want a system where ONE voter has to show ONE valid ID card so that they get their ONE vote in our system that allows a person to count as ONE vote.

Not doing this may allow ONE person to cast MANY votes, although the idea is that ONE person equals ONE vote.

So........why are Dem's opposed to this? Is there a problem with verifying ONE person counts as ONE vote????????????????

Not just Republicans. Independents and Greens and Democrats and everybody who wants the process to be honest and have integrity are in favor of one person, one vote. And I am guessing the vast majority of registered voters are in favor of showing ID at the polling place.

I honestly cannot think of any legitimate reason why anybody would object to that unless they did want to be able to circumvent the process and get other than legitimate votes into the ballot box.

I am open to be persuaded otherwise though.