If you can't win fair you have ballots with democrats only

[bigrebnc1775]

Then WHY did you not put that in your OP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That would have saved PAGES of confusion. Were they affiliated with the school or were the students given something from the school if they went with them.

They were given Ice cream. I posted the link it's up to others to read.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I looked I didn't see a thread. If this is true why didn't the school do their job and stop it?

Because there is nothing illegal about that. Why do they have to stop it?

Why is there a lawsuit?
From the title
Lawsuit: CPS pushing Democrats

Because the guy filing the lawsuit think the school gave them the sample ballots. Just because a lawsuit is filed doesn't indicate guilt.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Because there is nothing illegal about that. Why do they have to stop it?

Why is there a lawsuit?
From the title
Lawsuit: CPS pushing Democrats

Because the guy filing the lawsuit think the school gave them the sample ballots. Just because a lawsuit is filed doesn't indicate guilt.

From the link

The suit alleges those actions violated a 2002 agreement between CPS and COAST where the school agreed it wouldn’t allow school property or employees to be used for “advocating the election or defeat of candidates for public office.”

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I agree that it's bad that the military ballots have not been sent out by a number of states...

But I don't believe its a Democrat conspiracy either.

I don't think it is necessarily a conspiracy, but I do believe that roughly 70% of the Military vote does go to Republicans. So the Results will be felt mostly by Republican Candidates.

Military ballots make up a small fraction of overseas ballots (all of which were not sent out) - and there's no reason to think those other ballots would be more likely to go Republican - particularly because the states in question are solidly Blue states. It's a paperwork fuckup, not a political move.

I call BULLSHIT. You see absentee ballots to the military have been going out for quite some years now, yet in close races where the Democrats may lose it seems there is always a "paper work" problem that rears its ugly head.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

From the link or did you not comprehend that part?

"Sample Ballot" being the key words here. As in, a piece of campaign literature. I don't know why you're having such a hard time with this...

I don't know why you said this

Republicans were on the ballot. So were Democrats.

Let's try this again.

Do you know the difference between the words "sample ballot" and "ballot"?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I don't think it is necessarily a conspiracy, but I do believe that roughly 70% of the Military vote does go to Republicans. So the Results will be felt mostly by Republican Candidates.

Military ballots make up a small fraction of overseas ballots (all of which were not sent out) - and there's no reason to think those other ballots would be more likely to go Republican - particularly because the states in question are solidly Blue states. It's a paperwork fuckup, not a political move.

I call BULLSHIT. You see absentee ballots to the military have been going out for quite some years now, yet in close races where the Democrats may lose it seems there is always a "paper work" problem that rears its ugly head.

There's no "close" race in NY.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Why is there a lawsuit?
From the title
Lawsuit: CPS pushing Democrats

It's a frivolous lawsuit.

OF course it is, how did I know you were going to say this?
From the link

The suit alleges those actions violated a 2002 agreement between CPS and COAST where the school agreed it wouldn’t allow school property or employees to be used for “advocating the election or defeat of candidates for public office.”

"Alleges" is the key word here. Do you believe every lawsuit?

 

[FA_Q2]

Then WHY did you not put that in your OP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That would have saved PAGES of confusion. Were they affiliated with the school or were the students given something from the school if they went with them.

They were given Ice cream. I posted the link it's up to others to read.

It does not indicate who gave them the ice cream. It is likely the campaigners gave it to them and it is no different than campaigners do on the R side as well. The biggest difference here is that the D's are targeting youth - the LEAST likely voters out of the bunch.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's a frivolous lawsuit.

OF course it is, how did I know you were going to say this?
From the link

The suit alleges those actions violated a 2002 agreement between CPS and COAST where the school agreed it wouldn’t allow school property or employees to be used for “advocating the election or defeat of candidates for public office.”

"Alleges" is the key word here. Do you believe every lawsuit?

The word Allege is always used even if the person is guilty until after the conviction

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Then WHY did you not put that in your OP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That would have saved PAGES of confusion. Were they affiliated with the school or were the students given something from the school if they went with them.

They were given Ice cream. I posted the link it's up to others to read.

It does not indicate who gave them the ice cream. It is likely the campaigners gave it to them and it is no different than campaigners do on the R side as well. The biggest difference here is that the D's are targeting youth - the LEAST likely voters out of the bunch.

It was a school supervised field trip, who do you think took them for Ice cream?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Looks like the democrats are up to a new tatic of cheating.

Three van loads of Hughes High students were taken last week – during school hours – to vote and given sample ballots only for Democratic candidates and then taken for ice cream, a Monday lawsuit alleges.

Lawsuit: CPS pushing Democrats | cincinnati.com | Cincinnati.Com

"Looks like the democrats are up to a new tatic of cheating."

Does this one count?

"Several Democratic presidential candidates, including frontrunner Howard Dean, also support felon voting.

A cynic may be forgiven for suspecting that the motivation behind such support has as much to do with political expediency as principle.

Several recent studies contend that even allowing for their expected lower participation rates, the restoration of voting rights to felons would have shifted the outcome of a number of recent congressional elections. This tantalizes the felon-vote movement. But the movement receives its greatest inspiration from the 2000 election fiasco in Florida. Felon-vote proponents claim that had felons who have completed their sentences been permitted to vote in Florida, Gore would be president today. And they're probably right.

The restoration of voting rights to felons is decidedly unpopular with the electorate. For example, in 1998, more than 80 percent of Utah voters approved a measure to bar inmates from voting. In 2000, the Massachusetts electorate, among the most liberal in the country, voted for a constitutional amendment barring felon inmates from voting.

But overwhelming public opposition has not deterred felon-vote advocates. They've simply resorted to a receptive judiciary to achieve their objective.

As David Lampo notes, these distinctions are immaterial to many felon-vote advocates. Their aim is nothing less than the wholesale restoration of voting rights to all convicts — and that suggests an agenda that's more partisan than altruistic.

Peter Kirsanow on Felon & Election 2004 on National Review Online
(emphasis mine)


Seems to be a theme here,

1. Citizens are opposed.

2. Let the courts rubber stamp a left-wing agenda.

3. A Democrat strategy.

Allowing felons to vote is a delicate situation because there's nothing in the Constitution that bars prisoners from voting. Currently it's left up to each state to decide, which is probably where the issue will remain.

I don't have a dog in this fight, so please don't put up six pages of 'proof' as to why they should be denied the right to vote. Okay?

This is not the first time that you have shown a real fear of a full, and documented answer/rebuttal.

1. When I feel the urge, I will bold specific parts...

2. Choose to read, scan, or skip

3. My manner of response will remain my decision.

Now, if I can answer your post...I also feel this is a states rights issue...and I'm guessing that your somewhat pointed response is based on the flashing red arrows indicating how the Democrat Party will stop at any nothing, ethical or not.

Did I find the nugget hidden in that mine?

 

[MaggieMae]

It is illegal in most jurisdictions for campaign workers to be within 50 feet of a polling place. Some places even farther away. Depends on local State laws but I am pretty sure they all ban campaign workers from being IN the polling place.

Read the article. They were given literature by a staffer from a campaign OUTSIDE the polling place.

This is a non-story. Seriously, you guys are so damn quick to flip the "outrage" switch.

Seems like much to do about nothing. However I am upset about the Failure to send out Military ballots story.

That is a real story, and some REAL BS.

That seems to happen a lot, and I don't understand it. If someone thinks it will benefit one party over another and deliberately does this, it's obviously gonna come back to bite them. So why? I think it's just another glitch in the system which, by now, should be a smooth operation. Final lection results in some states may well have to be postponed because of this nonsense.

 

[MaggieMae]

I doubt you have any knownledge of anything you discuss. But don't let me stop you clown.

Well, either she's right, or you just can't read - the article discusses sample ballots, which are a type of campaign literature, that was handed out by a campaign staffer outside the polling place. Not ballots, which is how you cast a vote.

So try reading your OP again.

OF course yada yada yada.
Remember kiddies vote democrat and you will have ice cream everyday. and and vote early and vote often. Yep.

And kissing babies is different somehow? Why do you think candidates hit the road and campaign? To influence people to vote for them. A no-brainer. Both parties engage in attempts to manipulate votes. Was it okay that the RNC sent out phony census mailers designed to look like the official Census data collection form?

 

[MaggieMae]

I looked I didn't see a thread. If this is true why didn't the school do their job and stop it?

Because there is nothing illegal about that. Why do they have to stop it?

Why is there a lawsuit?
From the title
Lawsuit: CPS pushing Democrats

To get people like you all riled up. In the end, even if they lose (which they will), they've succeeded in the mission.

 

[MaggieMae]

"Looks like the democrats are up to a new tatic of cheating."

Does this one count?

"Several Democratic presidential candidates, including frontrunner Howard Dean, also support felon voting.

A cynic may be forgiven for suspecting that the motivation behind such support has as much to do with political expediency as principle.

Several recent studies contend that even allowing for their expected lower participation rates, the restoration of voting rights to felons would have shifted the outcome of a number of recent congressional elections. This tantalizes the felon-vote movement. But the movement receives its greatest inspiration from the 2000 election fiasco in Florida. Felon-vote proponents claim that had felons who have completed their sentences been permitted to vote in Florida, Gore would be president today. And they're probably right.

The restoration of voting rights to felons is decidedly unpopular with the electorate. For example, in 1998, more than 80 percent of Utah voters approved a measure to bar inmates from voting. In 2000, the Massachusetts electorate, among the most liberal in the country, voted for a constitutional amendment barring felon inmates from voting.

But overwhelming public opposition has not deterred felon-vote advocates. They've simply resorted to a receptive judiciary to achieve their objective.

As David Lampo notes, these distinctions are immaterial to many felon-vote advocates. Their aim is nothing less than the wholesale restoration of voting rights to all convicts — and that suggests an agenda that's more partisan than altruistic.

Peter Kirsanow on Felon & Election 2004 on National Review Online
(emphasis mine)


Seems to be a theme here,

1. Citizens are opposed.

2. Let the courts rubber stamp a left-wing agenda.

3. A Democrat strategy.

Allowing felons to vote is a delicate situation because there's nothing in the Constitution that bars prisoners from voting. Currently it's left up to each state to decide, which is probably where the issue will remain.

I don't have a dog in this fight, so please don't put up six pages of 'proof' as to why they should be denied the right to vote. Okay?

This is not the first time that you have shown a real fear of a full, and documented answer/rebuttal.

1. When I feel the urge, I will bold specific parts...

2. Choose to read, scan, or skip

3. My manner of response will remain my decision.

Now, if I can answer your post...I also feel this is a states rights issue...and I'm guessing that your somewhat pointed response is based on the flashing red arrows indicating how the Democrat Party will stop at any nothing, ethical or not.

Did I find the nugget hidden in that mine?

Nope. I was teasing you. I thought you knew the difference by now. As I said, I really don't spend a lot of time dwelling on this issue. In fact, I spend zero time on it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Because there is nothing illegal about that. Why do they have to stop it?

Why is there a lawsuit?
From the title
Lawsuit: CPS pushing Democrats

To get people like you all riled up. In the end, even if they lose (which they will), they've succeeded in the mission.

OH yeah thats the reason. What a joke.