Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Lol, I kinda knew you were going to say Tyson. I don't know of any repubs who defend their practices, but you do know the Tysons are big time Clinton supporters, right?
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Right, my point was, the left are the only ones saying it. I listen to a lot of both right and left wing radio, I've never heard anyone on the right say anything other than they want proper legal voters only to be able to vote. The left are the only ones saying the right are trying to suppress the vote. You will say any attempt by the right to maintain fair and honest elections as an attempt to suppress votes.
If you don’t see it it’s because you don’t want toWhat employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
My republican buddy at the park said the same thing these intellectually dishonest Republicans said. "show me that the Republican politicians tried to purge the votes right before an election.If you don’t see it it’s because you don’t want toWhat employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
You don't have to take our word for it. Every single court of law at state and federal level all the way up to the Supreme court has seen these things exactly the way that we do - flagrant and blatant attempts to suppress the minority and poor vote.
In 2018, when these close to the election voter suppression measures were being implemented throughout the run up to the mid-terms, court after court declared the actions of Republicans as being unconstitutional, and improper, but said that to change things now, so close to the election, would be even more confusing to voters.
For example, the 50,000 voter registrations in Georgia which were thrown out due to "exact match laws" were allowed to vote provisionally, but Stacey Abrams lost the governorship by fewer than 50,000 votes, so the ploy was successful - that time. It also invigorated voter registration efforts in Georgia, and lead to the state turning blue in 2020.
Everyone confirms their identity when they register. Isn't that enough?rule, regulation, or law that might simply confirm a voter's identity that those of you on the left wouldn't scream "racism!" over? Can those of you crowding to the left imagine any manner whatsoever that performed and/or was intended ONLY to ensure that a voter - any voter, every voter, regardless of race - is who he or she says he or she is that would not evoke cries of "racism!!!!!" from you?
Everyone confirms their identity when they register. Isn't that enough?rule, regulation, or law that might simply confirm a voter's identity that those of you on the left wouldn't scream "racism!" over? Can those of you crowding to the left imagine any manner whatsoever that performed and/or was intended ONLY to ensure that a voter - any voter, every voter, regardless of race - is who he or she says he or she is that would not evoke cries of "racism!!!!!" from you?
Georgia legislature passed a law instituting stringent new requirements for mail-in ballots, sharply reduced the number of ballot drop boxes and voting hours — and even made it a crime to offer food or water to residents waiting to vote at the polls.I consider myself fairly liberal and am against anything that can (1) subjectively deprive somebody of their vote without the right to appeal or (2) be maliciously used on election day to cause backup of voters waiting in line.
As far as racism goes, I'm no expert on racial customs so I do my best to stick to specifics. For example, some in Georgia's legislature desired to ban Sunday voting and called for weekend voting only taking place on Saturdays. Such change didn't strike me in any manner at first because I had never heard of the practice of 'Souls to the Polls' taking place after Sunday church service.
Voter ID=1040rule, regulation, or law that might simply confirm a voter's identity that those of you on the left wouldn't scream "racism!" over? Can those of you crowding to the left imagine any manner whatsoever that performed and/or was intended ONLY to ensure that a voter - any voter, every voter, regardless of race - is who he or she says he or she is that would not evoke cries of "racism!!!!!" from you?
Ye
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Lol, I kinda knew you were going to say Tyson. I don't know of any repubs who defend their practices, but you do know the Tysons are big time Clinton supporters, right?
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Right, my point was, the left are the only ones saying it. I listen to a lot of both right and left wing radio, I've never heard anyone on the right say anything other than they want proper legal voters only to be able to vote. The left are the only ones saying the right are trying to suppress the vote. You will say any attempt by the right to maintain fair and honest elections as an attempt to suppress votes.
Yes they give to both parties so they cover all their bases.
Ok let's talk about Yarrabee Farms.
Man charged in Tibbetts' death worked at Iowa farm linked to prominent Republican
"This individual has worked at our farms for four years, was vetted through the government's E-Verify system," said farm owner about Cristhian Rivera.www.desmoinesregister.com
During a news conference Tuesday, authorities said Rivera was employed and lived in the area for four to seven years, but they would not disclose his employer
www.latimes.com
But none of the stories say that. All of them, as far as I'm aware, all say that voters were sent post cards for them to return which would have kept them on the roles.My republican buddy at the park said the same thing these intellectually dishonest Republicans said. "show me that the Republican politicians tried to purge the votes right before an election.If you don’t see it it’s because you don’t want toWhat employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
You don't have to take our word for it. Every single court of law at state and federal level all the way up to the Supreme court has seen these things exactly the way that we do - flagrant and blatant attempts to suppress the minority and poor vote.
In 2018, when these close to the election voter suppression measures were being implemented throughout the run up to the mid-terms, court after court declared the actions of Republicans as being unconstitutional, and improper, but said that to change things now, so close to the election, would be even more confusing to voters.
For example, the 50,000 voter registrations in Georgia which were thrown out due to "exact match laws" were allowed to vote provisionally, but Stacey Abrams lost the governorship by fewer than 50,000 votes, so the ploy was successful - that time. It also invigorated voter registration efforts in Georgia, and lead to the state turning blue in 2020.
I always ask, "would me proving that change your position?" If not why should I waste my time. I know they've tried it. You know. The Supreme Court knows. The only ones who don't know don't care.
Ye
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Lol, I kinda knew you were going to say Tyson. I don't know of any repubs who defend their practices, but you do know the Tysons are big time Clinton supporters, right?
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Right, my point was, the left are the only ones saying it. I listen to a lot of both right and left wing radio, I've never heard anyone on the right say anything other than they want proper legal voters only to be able to vote. The left are the only ones saying the right are trying to suppress the vote. You will say any attempt by the right to maintain fair and honest elections as an attempt to suppress votes.
Yes they give to both parties so they cover all their bases.
Ok let's talk about Yarrabee Farms.
Man charged in Tibbetts' death worked at Iowa farm linked to prominent Republican
"This individual has worked at our farms for four years, was vetted through the government's E-Verify system," said farm owner about Cristhian Rivera.www.desmoinesregister.com
The story doesn't actually say rivera was employed by the lang family. The story is a bit confusing. It says yarabee farms is owned by several people, and:
During a news conference Tuesday, authorities said Rivera was employed and lived in the area for four to seven years, but they would not disclose his employer
So, while the craig family are one of the owners of the farm, the story doesn't actually name them as the ones who employed Rivera.
It also said that he was vetted through the e verify system, so apparently the government knew he was working in the country illegally.
I'm not sure what you want me to say about this story? Was he here illegally? Yes, and by that standard, he should not be employed, but, it is what it is. Does the story ever actually link Rivera with the lang family? Or just that Rivera was employed at a farm where the lang family was one of the owners?
Yes, the Tysons donate to both candidates, but there is a closer tie there, way back when, there I recall a story about a Tyson scandal with the Clinton's.
Also, apparently don Tyson was a big driving force behind Bill Clinton.
Clinton Ties to Tyson Scion Still Drawing Critics' Fire : Politics: Some allege Arkansan got special treatment from Agriculture, Commerce departments. He denies it.
He is an unlikely looking millionaire kingmaker--a balding, impish man whose trademark khaki work uniform belies his wealth and power.
John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
Ye
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Lol, I kinda knew you were going to say Tyson. I don't know of any repubs who defend their practices, but you do know the Tysons are big time Clinton supporters, right?
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Right, my point was, the left are the only ones saying it. I listen to a lot of both right and left wing radio, I've never heard anyone on the right say anything other than they want proper legal voters only to be able to vote. The left are the only ones saying the right are trying to suppress the vote. You will say any attempt by the right to maintain fair and honest elections as an attempt to suppress votes.
Yes they give to both parties so they cover all their bases.
Ok let's talk about Yarrabee Farms.
Man charged in Tibbetts' death worked at Iowa farm linked to prominent Republican
"This individual has worked at our farms for four years, was vetted through the government's E-Verify system," said farm owner about Cristhian Rivera.www.desmoinesregister.com
The story doesn't actually say rivera was employed by the lang family. The story is a bit confusing. It says yarabee farms is owned by several people, and:
During a news conference Tuesday, authorities said Rivera was employed and lived in the area for four to seven years, but they would not disclose his employer
So, while the craig family are one of the owners of the farm, the story doesn't actually name them as the ones who employed Rivera.
It also said that he was vetted through the e verify system, so apparently the government knew he was working in the country illegally.
I'm not sure what you want me to say about this story? Was he here illegally? Yes, and by that standard, he should not be employed, but, it is what it is. Does the story ever actually link Rivera with the lang family? Or just that Rivera was employed at a farm where the lang family was one of the owners?
Yes, the Tysons donate to both candidates, but there is a closer tie there, way back when, there I recall a story about a Tyson scandal with the Clinton's.
Also, apparently don Tyson was a big driving force behind Bill Clinton.
Clinton Ties to Tyson Scion Still Drawing Critics' Fire : Politics: Some allege Arkansan got special treatment from Agriculture, Commerce departments. He denies it.
He is an unlikely looking millionaire kingmaker--a balding, impish man whose trademark khaki work uniform belies his wealth and power.
You mean IDs that are easy to fake. That defeats the purpose of legal ID.I would be ok with ID if they allowed a broad array of photo id's instead of the very restricted ones states are trying to pass.
...
Sounds to me that for you Republicans are innocent until proven guilty without a shadow of a doubt. ...
Ye
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Lol, I kinda knew you were going to say Tyson. I don't know of any repubs who defend their practices, but you do know the Tysons are big time Clinton supporters, right?
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Right, my point was, the left are the only ones saying it. I listen to a lot of both right and left wing radio, I've never heard anyone on the right say anything other than they want proper legal voters only to be able to vote. The left are the only ones saying the right are trying to suppress the vote. You will say any attempt by the right to maintain fair and honest elections as an attempt to suppress votes.
Yes they give to both parties so they cover all their bases.
Ok let's talk about Yarrabee Farms.
Man charged in Tibbetts' death worked at Iowa farm linked to prominent Republican
"This individual has worked at our farms for four years, was vetted through the government's E-Verify system," said farm owner about Cristhian Rivera.www.desmoinesregister.com
The story doesn't actually say rivera was employed by the lang family. The story is a bit confusing. It says yarabee farms is owned by several people, and:
During a news conference Tuesday, authorities said Rivera was employed and lived in the area for four to seven years, but they would not disclose his employer
So, while the craig family are one of the owners of the farm, the story doesn't actually name them as the ones who employed Rivera.
It also said that he was vetted through the e verify system, so apparently the government knew he was working in the country illegally.
I'm not sure what you want me to say about this story? Was he here illegally? Yes, and by that standard, he should not be employed, but, it is what it is. Does the story ever actually link Rivera with the lang family? Or just that Rivera was employed at a farm where the lang family was one of the owners?
Yes, the Tysons donate to both candidates, but there is a closer tie there, way back when, there I recall a story about a Tyson scandal with the Clinton's.
Also, apparently don Tyson was a big driving force behind Bill Clinton.
Clinton Ties to Tyson Scion Still Drawing Critics' Fire : Politics: Some allege Arkansan got special treatment from Agriculture, Commerce departments. He denies it.
He is an unlikely looking millionaire kingmaker--a balding, impish man whose trademark khaki work uniform belies his wealth and power.
Sounds to me that for you Republicans are innocent until proven guilty without a shadow of a doubt. Like black jurors in the OJ trial or R Kelly trial.
You're very read to believe Clinton was pals with Tyson. Same way I bet you overlooked the fact Trump was palling around with Jeffrey Epstein.
Also consider Trump himself was an illegal employer well into his presidency. He knew it, I knew it, many new it, and he only stopped when he heard a story was coming out that was going to expose him. So one day in 2019 he let all his illegals go.
Don't be naive. That Republican owned farm knew it was hiring illegals. And that's not a sactuary city where it happened. So stop crying about sactuary cities when corporations all across RED STATE America are hiring illegals to do jobs Americans would love to do.
Ye
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Lol, I kinda knew you were going to say Tyson. I don't know of any repubs who defend their practices, but you do know the Tysons are big time Clinton supporters, right?
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Right, my point was, the left are the only ones saying it. I listen to a lot of both right and left wing radio, I've never heard anyone on the right say anything other than they want proper legal voters only to be able to vote. The left are the only ones saying the right are trying to suppress the vote. You will say any attempt by the right to maintain fair and honest elections as an attempt to suppress votes.
Yes they give to both parties so they cover all their bases.
Ok let's talk about Yarrabee Farms.
Man charged in Tibbetts' death worked at Iowa farm linked to prominent Republican
"This individual has worked at our farms for four years, was vetted through the government's E-Verify system," said farm owner about Cristhian Rivera.www.desmoinesregister.com
The story doesn't actually say rivera was employed by the lang family. The story is a bit confusing. It says yarabee farms is owned by several people, and:
During a news conference Tuesday, authorities said Rivera was employed and lived in the area for four to seven years, but they would not disclose his employer
So, while the craig family are one of the owners of the farm, the story doesn't actually name them as the ones who employed Rivera.
It also said that he was vetted through the e verify system, so apparently the government knew he was working in the country illegally.
I'm not sure what you want me to say about this story? Was he here illegally? Yes, and by that standard, he should not be employed, but, it is what it is. Does the story ever actually link Rivera with the lang family? Or just that Rivera was employed at a farm where the lang family was one of the owners?
Yes, the Tysons donate to both candidates, but there is a closer tie there, way back when, there I recall a story about a Tyson scandal with the Clinton's.
Also, apparently don Tyson was a big driving force behind Bill Clinton.
Clinton Ties to Tyson Scion Still Drawing Critics' Fire : Politics: Some allege Arkansan got special treatment from Agriculture, Commerce departments. He denies it.
He is an unlikely looking millionaire kingmaker--a balding, impish man whose trademark khaki work uniform belies his wealth and power.
I think later the company admitted they did not use Everify. What would you say to that?
It didn't happen. I was using it as an example.of what could happen under the system of verification he mentioned in his post.John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
And where did this happen?
Ye
What employers are you referring to?Another interesting thought I just had on Republican hypocrisy. Every time we find an illegal employer Republicans defend them saying they were shown fake id's and there is no way for them to know the ID's weren't real.No, its not about stopping poor people from voting, its about making sure legal people are voting.I don't know. They ask a couple questions. What's your address for example. Anyways, you do realize if this happens it maybe happens once or twice in each state. Not even. So why are you so worried about this?Don't know, my point was, its that easy for someone to commit voter fraud if all you have is a list, and someone's word that they are being honest about who they are.Is that happening?John Jones walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"In my area they have a paper list of all registered voters in the district. You walk in, they ask your name, you tell them, they cross off your name, you go vote.
Works great.
"OK Mr Davidson, we got you on the list"
A few hours later...
John Jones walks in "hello, I'm John Jones, and I'm here to vote"
"OK Mr Jones, we got you on the list"
A few hours later....
Dave Davidson walks in: "hello, I'm Dave Davidson, and I'm here to vote"
"I'm sorry, Mr Davidson, we show that you have already voted, I'm afraid you can't vote because we have no way of proving you didn't vote"
It's more likely you are just trying to make it harder for poor people to vote.
If someone is a registered voter they should be able to get an absentee ballot no reason needed and they should be able to mail in their vote. And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
If these new rules stopped a lot of Trump voters from voting I bet you wouldn't be pushing for these new voter laws. I bet you'd want to make it easier for them to vote. And then maybe I would be like you. I'd be against the masses voting because "they are stupid".
Sorry but picking a Republican or Democrat to lead isn't about being smart. For a rich person, it's smart to vote GOP. For a poor person, it's smart to vote Democratic. It's the GOP's responsibility to represent poor and stupid people too not just smart and rich people.
So why are you so worried about this?
Why are you not worried about this? Do you not want to make sure that only legal and legitimate votes are counted?
And I sort of liked it that because of the pandemic they mailed EVERYONE an absentee ballot. It showed a lot of people will vote if they can mail in vote.
Sure, its convenient, but surely you can see the flaw in blindly sending out millions of ballots, especially when you don't allow voter role purges. Many ballots will find their way to the wrong people, former addresses, people who have died, and some people will use that as a way to commit fraud because they will send those illegitimate ballots back in, and nobody will ever be able to catch them.
1. Voter purges are not only allowed, they're encouraged. But like all things, the devil is in the details. Purges without notification, and done close to elections are barred. Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
2. All mail in ballots require ID. The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
3. Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
4. In the instances where there have been large cases of voter fraud, the voter ID laws being proposed by Republicans would have had absolutely no impact in preventing these voter fraud cases.Ongoing purges of names with notifications being mailed out, and a reasonable time frame for the voter to respond, a second and "final notice" of purge, all done with no names being removed within 6 months of an election, should be SOP.
I'm all for giving people enough time to respond to a purge notice. No argument there, but, if they send you multiple notices and you fail to respond, you can't blame that on the system.
The difference between Dems and Republicans, is that Dems will accept all forms of ID, and Republicans want very limited forms of ID and verifications, which are designed to limit specific blocks of voters.
I'll be honest, I agree that we should not accept ALL forms of ID. Its too easy to fake an ID these days. I think the form of ID should be a legal, verified ID, such as a DL, or other state or government issued ID. For those that have trouble acquiring one of these ID, I think the state should help them get it, and it should be free.
Mail in voting has been in place since the Civil War. There has never been any cases of significant voter fraud using mail in ballots.
Only in select areas and in most cases its a "by request" absentee ballot. There has never been a nation wide mass ballot mailing such as the dems are suggesting.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Makes me think even more that this is just an unnecessary step or hoop Republicans are trying to make people jump through in order to vote, because they don't want them to vote. They want to make it harder so less people vote.
So if it's so easy for illegals to get fake id's that employers accept, why wouldn't poll workers accept their fake id's too?
Thats a good point. Its why I'm not in favor of allowing any and all IDs as verification, but a specific ID, that you have to.prove your citizenship to acquire and if you have a hard time getting the ID the state can assist you in finding the appropriate documents to prove your citizenship.
And no, don't want to make it harder for legal citizens to vote, just want to make it so that only citizens can vote, and that no dead people, dogs, or people who get someone else's ballot in the mail are able to vote.
Why does the left keep insisting its about voter suppression? I've yet to hear anyone from the right say they wanted to prevent people from voting. Only YOU folks are saying that.
Tyson Foods, Koch Industries - ICE workers pulled 700 illegals out of two plants owned by these billionaire owned companies. And not for the first time either. These companies, with all of their resources, are consistent targets of ICE enforcement raids, but neither has ever been charged with hiring illegal workers. Their claims have always been they were presented with fake ID's.
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Lol, I kinda knew you were going to say Tyson. I don't know of any repubs who defend their practices, but you do know the Tysons are big time Clinton supporters, right?
You have yet to hear anyone on the right to say they want to prevent people from voting because THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Right, my point was, the left are the only ones saying it. I listen to a lot of both right and left wing radio, I've never heard anyone on the right say anything other than they want proper legal voters only to be able to vote. The left are the only ones saying the right are trying to suppress the vote. You will say any attempt by the right to maintain fair and honest elections as an attempt to suppress votes.
Yes they give to both parties so they cover all their bases.
Ok let's talk about Yarrabee Farms.
Man charged in Tibbetts' death worked at Iowa farm linked to prominent Republican
"This individual has worked at our farms for four years, was vetted through the government's E-Verify system," said farm owner about Cristhian Rivera.www.desmoinesregister.com
The story doesn't actually say rivera was employed by the lang family. The story is a bit confusing. It says yarabee farms is owned by several people, and:
During a news conference Tuesday, authorities said Rivera was employed and lived in the area for four to seven years, but they would not disclose his employer
So, while the craig family are one of the owners of the farm, the story doesn't actually name them as the ones who employed Rivera.
It also said that he was vetted through the e verify system, so apparently the government knew he was working in the country illegally.
I'm not sure what you want me to say about this story? Was he here illegally? Yes, and by that standard, he should not be employed, but, it is what it is. Does the story ever actually link Rivera with the lang family? Or just that Rivera was employed at a farm where the lang family was one of the owners?
Yes, the Tysons donate to both candidates, but there is a closer tie there, way back when, there I recall a story about a Tyson scandal with the Clinton's.
Also, apparently don Tyson was a big driving force behind Bill Clinton.
Clinton Ties to Tyson Scion Still Drawing Critics' Fire : Politics: Some allege Arkansan got special treatment from Agriculture, Commerce departments. He denies it.
He is an unlikely looking millionaire kingmaker--a balding, impish man whose trademark khaki work uniform belies his wealth and power.
Sounds to me that for you Republicans are innocent until proven guilty without a shadow of a doubt. Like black jurors in the OJ trial or R Kelly trial.
You're very read to believe Clinton was pals with Tyson. Same way I bet you overlooked the fact Trump was palling around with Jeffrey Epstein.
Also consider Trump himself was an illegal employer well into his presidency. He knew it, I knew it, many new it, and he only stopped when he heard a story was coming out that was going to expose him. So one day in 2019 he let all his illegals go.
Don't be naive. That Republican owned farm knew it was hiring illegals. And that's not a sactuary city where it happened. So stop crying about sactuary cities when corporations all across RED STATE America are hiring illegals to do jobs Americans would love to do.
innocent until proven guilty without a shadow of a doubt.
Same way I bet you overlooked the fact Trump was palling around with Jeffrey Epstein.
Republican owned farm knew it was hiring illegals. And that's not a sactuary city where it happened. So stop crying about sactuary cities when corporations all across RED STATE America are hiring illegals to do jobs Americans would love to do.
