Rat Voters Suddenly UNregistering....How Come?

[Faun]

Because he lied, there is no reason to hunt for evidence, which preliminary searches indicate does not exist, to prove him right.

So you are saying because there was NO evidence of collusion by Trump, there was no reason for an investigation or a special council then?
So there is no reason for an investigation to try to find anything at all about TRUMP huh?

If that were true, you'd might have a point. But there was evidence of possible collusion to warrant an investigation.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Because he lied, there is no reason to hunt for evidence, which preliminary searches indicate does not exist, to prove him right.

So you are saying because there was NO evidence of collusion by Trump, there was no reason for an investigation or a special council then?
So there is no reason for an investigation to try to find anything at all about TRUMP huh?

If that were true, you'd might have a point. But there was evidence of possible collusion to warrant an investigation.

And that would be what????

 

[Faun]

If Trump can't prove what he said without all 50 states turning over all the information he wants, then he was bullshitting when he said it.

No, he's attempting to show the proof of his statement.

Exactly my point. He made that claim without proof. It was bullshit, just as many on the left said it was.

Okay, let's say that's true. What would be wrong with him trying to prove it now?

Because he lied, there is no reason to hunt for evidence, which preliminary searches indicate does not exist, to prove him right.

Voter fraud is like speeders on the highway. If people are traveling 30 miles over the speed limit, but nobody is there to stop them, how could you prove anybody was breaking the law?

There might be millions who are voting illegally, or there may only be a few. Nobody knows because there is little oversight when it comes to voting.

My state is one of the worst. They allow all people to vote by mail. So what's stopping some radical from going into mailboxes, collecting those mail ballots, and filling them out themselves? They also allow you to bring in a utility bill to vote. Heck, I don't even have any fancy art program on my computer, but even I could take my electric bill, scan it, and replace the name and address with any name and address I desire.

What a dumbass analogy. Unlike driving down a road, there is a paper trail of who voted. Four states, California, North Carolina, Ohio and Tennessee, conducted investigations into election fraud in 2016. That covered over 29 million votes, or almost 23% of the entire nation. They found relatively few cases of election fraud, ranging in occurrence from .00003 and .000005. Out for 29 million votes, they found just 324 [possible] cases.

Just the Facts on Fraud

 

[Nia88]

Because people don't want their personal data out there. This voter information request is a privacy issue.

 

[Faun]

Because he lied, there is no reason to hunt for evidence, which preliminary searches indicate does not exist, to prove him right.

So you are saying because there was NO evidence of collusion by Trump, there was no reason for an investigation or a special council then?
So there is no reason for an investigation to try to find anything at all about TRUMP huh?

If that were true, you'd might have a point. But there was evidence of possible collusion to warrant an investigation.

And that would be what????

For one, Roger Stone discussing Podesta's "time in the barrel" with a Russian hacker days before Podesta's emails were dumped on the Internet.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, he's attempting to show the proof of his statement.

Exactly my point. He made that claim without proof. It was bullshit, just as many on the left said it was.

Okay, let's say that's true. What would be wrong with him trying to prove it now?

Because he lied, there is no reason to hunt for evidence, which preliminary searches indicate does not exist, to prove him right.

Voter fraud is like speeders on the highway. If people are traveling 30 miles over the speed limit, but nobody is there to stop them, how could you prove anybody was breaking the law?

There might be millions who are voting illegally, or there may only be a few. Nobody knows because there is little oversight when it comes to voting.

My state is one of the worst. They allow all people to vote by mail. So what's stopping some radical from going into mailboxes, collecting those mail ballots, and filling them out themselves? They also allow you to bring in a utility bill to vote. Heck, I don't even have any fancy art program on my computer, but even I could take my electric bill, scan it, and replace the name and address with any name and address I desire.

What a dumbass analogy. Unlike driving down a road, there is a paper trail of who voted. Four states, California, North Carolina, Ohio and Tennessee, conducted investigations into election fraud in 2016. That covered over 29 million votes, or almost 23% of the entire nation. They found relatively few cases of election fraud, ranging in occurrence from .00003 and .000005. Out for 29 million votes, they found just 324 [possible] cases.

Just the Facts on Fraud

Your link doesn't state how many votes were examined. Furthermore none of the avenues they explored looked into the possible fraud that could exist by voting in another persons name.

During discussions in Voter-ID, liberals bring up all kinds of ridiculous situations where a person could be denied the right to vote. How rare that could possibly be is irrelevant as liberals have told me. Every vote should count.

Yet when we find a few hundred here and a few hundred there that were actually fraudulent, that's no big deal to a liberal; it's not enough to change an outcome.

So I decide to steal 30 mail in ballots, fill them out as the resident, mail them in, and nobody catches me doing so, those 30 are considered legitimate votes.

 

[Faun]

Everybody on the left laughed and laughed about President Trump claim there were millions of bogus votes cast for Clinton. His new commission was told by the coastal states, and even a few in Dixie, that he could kick rocks. There would be no voter records turned over to the Feds. But the majority of states agreed to see if their voters rolls were legit. Turns out some folks aren't waiting for the knock on the door from the men in a black sedan. Already, over 3,000 Colorado voters have unregistered from the democrap party....wonder why? Surely it isn't ideological....progs don't turn normal that fast so it must be something else....I wonder what it could be?
DNC worried about voters unregistering in Colorado

Right to privacy..

How do you figure? The government already has most if not all of this information, anyway. Right to privacy Come on here, paranoia is more like it.

Because people don't want their personal data out there. This voter information request is a privacy issue.

Especially in the hands of an unhinged nut like Trump.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Because he lied, there is no reason to hunt for evidence, which preliminary searches indicate does not exist, to prove him right.

So you are saying because there was NO evidence of collusion by Trump, there was no reason for an investigation or a special council then?
So there is no reason for an investigation to try to find anything at all about TRUMP huh?

If that were true, you'd might have a point. But there was evidence of possible collusion to warrant an investigation.

And that would be what????

For one, Roger Stone discussing Podesta's "time in the barrel" with a Russian hacker days before Podesta's emails were dumped on the Internet.

Oh yes, Pedesta. Isn't that the guy that used P-A-S-S-W-O-R-D as his actually email password? Must have been a tough one for the hackers to figure out.

As Stone said repeatedly, he mentioned nothing about Podesta's email. He was referring to Podesta's business dealings.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It's not because THEY did anything illegal; it is because Trump is violating our personal privacy in the voting booth. And he can go fuck himself.

Yes, election fraud is a private matter between democrats and their Fuhrer. No one has a right to demand honest elections, how would you Nazis ever win?

 

[Faun]

Because he lied, there is no reason to hunt for evidence, which preliminary searches indicate does not exist, to prove him right.

So you are saying because there was NO evidence of collusion by Trump, there was no reason for an investigation or a special council then?
So there is no reason for an investigation to try to find anything at all about TRUMP huh?

If that were true, you'd might have a point. But there was evidence of possible collusion to warrant an investigation.

And that would be what????

For one, Roger Stone discussing Podesta's "time in the barrel" with a Russian hacker days before Podesta's emails were dumped on the Internet.

Oh yes, Pedesta. Isn't that the guy that used P-A-S-S-W-O-R-D as his actually email password? Must have been a tough one for the hackers to figure out.

As Stone said repeatedly, he mentioned nothing about Podesta's email. He was referring to Podesta's business dealings.

Which of course, has nothing to do with someone from Trump's campaign communicating directly with a hacker days before the hacked material goes public. Then of course, there's the hacker offering up his services to Stone just days prior to that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So you are saying because there was NO evidence of collusion by Trump, there was no reason for an investigation or a special council then?
So there is no reason for an investigation to try to find anything at all about TRUMP huh?

If that were true, you'd might have a point. But there was evidence of possible collusion to warrant an investigation.

And that would be what????

For one, Roger Stone discussing Podesta's "time in the barrel" with a Russian hacker days before Podesta's emails were dumped on the Internet.

Oh yes, Pedesta. Isn't that the guy that used P-A-S-S-W-O-R-D as his actually email password? Must have been a tough one for the hackers to figure out.

As Stone said repeatedly, he mentioned nothing about Podesta's email. He was referring to Podesta's business dealings.

Which of course, has nothing to do with someone from Trump's campaign communicating directly with a hacker days before the hacked material goes public. Then of course, there's the hacker offering up his services to Stone just days prior to that.

What hacker do you speak of? Russian hackers? Who are they?

 

[Faun]

If that were true, you'd might have a point. But there was evidence of possible collusion to warrant an investigation.

And that would be what????

For one, Roger Stone discussing Podesta's "time in the barrel" with a Russian hacker days before Podesta's emails were dumped on the Internet.

Oh yes, Pedesta. Isn't that the guy that used P-A-S-S-W-O-R-D as his actually email password? Must have been a tough one for the hackers to figure out.

As Stone said repeatedly, he mentioned nothing about Podesta's email. He was referring to Podesta's business dealings.

Which of course, has nothing to do with someone from Trump's campaign communicating directly with a hacker days before the hacked material goes public. Then of course, there's the hacker offering up his services to Stone just days prior to that.

What hacker do you speak of? Russian hackers? Who are they?

Sorry, but this has been discussed on these fora 1000 times for many months now. You're certainly welcome to peruse the threads if you care. Or you can look up the name of the hacker who was tweeting with Stone. Regardless, I'm done debating it for now.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And that would be what????

For one, Roger Stone discussing Podesta's "time in the barrel" with a Russian hacker days before Podesta's emails were dumped on the Internet.

Oh yes, Pedesta. Isn't that the guy that used P-A-S-S-W-O-R-D as his actually email password? Must have been a tough one for the hackers to figure out.

As Stone said repeatedly, he mentioned nothing about Podesta's email. He was referring to Podesta's business dealings.

Which of course, has nothing to do with someone from Trump's campaign communicating directly with a hacker days before the hacked material goes public. Then of course, there's the hacker offering up his services to Stone just days prior to that.

What hacker do you speak of? Russian hackers? Who are they?

Sorry, but this has been discussed on these fora 1000 times for many months now. You're certainly welcome to peruse the threads if you care. Or you can look up the name of the hacker who was tweeting with Stone. Regardless, I'm done debating it for now.

Good choice on your part.

 

[Faun]

For one, Roger Stone discussing Podesta's "time in the barrel" with a Russian hacker days before Podesta's emails were dumped on the Internet.

Oh yes, Pedesta. Isn't that the guy that used P-A-S-S-W-O-R-D as his actually email password? Must have been a tough one for the hackers to figure out.

As Stone said repeatedly, he mentioned nothing about Podesta's email. He was referring to Podesta's business dealings.

Which of course, has nothing to do with someone from Trump's campaign communicating directly with a hacker days before the hacked material goes public. Then of course, there's the hacker offering up his services to Stone just days prior to that.

What hacker do you speak of? Russian hackers? Who are they?

Sorry, but this has been discussed on these fora 1000 times for many months now. You're certainly welcome to peruse the threads if you care. Or you can look up the name of the hacker who was tweeting with Stone. Regardless, I'm done debating it for now.

Good choice on your part.

Of course it is. That's why I took it. It's old news now, been discussed thoroughly, since it was first revealed, and nothing new about it has been introduced. I wouldn't be surprised to find, had I bothered to look, that you've already discussed this yourself and already know who the hacker is that Stone was communicating with.

 

[JQPublic1]

There are many states where Dems with change to vot in the Rep primary, then switch back, and vice versa. The fact people are making a big deal out of this makes me think they don't want to get to bottom of how many have illegally voted. Unless, there is a conspiracy he's gonna send someone to your door if you are registered with the wrong party....

Our votes are not tied to our voting records. They are anonymous.

President Donald Trump is asking for voter names, addresses, party affiliation and voting records from all 50 states, part of an investigation into voter fraud by a commission he launched last month. A Trump commission requested voter data. Here's what every state is saying.

I know there's been some confusion about this, but I do trust PBS to get it right. He is asking for voter affiliation.

Right. Just how we registered, Democrat, Republican, Unaffiliated or whatever else. Whether a voter voted in a primary in some states would also tell who they are registered with, since in some states, you must be a member of the party in order to vote in the primary.

We have to look at what precipitated these allegations of voter fraud.
All I have seen in that regard is Trump's wild fanciful allegations based on nothing but lies. That's been no evidence of widespread voter fraud. In fact, it is a very, very rare event. Only a few people have ever been arrested and prosecuted for it. The bigger crime is cross-check. That nefarious program has disenfranchised thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of legal voters by purging them from the rolls. Frankly, I am puzzled by the Democrats silence on that issue. It is as if they sanction that diabolical republican initiative.

So how do you remove voters who moved out of state, passed away, or are too sickly to vote? Nobody is required to contact the voting commission when any of these things happen to a voter. So there is only one way to remove them, and that is purging.

Our state did it until some lib judge stopped us. They sent out three notices to people who haven't voted in over seven years. Those who did not reply were removed, those who did reply stayed on the voting roster. After the names were removed, some of those who were too lazy to return the postage paid reply complained about it.

You aren't familiar with Cross-Check I see. Cross- check is completely different from purging inactive voters from the rolls. Kobach designed X-check to target ethnic minorities, many of whom have the same names and, critically, most of whom vote democrat.
But it doesn't stop there. People registered to vote in two different states
are purged at the discretion of X-check operatives. During the last election only red states opted to implement X-check, all without any oversight or input by democrats. Under those circumstances
the purge would likely be biased besides being unconstitutional. Depriving qualified voters of their right to vote ought to be criminal . Amendment XV of the U.S. constitution is clear:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
You may be surprised by what the ammendment actually portends. It does not guarantee the right to vote. Ammendment 15 merely prohibits preventing people from voting based on the list of things mentioned therein. Unfortunately, the GOP has made an art of walking the fine line between voter suppression and. Upholding the tenets of ammendment XV. As long as X-check has the appearance of being applied to everyone equally...there is no violation until someone proves bias.
Realistically, another ammendment is needed to emphatically guarantee the right to vote by all citizens. And that includes former inmates who are protected by the original Fifteenth Amendment and can not technically be discriminated against.despite their former servitude.
The Missing Right: A Constitutional Right to Vote

 

[PixieStix]

It's not because THEY did anything illegal; it is because Trump is violating our personal privacy in the voting booth. And he can go fuck himself.

It's Russia's fault, I am sure......Voting records are already public, by the way.

 

[busybee01]

Okay, maybe a bit harsh. But I'm serious, Tom. I don't like this sudden interest in who voted for whom by the Trump administration. They are yelling about Mueller's team because a few of them supported democrats. OMG. Mueller is a Republican, btw, and the rest of the team seems to be unaffiliated. And now the President's select commission is asking for every piece of information on every voter in the land, including their voting history and their party affiliation.
It's creepy. If the shoe were on the other foot and it was Hillary Clinton who had won, and she was insisting that it was unfair to have three Republican supporters on the team investigating the Foundation, I think you would feel very differently about the issue.

I believe they are unregistering for a simple reason....they aren't going to take a chance on getting caught in the future. Little doubt many of them are illegals, felons, or also voted absentee in a different state. They know Trump is on to them and they are fleeing the party. BTW, Mueller's law firm donated to the Clinton campaign at a rate of almost 99% of it's attorneys and at least 7 of his 12 investigators are either Clinton donors or worked for her in some capacity. You can't hide behind Trump finding out who you voted for.....they are simply checking to see if those who voted were qualified to vote...and the answer is obviously no just for over 3,000 Coloradans...wait until they get a look at New York, Illinois, and California.

You are full of bullshit!! The fact is that there are those of us who object to the federal government having the information. I believe in the Constitution and responsibility for elections lies with the state not the federal government. Fortunately I live in a state that is providing no information so I don't have to worry about it.

BTW: Justice Department guidelines say that senior officials may contribute to political campaigns and there is no conflict.

The fact is that the federal government could ask the states to perform a audit and send the results to the commission. This clearly is not what this commission is looking for.

 

[busybee01]

The righties who fear that the gov will confiscate their guns if they are registered have to wonder why these people are in registering ?

The illegal vote mantra is a big fat lie . If it was true , it could easily be proven.

It just was proven when the states that are most notorious for having fraudulent illegal voters, refused to give up their records. Case closed! As if anyone ever doubted it. Even YOU know millions of illegals voted, you just dont have the integrity to admit it.

You are the one who lacks integrity. Nothing is proven by states refusing to provide the information. The case is not closed. You are making the charge so it is up to you to prove it. I do more than doubt it. It is a fantasy from the sick minds of delusional Trump supporters.

 

[busybee01]

Everybody on the left laughed and laughed about President Trump claim there were millions of bogus votes cast for Clinton. His new commission was told by the coastal states, and even a few in Dixie, that he could kick rocks. There would be no voter records turned over to the Feds. But the majority of states agreed to see if their voters rolls were legit. Turns out some folks aren't waiting for the knock on the door from the men in a black sedan. Already, over 3,000 Colorado voters have unregistered from the democrap party....wonder why? Surely it isn't ideological....progs don't turn normal that fast so it must be something else....I wonder what it could be?

DNC worried about voters unregistering in Colorado

They obviously didn't tell you that Republicans were also unregistering in Colorado--and it's because of Trump's voter fraud commission. It's not anything to do with voter fraud but everything to do with the state of Colorado sharing address's, birthday, social security numbers with Trump's bogus commission on voter fraud.

"Voters in some states are withdrawing their voting registration amid a request from President Trump’s voter fraud panel to collect voting data from all 50 states. Now a federal judge in Washington is looking into the suit filed against the panel’s request, by the Electronic Privacy Information Center The Washington Post reports that the judge will rule on the request for a temporary restraining order to stop the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity from collecting the data. Last week, the states were asked to upload info on voters that is publicly available to a federal site. That includes their names, address's, birth dates, party affiliations and last four digits of their social security numbers.

A majority of states are refusing to supply some or all of that information.
44 states won't give some voter info to panel - CNNPolitics.com

However, Colorado is one of the states that is adhering to the request."
Voters Unregistering in Response to Presidential Commission's Voter Info Request

so curious, who holds the records of social security information? state or feds? D'OH!

You think the feds give social security numbers out to every Tom, Dick, and Harry who asks for them?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There are many states where Dems with change to vot in the Rep primary, then switch back, and vice versa. The fact people are making a big deal out of this makes me think they don't want to get to bottom of how many have illegally voted. Unless, there is a conspiracy he's gonna send someone to your door if you are registered with the wrong party....

Our votes are not tied to our voting records. They are anonymous.

Right. Just how we registered, Democrat, Republican, Unaffiliated or whatever else. Whether a voter voted in a primary in some states would also tell who they are registered with, since in some states, you must be a member of the party in order to vote in the primary.

We have to look at what precipitated these allegations of voter fraud.
All I have seen in that regard is Trump's wild fanciful allegations based on nothing but lies. That's been no evidence of widespread voter fraud. In fact, it is a very, very rare event. Only a few people have ever been arrested and prosecuted for it. The bigger crime is cross-check. That nefarious program has disenfranchised thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of legal voters by purging them from the rolls. Frankly, I am puzzled by the Democrats silence on that issue. It is as if they sanction that diabolical republican initiative.

So how do you remove voters who moved out of state, passed away, or are too sickly to vote? Nobody is required to contact the voting commission when any of these things happen to a voter. So there is only one way to remove them, and that is purging.

Our state did it until some lib judge stopped us. They sent out three notices to people who haven't voted in over seven years. Those who did not reply were removed, those who did reply stayed on the voting roster. After the names were removed, some of those who were too lazy to return the postage paid reply complained about it.

You aren't familiar with Cross-Check I see. Cross- check is completely different from purging inactive voters from the rolls. Kobach designed X-check to target ethnic minorities, many of whom have the same names and, critically, most of whom vote democrat.
But it doesn't stop there. People registered to vote in two different states
are purged at the discretion of X-check operatives. During the last election only red states opted to implement X-check, all without any oversight or input by democrats. Under those circumstances
the purge would likely be biased besides being unconstitutional. Depriving qualified voters of their right to vote ought to be criminal . Amendment XV of the U.S. constitution is clear:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
You may be surprised by what the ammendment actually portends. It does not guarantee the right to vote. Ammendment 15 merely prohibits preventing people from voting based on the list of things mentioned therein. Unfortunately, the GOP has made an art of walking the fine line between voter suppression and. Upholding the tenets of ammendment XV. As long as X-check has the appearance of being applied to everyone equally...there is no violation until someone proves bias.
Realistically, another ammendment is needed to emphatically guarantee the right to vote by all citizens. And that includes former inmates who are protected by the original Fifteenth Amendment and can not technically be discriminated against.despite their former servitude.
The Missing Right: A Constitutional Right to Vote

Okay, then let's give former felons guns as well. As it stands now, you can't own a firearm if you are a convicted felon, and the Constitution makes no mention of criminals when it come to guns.