SCOTUS says keep punishing the Rs for cheating

[Truthmatters]

then why did they go to the SCOTUS for relief?

 

[Truthmatters]

your fucking party cheats and you think it just fine.

your fucking traitors to this country

YOUR party cheats and YOU are absolutely devotedly SILENT on it.

You are a moron and a full fledged full on **** hypocrite, tderpm.

BULLSHIT!


there is NO record of dem party cheating right from the VERY top like there is for the republican party in the courts.

just lying about it doesn't make it true

 

[Truthmatters]

Considering how well elected officials represent their constituency, I'm surprised they vote even once. Risking arrest to vote multiple times seems beyond absurd.

"Risking arrest to vote multiple times seems beyond absurd."
Bingo!
And that my friend is why voter impersonation almost never happens and-----and Republicans know it-----Republicans know it because they refuse to appropriate your tax money to investigate it. Hmm wonder why?
But fortunately, what Republicans refuse to do, Rolling Stone did for them, check it out...


- Rolling Stone: "not only is voter fraud not rampant – it's virtually nonexistent"

Rolling Stone debunks all the Republican ‘voter fraud’ myths being used as an excuse to suppress the vote with ID laws on Election Day:

“But here’s the thing: Not only is voter fraud not rampant – it’s virtually nonexistent. The iron-clad word on the subject comes from the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, whose 2007 report, ‘The Truth About Voter Fraud,’ sorts through thousands of allegations going back to the 1990s in the most in-depth voter fraud study ever undertaken. The bottom line, confirmed by all subsequent research: ”Usually, only a tiny portion of the claimed illegality is substantiated — and most of the remainder is either nothing more than speculation or has been conclusively debunked.””

1. Double voting – In Missouri in 2000 and 2002, hundreds of voters were alleged to have voted twice either within the state or once in Kansas and once in Missouri. Reporters followed up on 18 Kansas City; 13 were shown to result from clerical errors. In total, public sources backed up only four cases, for a documented fraud rate of 0.0003 percent
2. Voting by Dead People – An investigation turned up only one instance, and even this was later found to have been an error: One Alan J. Mandel was alleged to have voted in 1998, despite having died in 1997. It turned out that another Alan J. Mandell (two “l”s) – very much alive – was the guy who’d voted, but election workers simply checked the wrong name off of their list.
3. Voting With Fraudulent Addresses – In New Hampshire, a citizen became concerned because 88 individuals had registered with residences on property owned by Daniel Webster College. Further investigation revealed that all 88 were DW students living on college property.
4. Voting by Convicted Felons — In 2000, Florida claimed that 5,643 ineligible persons with convictions actually voted in the general election. Upon investigation, it turned out the data included eligible citizens with misdemeanors, citizens with convictions after their valid vote, and eligible voters whose names and birthdates matched those of convicted felons.
5. Voting by Noncitizens — In Washington in 2005, county officials were asked to investigate the citizenship status of 1,668 registered voters based on their “foreign-sounding names.” Not a single individual on the submitted list turned out to be a noncitizen.
6. Registration Fraud — “Most reports of registration fraud do not actually claim that the fraud happens so that ineligible people can vote at the polls. Indeed, we are aware of no recent substantiated case in which registration fraud has resulted in fraudulent votes being cast.”
7. Voting by Dogs — There is no typical case. Brennan found only two cases – ever – of ballots being submittted in the name of a dog: a ballot cast by “Duncan MacDonald” in 2006 and 2007 (but labeled “VOID” and signed with a paw print), and another cast by “Raku Bowman” in 2003 in a local election in Venice, California.
8. Vote Buying — Vote buying is not fraud – it’s an illegal agreement between citizens, usually with the direct involvement of a candidate or campaign – and can’t be addressed by most of the remedies put forward to tackle fraud – photo ID laws, restrictions on registration, etc.
9. Fraud by Election Officials — Fraud by election officials does happen, but, like vote-buying, it is not a form of voter fraud. If election officials are willing to break the law, rules designed to restrict voting won’t stop them.

.
​

good post


too bad the republican party minions don't do facts

 

[Truthmatters]

I posted this in TMs other spam thread but I am putting it here also so TM can't say she missed real cheating on a national level. BTW the cheating went unpunished as far as I know.

What you are saying about it, repeatedly is a big fat lie. No one is cheating. Except all the confirmed democrats that gladly admit they voted more then once. And they don't care cause YOU don't care, because democrats are cheaters. Just like they lied to the Supreme court of Florida during the 2001 election, now that is real cheating.

Here is a link, you will certainly ignore, that lists all the false statements made during the Florida election debacle. Both Republican and Democrat. But the ones I want you to read are these two:

David Boies (Gore lead attorney):
Stated to the Florida Supreme Court that dimpled chads had been counted as votes in a case upheld by the Illinois Supreme Court.

Turns out that statement was totally false, as was the affidavit Boies had the lawyer in that case sign. However, Boies still managed to walk on water in the eyes of the media.

Would you consider this cheating and or lying?.

David Boies and Florida Supreme Court:

The Court asked Boies how many votes Gore had picked up in the Palm Beach hand recount. Boies said 215. The Court then order 215 to be deducted from Bush's margin.

There was only one problem here. According to the Democratic Election Supervisor Theresa LePore, Gore only picked up 174. Despite this inconvenient fact, the news media used the 215 figure in their new calculations until the U.S. Supreme Court halted the recount. How scary is it that the vote OFFICIAL vote total was, at least temporarily, wrongly determined by a LAWYER?!

Again, is this cheating and lying?

I realize you are just repeating what your handlers tell you to say but come on you even have to realize they handed you the wrong end of the stick.

http://www.johnziegler.com/editorial...p?editorial=39

BTW, if Bios had not said what he said to the SCOF then the whole issue most certainly have died right then and there. Through his saying what he said the country went through a month of BS.

your link is an error page

 

[Truthmatters]

I posted this in TMs other spam thread but I am putting it here also so TM can't say she missed real cheating on a national level. BTW the cheating went unpunished as far as I know.

What you are saying about it, repeatedly is a big fat lie. No one is cheating. Except all the confirmed democrats that gladly admit they voted more then once. And they don't care cause YOU don't care, because democrats are cheaters. Just like they lied to the Supreme court of Florida during the 2001 election, now that is real cheating.

Here is a link, you will certainly ignore, that lists all the false statements made during the Florida election debacle. Both Republican and Democrat. But the ones I want you to read are these two:

David Boies (Gore lead attorney):
Stated to the Florida Supreme Court that dimpled chads had been counted as votes in a case upheld by the Illinois Supreme Court.

Turns out that statement was totally false, as was the affidavit Boies had the lawyer in that case sign. However, Boies still managed to walk on water in the eyes of the media.

Would you consider this cheating and or lying?.

David Boies and Florida Supreme Court:

The Court asked Boies how many votes Gore had picked up in the Palm Beach hand recount. Boies said 215. The Court then order 215 to be deducted from Bush's margin.

There was only one problem here. According to the Democratic Election Supervisor Theresa LePore, Gore only picked up 174. Despite this inconvenient fact, the news media used the 215 figure in their new calculations until the U.S. Supreme Court halted the recount. How scary is it that the vote OFFICIAL vote total was, at least temporarily, wrongly determined by a LAWYER?!

Again, is this cheating and lying?

I realize you are just repeating what your handlers tell you to say but come on you even have to realize they handed you the wrong end of the stick.

http://www.johnziegler.com/editorial...p?editorial=39

BTW, if Bios had not said what he said to the SCOF then the whole issue most certainly have died right then and there. Through his saying what he said the country went through a month of BS.

TM will ignore this and continue with her spamming and incivility. She is a hopeless troll who should be completely ignored.

your a lying idiot

 

[AmericanFirst]

your fucking party cheats and you think it just fine.

your fucking traitors to this country

YOUR party cheats and YOU are absolutely devotedly SILENT on it.

You are a moron and a full fledged full on **** hypocrite, tderpm.

BULLSHIT!


there is NO record of dem party cheating right from the VERY top like there is for the republican party in the courts.

just lying about it doesn't make it true

Bullshit. LIAR!!!!!!!

 

[Truthmatters]

Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree - Los Angeles Times



January 14, 2013


just last year.

now why do you refuse these cold hard undeniable facts?

For their part, lawyers for the Democratic National Committee had argued that recent campaigns show the “consent degree remains necessary today.”

The court’s action is a victory for the DNC, and it comes after an election year in which the two parties regularly exchanged charges over “voter fraud” and “voter intimidation.” But most of the recent battles have been fought on the state level, and it is not clear whether the long-standing consent decree has had much impact.

The case began in 1981 when the RNC created a “national ballot security task force” that, among other things, undertook mailing campaigns targeted at black and Latino neighborhoods in New Jersey. If mailers were returned undelivered, party activists put those voters on a list to be challenged if they showed up to cast a ballot. In addition, the party was alleged to have hired off-duty law enforcement officers to “patrol” minority neighborhoods on election day.

The DNC sued the RNC in federal court, alleging its activities violated the Voting Rights Act and were intended to suppress voting among minorities. Rather than fight the charges in a trial, the RNC agreed to a consent decree promising to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities … directed toward [election] districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic minority populations.”

The consent decree has remained in effect, and DNC lawyers say they have gone to court in states such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Pennsylvania to challenge Republican activities that appear to target mostly black precincts. Both sides agree, however, that the consent decree does not forbid “normal poll watching” by Republican officials.

The RNC has tried repeatedly to have the consent decree lifted, contending it interferes with its efforts to combat voter fraud. But a federal judge in New Jersey in 2009 ruled that it should remain in effect, and the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed last year.

there is nothing to compare to this case


NOTHING

 

[ClosedCaption]

Considering how well elected officials represent their constituency, I'm surprised they vote even once. Risking arrest to vote multiple times seems beyond absurd.

"Risking arrest to vote multiple times seems beyond absurd."
Bingo!
And that my friend is why voter impersonation almost never happens and-----and Republicans know it-----Republicans know it because they refuse to appropriate your tax money to investigate it. Hmm wonder why?
But fortunately, what Republicans refuse to do, Rolling Stone did for them, check it out...


- Rolling Stone: "not only is voter fraud not rampant – it's virtually nonexistent"

Rolling Stone debunks all the Republican ‘voter fraud’ myths being used as an excuse to suppress the vote with ID laws on Election Day:

“But here’s the thing: Not only is voter fraud not rampant – it’s virtually nonexistent. The iron-clad word on the subject comes from the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, whose 2007 report, ‘The Truth About Voter Fraud,’ sorts through thousands of allegations going back to the 1990s in the most in-depth voter fraud study ever undertaken. The bottom line, confirmed by all subsequent research: ”Usually, only a tiny portion of the claimed illegality is substantiated — and most of the remainder is either nothing more than speculation or has been conclusively debunked.””

1. Double voting – In Missouri in 2000 and 2002, hundreds of voters were alleged to have voted twice either within the state or once in Kansas and once in Missouri. Reporters followed up on 18 Kansas City; 13 were shown to result from clerical errors. In total, public sources backed up only four cases, for a documented fraud rate of 0.0003 percent
2. Voting by Dead People – An investigation turned up only one instance, and even this was later found to have been an error: One Alan J. Mandel was alleged to have voted in 1998, despite having died in 1997. It turned out that another Alan J. Mandell (two “l”s) – very much alive – was the guy who’d voted, but election workers simply checked the wrong name off of their list.
3. Voting With Fraudulent Addresses – In New Hampshire, a citizen became concerned because 88 individuals had registered with residences on property owned by Daniel Webster College. Further investigation revealed that all 88 were DW students living on college property.
4. Voting by Convicted Felons — In 2000, Florida claimed that 5,643 ineligible persons with convictions actually voted in the general election. Upon investigation, it turned out the data included eligible citizens with misdemeanors, citizens with convictions after their valid vote, and eligible voters whose names and birthdates matched those of convicted felons.
5. Voting by Noncitizens — In Washington in 2005, county officials were asked to investigate the citizenship status of 1,668 registered voters based on their “foreign-sounding names.” Not a single individual on the submitted list turned out to be a noncitizen.
6. Registration Fraud — “Most reports of registration fraud do not actually claim that the fraud happens so that ineligible people can vote at the polls. Indeed, we are aware of no recent substantiated case in which registration fraud has resulted in fraudulent votes being cast.”
7. Voting by Dogs — There is no typical case. Brennan found only two cases – ever – of ballots being submittted in the name of a dog: a ballot cast by “Duncan MacDonald” in 2006 and 2007 (but labeled “VOID” and signed with a paw print), and another cast by “Raku Bowman” in 2003 in a local election in Venice, California.
8. Vote Buying — Vote buying is not fraud – it’s an illegal agreement between citizens, usually with the direct involvement of a candidate or campaign – and can’t be addressed by most of the remedies put forward to tackle fraud – photo ID laws, restrictions on registration, etc.
9. Fraud by Election Officials — Fraud by election officials does happen, but, like vote-buying, it is not a form of voter fraud. If election officials are willing to break the law, rules designed to restrict voting won’t stop them.

.
​

Nice.

The republican response will be something along the lines of accusing someone else of "hating" something or someone to deflect from facts.

 

[Truthmatters]

Considering how well elected officials represent their constituency, I'm surprised they vote even once. Risking arrest to vote multiple times seems beyond absurd.

"Risking arrest to vote multiple times seems beyond absurd."
Bingo!
And that my friend is why voter impersonation almost never happens and-----and Republicans know it-----Republicans know it because they refuse to appropriate your tax money to investigate it. Hmm wonder why?
But fortunately, what Republicans refuse to do, Rolling Stone did for them, check it out...


- Rolling Stone: "not only is voter fraud not rampant – it's virtually nonexistent"

Rolling Stone debunks all the Republican ‘voter fraud’ myths being used as an excuse to suppress the vote with ID laws on Election Day:

“But here’s the thing: Not only is voter fraud not rampant – it’s virtually nonexistent. The iron-clad word on the subject comes from the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, whose 2007 report, ‘The Truth About Voter Fraud,’ sorts through thousands of allegations going back to the 1990s in the most in-depth voter fraud study ever undertaken. The bottom line, confirmed by all subsequent research: ”Usually, only a tiny portion of the claimed illegality is substantiated — and most of the remainder is either nothing more than speculation or has been conclusively debunked.””

1. Double voting – In Missouri in 2000 and 2002, hundreds of voters were alleged to have voted twice either within the state or once in Kansas and once in Missouri. Reporters followed up on 18 Kansas City; 13 were shown to result from clerical errors. In total, public sources backed up only four cases, for a documented fraud rate of 0.0003 percent
2. Voting by Dead People – An investigation turned up only one instance, and even this was later found to have been an error: One Alan J. Mandel was alleged to have voted in 1998, despite having died in 1997. It turned out that another Alan J. Mandell (two “l”s) – very much alive – was the guy who’d voted, but election workers simply checked the wrong name off of their list.
3. Voting With Fraudulent Addresses – In New Hampshire, a citizen became concerned because 88 individuals had registered with residences on property owned by Daniel Webster College. Further investigation revealed that all 88 were DW students living on college property.
4. Voting by Convicted Felons — In 2000, Florida claimed that 5,643 ineligible persons with convictions actually voted in the general election. Upon investigation, it turned out the data included eligible citizens with misdemeanors, citizens with convictions after their valid vote, and eligible voters whose names and birthdates matched those of convicted felons.
5. Voting by Noncitizens — In Washington in 2005, county officials were asked to investigate the citizenship status of 1,668 registered voters based on their “foreign-sounding names.” Not a single individual on the submitted list turned out to be a noncitizen.
6. Registration Fraud — “Most reports of registration fraud do not actually claim that the fraud happens so that ineligible people can vote at the polls. Indeed, we are aware of no recent substantiated case in which registration fraud has resulted in fraudulent votes being cast.”
7. Voting by Dogs — There is no typical case. Brennan found only two cases – ever – of ballots being submittted in the name of a dog: a ballot cast by “Duncan MacDonald” in 2006 and 2007 (but labeled “VOID” and signed with a paw print), and another cast by “Raku Bowman” in 2003 in a local election in Venice, California.
8. Vote Buying — Vote buying is not fraud – it’s an illegal agreement between citizens, usually with the direct involvement of a candidate or campaign – and can’t be addressed by most of the remedies put forward to tackle fraud – photo ID laws, restrictions on registration, etc.
9. Fraud by Election Officials — Fraud by election officials does happen, but, like vote-buying, it is not a form of voter fraud. If election officials are willing to break the law, rules designed to restrict voting won’t stop them.

.
​

keeping Americans from voting through trickery is the only reason the R party wins national elections anymore

 

[Truthmatters]

If we STOP the republican party from cheating voters out of their right to vote the R party dies outright.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Voter Fraud: It's Real, But Rare - ABC News

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Even ONE instance of such voter fraud is (and should be seen as) intolerable.

A solid voter ID law prevents the dead from voting at all.

But what of DEAD RIGHTS!???

Anyway, this has been diverting. The thread's premise is absurd, of course. But considering the source, nothing more was expected.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I was playing *guess the troll" while looking at this thread on the front page. It's a fun game where you have an old irrelevant thread that gets bumped by a loser and you try to guess who did the bumping.

I was wrong today. I guessed candycorn

 

[Star]

Even ONE instance of such voter fraud is (and should be seen as) intolerable.

A solid voter ID law prevents the dead from voting at all.

But what of DEAD RIGHTS!???

Anyway, this has been diverting. The thread's premise is absurd, of course. But considering the source, nothing more was expected.

Sounds like you're invoking an even less probability factor than the idiotic Cheney Doctrine to an imagined/almost non-existent voter fraud?
Do you apply the Cheney Doctrine to everything in your life or just to those things that allow the minority to control the majority in a-----in a democratic/republic?


ABC News: "Imagine what would happen in various everyday situations were the Cheney doctrine to be applied. A young man is in a bar and another man gives him a hard stare. If the young Cheneyite feels threatened and believes the probability to be at least 1 percent that the other man will shoot him, then he has a right to preemptively shoot him in "self-defense."


Or an older woman visits her Cheneyite doctor who, finding that the woman has suffered from a sore throat and fatigue for months, orders that she be put on chemotherapy since the likelihood of cancer is in his opinion at least 1 percent. Further tests, he might argue, would take too long.


A Cheneyite gambler would be a casino's dream. The chance of rolling a 12 with a pair of dice, for example, is 1/36, almost 3 percent, and hence would justify the gambler betting his house on rolling a 12.


And what about a Cheneyite scientist, hard as that may be to conceive? If this scientist decided that the "evidence" for some crackpot scientific theory suggested to him that its probability were at least 1 percent, the scientist would feel comfortable touting it as a reasonable alternative to established theory.


Needless to say, standards for action or decision are generally far more stringent. For a conventional scientist running a statistical test of a hypothesis the threshold is usually 95 percent, not 1 percent. More precisely, if the scientist runs the test, and obtains, based on the tentative assumption of the hypothesis, an outcome having a probability of less than 5 percent, then he or she generally rejects the hypothesis.


And certainly in criminal trials the statistical burden is much greater; it's beyond a reasonable doubt (that is, an indeterminate, but very high probability), not 1 percent. In civil cases the probability standard is lower, but still nowhere near 1 percent."

.

 

[Truthmatters]

Even ONE instance of such voter fraud is (and should be seen as) intolerable.

A solid voter ID law prevents the dead from voting at all.

But what of DEAD RIGHTS!???

Anyway, this has been diverting. The thread's premise is absurd, of course. But considering the source, nothing more was expected.

so you are for spending billions to buy everyone ids and for millions to be kept from voting who have done nothing wrong just to prevent one incident in a country election that didn't effect the outcome of that country election?


You don't sound like an adult

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Even ONE instance of such voter fraud is (and should be seen as) intolerable.

A solid voter ID law prevents the dead from voting at all.

But what of DEAD RIGHTS!???

Anyway, this has been diverting. The thread's premise is absurd, of course. But considering the source, nothing more was expected.

so you are for spending billions to buy everyone ids and for millions to be kept from voting who have done nothing wrong just to prevent one incident in a country election that didn't effect the outcome of that country election?


You don't sound like an adult

You do sound exactly like a failure at life. For good reason.

What I am "for" is appropriate legal mechanisms, including some preventive forms of verification, that serve to stop would-be vote thieves from succeeding even before they try to accomplish their little mission.

Most of us already HAVE valid forms of ID. If a voter is too impoverished to be able to afford one of those forms, then I am ALL for making sure that their lack of resources doesn't prevent them from getting a valid form of ID even if it's on the government's (i.e., the taxpayers') dime.

Unlike you, I see no reason to meekly accept even ONE act of voter fraud. I realize this gets in the way of organized and orchestrated Democrat voter fraud efforts. I realize this offends you. I also don't care even one tiny bit that a mindless hack like you is offended by efforts to prevent your efforts to authorize voter fraud for the Democrap Party.

Hey, tderpm, you posuer: WHO first suggested the concept of "one man one vote?"

Why do you hate the principle of fairness?

Why is it ok to tolerate the dilution of everybody else's vote to accommodate your partisan hack and massively hypocritical idiocy?

 

[BillyZane]

Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree - Los Angeles Times



January 14, 2013


just last year.

now why do you refuse these cold hard undeniable facts?

Scary that a lefty believes being told "no you can't do things that might be considered cheating" to be punishment. The rest of the world just believes it's the right thing to tell people.

 

[BillyZane]

Fucking Republicans not allowing the non-living to vote

No wonder their Party is dying

IF the Republican Party were dying, wouldn't they WANT to dead to have a vote? I'm just saying.