Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good point. They should not have been applying for 501c (4) status anyway IF they intended to elect a particular candidate.
Tell us again how this impacted the vote?
Obama's brother website including a donation button that claimed tax-exempt status but in fact was not and he operated it as tax exempt - illegally for years.
Lois Lerner signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation. Tax exemption was given within 3 weeks of application. More astonishing still is the fact that the BHO Foundation was given retroactive tax-exempt status despite never having bothered to apply for it. The IRS also overlooked the foundation’s history of soliciting donations before receiving tax-exempt status.
For better or worse, Obama won and Romney lost. Just get over it.
To align the IRS scandal, bad as it is, with voter suppression is an unsubstantiated act of fantasy, and I suspect that you're smart enough to know that. Romney did not lose for a lack of resources, and you can still vote even if you get audited.
So unless you can support your claims with specifics - which you can't - then of course the rational conclusion is that Obama won his second term fair and square.
Well, at least the all black precincts in Philly had 114% voter turn out and the new black panther party was out and about so yeah, it wasn't that bad.
They joy ride is over since it was all about race and nothing about ability. Blacks will not turn out for a white person at 114%.
I Almost forgot the liberals that voted in old districts they lived in because they were not purged from the voter rolls when they move. It was in Maryland I think...
I just wish conservatives would get as slimy and hateful as liberals. Unfortunately, they live by higher moral code.
Let's explain this to you, any organization that intended to work to get Romney elected would have violated its 501(c)4 status... the whole point of the extra scrutiny was the concern that right wing organization didn't have a freaking clue about the do's of a 501(c)4! A suspicion that conservatives like yourself intent on confirming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1
Good point. They should not have been applying for 501c (4) status anyway IF they intended to elect a particular candidate.
Tell us again how this impacted the vote?
To both points, who cares. You're merely trying to divert attention from the real problem...the IRS used it's vast powers to persecute and harass Obama's political opponents in the middle of a presidential election cycle, and then shared confidential tax information with other federal agencies and nitwits like Harry Reid.
It's mystifying and a bit pathetic that so many of you are comfortable with the fact that the IRS was used as a kind of secret police to subvert the democratic process in this country.
When it comes to Obama, man, you guys give up all dignity.
We now know what the Obama administration's playbook to win a second term was. Frustrate the tea party movement by denying indefinitely their 501(c)(4) status, targeting those groups and their members for audits and other government red tape, and otherwise suppressing the vote.
The corrupt imposter posing in the White House today received 10 million fewer votes than he did in 2008. If Romney had received an additional 4 million votes, he would have won.
We will never know how many Romney voters never made it to the polls because of the Obama regime's criminal campaign to target conservative grass roots organizations. Think of all the fundraising that was lost, all the volunteer time that was lost, and all the votes that were lost because of Obama's illegal and unethical methods of intimidation and voter suppression.
It cannot be said that Obama legitimately won his second term.
If a majority of hardcore conservatives believe like you do that Romney lost due to a massive conspiracy versus the actual platform, then you are de facto voting for a Democrat in 2016 if you don't change the platform and instead double down. The conspiracy stuff doesn't fly with moderates.
If a majority of hardcore conservatives believe like you do that Romney lost due to a massive conspiracy versus the actual platform, then you are de facto voting for a Democrat in 2016 if you don't change the platform and instead double down. The conspiracy stuff doesn't fly with moderates.
Moderates? LOL. 65 million morons voted for the most extremist presidential candidate of either major party in U.S. history. There are no moderates in that 65 million bloc of morons.
Obama's brother website including a donation button that claimed tax-exempt status but in fact was not and he operated it as tax exempt - illegally for years.
Lois Lerner signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation. Tax exemption was given within 3 weeks of application. More astonishing still is the fact that the BHO Foundation was given retroactive tax-exempt status despite never having bothered to apply for it. The IRS also overlooked the foundation’s history of soliciting donations before receiving tax-exempt status.
Looking again at the title of your thread - tell me how this led to voter suppression. Isn't that what this thread was all about?
To both points, who cares. You're merely trying to divert attention from the real problem...the IRS used it's vast powers to persecute and harass Obama's political opponents in the middle of a presidential election cycle, and then shared confidential tax information with other federal agencies and nitwits like Harry Reid.
It's mystifying and a bit pathetic that so many of you are comfortable with the fact that the IRS was used as a kind of secret police to subvert the democratic process in this country.
When it comes to Obama, man, you guys give up all dignity.
Please reference the thread title. OP claims that IF the IRS refused tax exempt status to Romney's political organizations (which they should have); this was voter suppression.
I'm not seeing it. IRS issues are discussed in detail in other threads. Particularly, how did this impact people voting for Romney? That clearly political groups were not granted tax exempt status.
What if George Bush had used the IRS to target new groups with "progressive," "minority," and "liberal" in their names. What if his IRS audited those groups and refused to grant them tax exempt status, thus preventing them from ever getting off the ground until after the 2004 election.
Would that be intimidation and voter suppression in your mind? You can deny it all you want, but if that were the situation, you'd be marching the streets screaming "racism!" and "voter suppression!" The only difference between the hypothetical and Obama's reality is that Obama targeted majority white groups to suppress their votes and intimidate them. It worked.
Tea party groups have already been well-formed for years - everyone and their grandmother knows about them. Romney could have bankrolled his entire campaign by himself had he wanted. The **** brothers had no trouble funding up a storm for all kinds of conservative outfits.
And regardless, none of that would have stopped anyone from turning out to the polls and voting against Obama? Did you vote? Were you too intimidated to show up?
What the IRS did is bad and should be stopped, but you'd need some real evidence to credibly suggest that they caused Romney to lose.
Tea party groups have already been well-formed for years - everyone and their grandmother knows about them. Romney could have bankrolled his entire campaign by himself had he wanted. The **** brothers had no trouble funding up a storm for all kinds of conservative outfits.
And regardless, none of that would have stopped anyone from turning out to the polls and voting against Obama? Did you vote? Were you too intimidated to show up?
What the IRS did is bad and should be stopped, but you'd need some real evidence to credibly suggest that they caused Romney to lose.
You didn't answer the question, but from your response I assume you'd be outraged if Bush did it to liberal groups. You are a hypocrite, which we knew already because hypocrite is synonymous with Democrat.
The liberal outpouring of venom would have been VOLCANIC if in 2004 it had been revealed that Bush had done even a fraction of the crap that Obama's minions did(IRS/Media harassment).
Sure we conservatives complain about it, but we've also been paying attention long enough now to realize that complaining 'aint gonna change nothing when you've got Holder as AG and RINOs running Congress.
We also know(as liberals do) that not pushing back 150% against horrific stuff like this is basically asking to be bent over the barrel again. But RINOs apparently like that position.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
