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.
Does anyone have any insight to this? Number 1, is it actually a real case (I'm inclined to think it is), and if so, what is its actual significance? To me it sound like it prohibits very specific actions construed to be voter intimidation and not a blanket order to "not fight fraud", but I'm wondering if I'm missing something of significance or it is just a right wing propaganda effort.
Why not just read the fracking case ( “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615.) provided in the link of the article that you posted a link to?
Whites can get voter ID's but Liberals have blacks and democrats convinced they are too dumb or it's too hard and they will allow Liberals to tell the world this. They go along with it I guess because it makes them feel special who knows. They scream disenfranchised and demand the rest of us agree with them.
Actually, what we found here in Pennsylvania was that the GOP was willing to sacrifice the votes of rural whites who live in counties where there weren't any state offices that could issue a state id inorder to restrict the voting of large urban communities where many couldn't get to or were unaware that their id's were insufficient. For example 70 year old urban adults who don't drive and haven't had a need for a state id in years but no longer possessed a birth certificate.
As my grandmother would say, "low down dirty dogs, them Republicans."
Why not just read the fracking case ( “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615.) provided in the link of the article that you posted a link to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint.
To me it sound like it prohibits very specific actions construed to be voter intimidation and not a blanket order to "not fight fraud", but I'm wondering if I'm missing something of significance
Right, and that was my interpretation, so I'm wondering if I missed something significant, because from my reading it didn't sound like the terms of it really mean "the GOP can't fight voter fraud" like it is being purported.
The Republicans need to keep pushing for all states to have photo id requirements to vote. Then start to push to check the votes after each election to verify legal citizens are voting and that people are not voting twice etc....
Electronic balloting is the easy way to alter millions of votes. The old timey low brain days of stuffing ballot boxes( like was done in Philly) is ancient times. But since both parties are run by the same people, i wouldn't worry too much. We'll all end up on the bread lines sooner or later.
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.
