100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Democrats Vote Against First Amendment | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
As I said before, the proposed constitutional amendment is a waste of time on the part of those proposing it. republicans got to have voter id, to suppress votes the other side were getting this may only prove to be as much a waste of time as that,,, time will tell Nah. Voter ID is used to prevent voting fraud. Then again, if you believe in the soft bigotry of low expectations, then you might think that only Republican voters can obtain photo IDs. and it could be said funding regulations is used to prevent votes being 'bought' rather than earned but if you believe in the soft bigotry of classism, you may believe only those who can raise obscene amounts of money should get the chance at winning Yeah right. Votes are not being bought. Advertisements are being bought. people don't spend the money on the ads for nothing,, they equal votes,,, or there would be no need for either side to be concerned with it,, would there? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I said before, the proposed constitutional amendment is a waste of time on the part of those proposing it. republicans got to have voter id, to suppress votes the other side were getting this may only prove to be as much a waste of time as that,,, time will tell Nah. Voter ID is used to prevent voting fraud. Then again, if you believe in the soft bigotry of low expectations, then you might think that only Republican voters can obtain photo IDs. and it could be said funding regulations is used to prevent votes being 'bought' rather than earned but if you believe in the soft bigotry of classism, you may believe only those who can raise obscene amounts of money should get the chance at winning Yeah right. Votes are not being bought. Advertisements are being bought. people don't spend the money on the ads for nothing,, they equal votes,,, or there would be no need for either side to be concerned with it,, would there? In case you missed it, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor greatly outspent his primary opponent and still lost. Plenty of politicians have lost despite having spent more campaign money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I said before, the proposed constitutional amendment is a waste of time on the part of those proposing it. republicans got to have voter id, to suppress votes the other side were getting this may only prove to be as much a waste of time as that,,, time will tell Nah. Voter ID is used to prevent voting fraud. Then again, if you believe in the soft bigotry of low expectations, then you might think that only Republican voters can obtain photo IDs. and it could be said funding regulations is used to prevent votes being 'bought' rather than earned but if you believe in the soft bigotry of classism, you may believe only those who can raise obscene amounts of money should get the chance at winning Yeah right. Votes are not being bought. Advertisements are being bought. people don't spend the money on the ads for nothing,, they equal votes,,, or there would be no need for either side to be concerned with it,, would there? In case you missed it, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor greatly outspent his primary opponent and still lost. Plenty of politicians have lost despite having spent more campaign money. and plenty of presidents have been elected despite fraud existing but yet, people vote and protest according to their interests,,, if election money made no difference, it wouldn't be being debated,,,,pretty simple,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... and plenty of presidents have been elected despite fraud existing
Oh, so now you are bringing up the election of JFK. It was sure strange how more people voted in Chicago during that election than there were eligible voters in Chicago. It was as if someone wealthy had paid to have additional votes cast in Chicago. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... and plenty of presidents have been elected despite fraud existing
Oh, so now you are bringing up the election of JFK. It was sure strange how more people voted in Chicago during that election than there were eligible voters in Chicago. It was as if someone wealthy had paid to have additional votes cast in Chicago. Chicago didn't decide any presidential election by itself but sure, IF THAT HAPPENED , it would be a great example of how FRAUD and MONEY Corrupt elections and should have some means of regulation,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... and plenty of presidents have been elected despite fraud existing
Oh, so now you are bringing up the election of JFK. It was sure strange how more people voted in Chicago during that election than there were eligible voters in Chicago. It was as if someone wealthy had paid to have additional votes cast in Chicago. Chicago didn't decide any presidential election by itself but sure, IF THAT HAPPENED , it would be a great example of how FRAUD and MONEY Corrupt elections and should have some means of regulation,,,, Actually, it has been said that the voting fraud gave JFK the 1960 presidential election. From Wikipedia: Cases of voter fraud were discovered in Texas. For example, Fannin County had only 4,895 registered voters, yet 6,138 votes were cast in that county, three-quarters for Kennedy. In an Angelina County precinct, Kennedy received 187 votes to Nixon's 24, though there were only a total of 86 registered voters in the precinct. When Republicans demanded a statewide recount, they learned that the state Board of Elections, whose members were all Democrats, had already certified Kennedy as the official winner in Texas.
Quote Source |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it has also 'been said' (in the same source) That such things didnt make the difference,,,
but Im sure voting procedures have already changed quite a bit since 1960 so that such events are close to non existent now |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it has also 'been said' (in the same source) That such things didnt make the difference,,, but Im sure voting procedures have already changed quite a bit since 1960 so that such events are close to non existent now Actually, just the opposite is true. Johnson's technique of getting fraudulent votes has been copied nationwide by the Democratic Party and is now considered the "standard" way to pump up Democratic numbers. The facts behind this were posted here some months ago and I thought you were paying attention then? The "trick" is to not need proper identification. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
what passes as 'facts' are often copy and paste from some random source that can often times be inaccurate itself,,,
I like to research things deeper than just what is posted randomly on this or other sites,,, somehow, we have survived two centuries without needing 'proper' id to go to the polls,,,,even in the face of fraud,,,, wonder what changed, why its suddenly so urgent and absolutely necessary? shrugs,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
what passes as 'facts' are often copy and paste from some random source that can often times be inaccurate itself,,, Such as those things reported by so-called "progressive" websites. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Actually, it has been said that the voting fraud gave JFK the 1960 presidential election."
Yes, Dailey gave Kennedy Chicago land and pretty much Illinois. But, he paid for it later with his life. |
|
|
|
|
