• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

DNC - You need an photo ID to get near the convention. Speech likely moved indoors.

RJKarl said:
Remind me again how many cases of voter impersonation have been proven over the past 1,000,000,000 votes?

Dead people voting would be the EASIEST ones to find.
Click to expand...

You know full well that the conviction rate for something is always going to be much lower than the occurrence rate. This is especially true for something that, before now, hasn't really been policed.

A better analogy--what you are saying is like saying because we have more evidence that theifs who rob the cage use guns, we don't need to regulate theft by knife.
 
Yep namecalling when you can't keep up.

How about your buddies in FL whose #1 was to suppress the black vote? The former FL GOP Chairman said they had meetings for that purpose and wrote the laws to do that.

It seems you race based laws to keep honest Americans from voting.

"t's a good thing you're not an investigator. You'd be like 'well, this is definitely fraudulent, but I'm sure this is the only time it ever happened so we'll just not check out anything else'."

Nice lie, I said ANYTHING like that. Once again your ignorant classlessness is showing.
 
Junebug said:
You know full well that the conviction rate for something is always going to be much lower than the occurrence rate. This is especially true for something that, before now, hasn't really been policed.

A better analogy--what you are saying is like saying because we have more evidence that theifs who rob the cage use guns, we don't need to regulate theft by knife.
Click to expand...

No I'm saying if we have no evidence of a certain crime we should set up rules that keep others from acting legally.

Since a bank in my county has been robbed this year, should the police be stationed at every bank 24/7 just in case another one gets hit?

That's what the voter ID laws are.
 
RJKarl said:
Yep namecalling when you can't keep up.

Herp derp because no one ever curses at someone just because they're annoying little pissants. It has to be because "they can't keep up." Well keep up with this dumbfuck. Terra has been involved with several Dem campaigns, they're not novices and they didn't just learn how to do this. They'll claim it was just some lazy dumb jocks that wanted to get paid without doing the work, but you're pretty naive if you think this is the first time this has happened.

Look, it's like Ron Paul said on the Tonight Show. Everything is political, and everything in politics is fair game. And most people in politics will cheat to win, in various ways. There is no way a marijuana legalization issue is going to pass in a red state like North Dakota or anywhere in the plains. So why cheat? Because it's your modus operandi, that's why. It's what you do.

How about your buddies in FL whose #1 was to suppress the black vote? The former FL GOP Chairman said they had meetings for that purpose and wrote the laws to do that.

Perhaps you've mistaken me for a Floridian or something. Or a Republican.

It seems you race based laws to keep honest Americans from voting.

This isn't even a sentence.

"t's a good thing you're not an investigator. You'd be like 'well, this is definitely fraudulent, but I'm sure this is the only time it ever happened so we'll just not check out anything else'."

Nice lie, I said ANYTHING like that. Once again your ignorant classlessness is showing.
Click to expand...

I guess it's fine for you to namecall. Or are you having trouble keeping up? What a maroon.

It's exactly what you're saying. You're saying that there's no reason to think that voter fraud of one type does not at all suggest that cheating of any other type is taking place. That's ridiculous and anyone that's ever investigated anything knows it.

Again I ask, please do not respond to me. I do not wish to communicate with you, and only do so because I forced to by your confrontational and accusative responses.
 
RJKarl said:
No I'm saying if we have no evidence of a certain crime we should set up rules that keep others from acting legally.
Click to expand...

I've posted Justice Stevens' listing of the examples of voter fraud (or, to use your lingo, impersonation) 3 times already. If you choose not to believe it, that's your choice, but don't pretend like your belief is fact.
 
KillSwofford said:
I guess it's fine for you to namecall. Or are you having trouble keeping up? What a maroon.

It's exactly what you're saying. You're saying that there's no reason to think that voter fraud of one type does not at all suggest that cheating of any other type is taking place. That's ridiculous and anyone that's ever investigated anything knows it.

Again I ask, please do not respond to me. I do not wish to communicate with you, and only do so because I forced to by your confrontational and accusative responses.
Click to expand...

I will return name calling in kind. I won't be a punching bag. Like usual when confronted with reality , you started the insults. As Will Smith says, "If you don't start nothin, there won't be nothin.

"It's exactly what you're saying. You're saying that there's no reason to think that voter fraud of one type does not at all suggest that cheating of any other type is taking place. That's ridiculous and anyone that's ever investigated anything knows it. "

Total BS. One has nothing to do with the other.

Here are some FACTS :

"Federal convictions for election fraud, 2002-05
Voting while ineligible: 18
Voting multiple times: 5
Registration fraud: 3"

"While defending its precedent-setting photo ID law before the Supreme Court, Indiana was unable to cite a single instance of voter impersonation in its entire history."

The AG of PA swore under oath that he couldn't find a SINGLE case of voter impersonation in PA AND didn't think ANY would happen this year.

The GOP in FL set up laws to intentionally keep blacks form voting. The Chairman of the GOP, who was at these meetings, testified to this under oath.

The difference between us is that you have wet dream boogeymen. I have facts from those involved.
 
RJKarl said:
I will return name calling in kind. I won't be a punching bag. Like usual when confronted with reality , you started the insults. As Will Smith says, "If you don't start nothin, there won't be nothin.

Oh for the love of God. We have old people quoting Will Smith now.


Here are some FACTS :

"Federal convictions for election fraud, 2002-05
Voting while ineligible: 18
Voting multiple times: 5
Registration fraud: 3"

You won't convict for what you're not looking for.


The difference between us is that you have wet dream boogeymen. I have facts from those involved.
Click to expand...

And you ignore any of the facts you don't like.

So yeah, still don't give a shit about anything you think. If you disagree with me, I'm almost certainly right because you are absolutely the worst at politics I've ever seen. What passes for strategy in your world is even funnier than your actual ridiculous political views.

You have a clear Dem support organization running an operation in which 10-11 people are charged with fraud, and you wave it off like it means nothing.

Do you do the same with murder or DUI? "Here's one, but I'm sure no one else has done it or will do it." -- note for RJ's ignorant ass, RJ did not actually say this.
 
It means ONE group screwed up. It has ZERO outside meaning to anything else.

Since Mark Foley tried to have sex with male Congressional pages, does that mean ALL Republicans are seducing boys? Or even a majority? Or even 10% of Republicans in office in the US are seducing boys?

My inane Mark Foley analogy makes as much sense as your analogy does.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Beautiful. +1
Click to expand...

Actually it was weak, because there is bountiful evidence as to why an ID rule is needed in the convention context.

I like cute, but it has to actually work.
 
Last edited:
Wait. Are people really arguing, with a straight face, that there is a statistically significant issue with voter fraud that would excuse laws that would create a quantifiable disenfranchising effect with a disproportionate impact on the poor? Can't we all just be honest? GOP insider memos certainly are. They teats the new ID laws as a Dem voter suppression strategy, not as a law and order issue.

No one really believes that voter fraud has any effect whatsoever on the outcome of elections, not even the proponents of voter ID laws. It's hard to find any evidence it even exists on a micro scale, despite hundreds of millions of votes being cast every election cycle (in the 85 odd cases that actually wore uncovered over the last decade, more than half were felons attempting to vote even though the lost the right, and not people trying to doubler vote or influence an election through fraud beyond their own person). Further, voter fraud doesn't work, and couldn't work. It would be a logistically impossible, statistically meaningless, inefficient, and just plain dumb way to try to illegally influence an election.

So why shill for something theory that no one really believes in? You have to know that these laws weren't conceived due to any true concern regarding fraud. Right?
 
Last edited:
Arlington, Swofford believes there is a real voter impersonation fraud problem.

He doesn't believe the mountain of evidence from GOP operatives, elected officials and sworn statements to the contrary. Nor does he believe when the former GOP Chair of FL states they had meetings to figure out the best way to keep blacks form voting. Nor does he believe the OH election official who said he didn't care if blacks were disenfranchised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top