state of hockey
He fixes the cable?
Re: 2012 Presidential Election 5: Election Day Countdown
He balanced the budget!
He balanced the budget!
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2012 Presidential Election 5: Election Day Countdown
- Thread starter 5mn_Major
- Start date
- Status
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: 2012 Presidential Election 5: Election Day Countdown
If it can be had you know **** well both sides will attempt it with equal vigor so for draggers to accuse "libstains" of trying to protect fraud on their own behalf is disengenuous at best. They clearly knew the potential 'disenfrachisement' results would far outweigh the saving of faux votes which is why they hitched their wagons to this amendment. It's another reason why voters weren't swayed by their rhetoric. (yes, both sides use it)
Romney and Ryan both repeatedly replied to pointed questions with, "We're not going to get into the specifics right now we'll take care of that later". That kind of retort cannot be trusted.
If it can be had you know **** well both sides will attempt it with equal vigor so for draggers to accuse "libstains" of trying to protect fraud on their own behalf is disengenuous at best. They clearly knew the potential 'disenfrachisement' results would far outweigh the saving of faux votes which is why they hitched their wagons to this amendment. It's another reason why voters weren't swayed by their rhetoric. (yes, both sides use it)
Romney and Ryan both repeatedly replied to pointed questions with, "We're not going to get into the specifics right now we'll take care of that later". That kind of retort cannot be trusted.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Presidential Election 5: Election Day Countdown
Yes to all of the above. Look up "walking around money." Let me just give you a small example of the stuff that goes on in big cities. After the cock-up in Florida, the so-called "provional" ballot was created. People whose regisration or residence are in question are permitted to vote "provisionally" and their bona fides are checked later to see if their votes will count. Immediately big city Democrats demanded that folks with questionable registrations should be allowed to vote at one central location, rather than the precincts where they allege they are registered. All the easier to bring busloads of these people to a location Democrats control.
Truly registered voters are required to vote in the precincts where they're registered. No special deals. Why shouldn't people with problematic registrations be required to vote in their home precincts, just like everyone else? Only one answer to that one.
If voter fraud is "no problem" then why the diehard opposition to implementing a simple, common sense ID proposal? There's only one answer to that one, too. It would be refreshing if the Democrats would just admit it. But they won't. They've got a good thing doing in those inner-city precincts. Yesterday some court-ordered poll watchers were denied access to precincts. Court ordered. That's an old standby. Deny the accredited poll watcher access all day long, then apologize that night for the "misunderstanding." Of course, by then the fraud has been accomplished.
Yes to all of the above. Look up "walking around money." Let me just give you a small example of the stuff that goes on in big cities. After the cock-up in Florida, the so-called "provional" ballot was created. People whose regisration or residence are in question are permitted to vote "provisionally" and their bona fides are checked later to see if their votes will count. Immediately big city Democrats demanded that folks with questionable registrations should be allowed to vote at one central location, rather than the precincts where they allege they are registered. All the easier to bring busloads of these people to a location Democrats control.
Truly registered voters are required to vote in the precincts where they're registered. No special deals. Why shouldn't people with problematic registrations be required to vote in their home precincts, just like everyone else? Only one answer to that one.
If voter fraud is "no problem" then why the diehard opposition to implementing a simple, common sense ID proposal? There's only one answer to that one, too. It would be refreshing if the Democrats would just admit it. But they won't. They've got a good thing doing in those inner-city precincts. Yesterday some court-ordered poll watchers were denied access to precincts. Court ordered. That's an old standby. Deny the accredited poll watcher access all day long, then apologize that night for the "misunderstanding." Of course, by then the fraud has been accomplished.
Last edited:
- Status