|
|
| Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought (1168835) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 13 |
||
|
| (1169070) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 12:39:06 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by bingbong on Thu Apr 3 12:25:40 2014.   Which one is you?
|
|
|
| (1169073) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 12:48:01 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 08:33:00 2014. Yes and "voter fraud" is defined as "voting Democratic, or belonging to a demographic statistically likely to vote that way."Just FYI— illegally disenfranchising people is a form of voter fraud, so the only voter fraud that has taken place has been committed by Republicans. Just for the level of pig-headed ignorance in your post, you now owe me an explanation for why the Republicans demanded the repeal of the Voting Rights Act. |
|
|
| (1169074) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Apr 3 12:53:04 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 12:19:13 2014. That's the kind of response you get when you make statements like you did :)your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (1169076) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 3 13:02:02 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 08:33:00 2014. And they want to encourage more of it, especially when it comes to illegal immigrants. |
|
|
| (1169080) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 13:21:44 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Fred G on Thu Apr 3 12:53:04 2014. Do me a favor. When responding to me, please do not refer to yourself as "my pal". You don't like me, and I don't like you. It's disigenuous. Especially when from someone who wished someone bodily harm on me. I have never done that to you, or anyone else on this forum. |
|
|
| (1169081) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 13:23:46 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 3 13:02:02 2014. iawtlp |
|
|
| (1169082) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by fset on Thu Apr 3 13:29:54 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 10:40:16 2014. How does a person vote in NY and in NC on the same election day? |
|
|
| (1169084) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 13:34:44 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 12:48:01 2014. Yes and "voter fraud" is defined as "voting Democratic, or belonging to a demographic statistically likely to vote that way."No it isn't. And no one is getting "disenfranchised" unless being 6 feet under still qualifies you to vote. |
|
|
| (1169085) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 13:35:36 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 13:21:44 2014. I actually like Fred a lot. We've met, he's a good guy.Even if he was trolling today. |
|
|
| (1169087) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by fset on Thu Apr 3 13:39:40 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 13:34:44 2014. I think that it became attached to the Dems due to several sarcastic remarks by politicans:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_early_and_vote_often http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_J._Daley http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/Vote_Early_Vote_Often_Just_Kidding.html |
|
|
| (1169088) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 13:39:56 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by fset on Thu Apr 3 13:29:54 2014. Obviously they did not. Obviously one was a bad vote, done by someone other than the person they said they were. It may or may not have anything to do with the real person who's name it is. The real person could have went to vote where they were supposed to, not knowing someone was using their information somewhere else, either in their old polling place, or someplace other than where they live. |
|
|
| (1169089) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 13:54:51 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 13:35:36 2014. Ok, that might be the case. But it's one thing to disagree with someone, it's another to wish bodily harm. As much as I may disagree with someone, I never wish them any harm. |
|
|
| (1169090) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 13:58:50 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 13:34:44 2014. You still owe me an explanation for why the Republicans demanded the repeal of the Voting Rights Act.Once you've provided that, we can discuss the fact that illegal voter suppression is the only reason the Republicans still hold quite a few offices and the fact that no one has ever cast ballots in the name of a dead person. |
|
|
| (1169092) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 14:07:47 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 13:58:50 2014. Because it needs to be updated. What was true in 1965 is not the same today.For more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/25/court-past-voting-discrimination-no-longer-held/?page=all |
|
|
| (1169093) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 3 14:14:42 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by fset on Thu Apr 3 13:39:40 2014. Many a true word has been spoken in jest, yes? |
|
|
| (1169094) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Apr 3 14:15:06 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 14:07:47 2014. They won't listen to the "Moonie Times". |
|
|
| (1169098) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Apr 3 14:20:42 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 13:21:44 2014. Okie dokie smokie :) |
|
|
| (1169099) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Apr 3 14:21:12 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 13:35:36 2014. Thanks, Chris, the feeling is def mutual.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (1169100) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Apr 3 14:34:03 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 13:21:44 2014. I apologize, I should have said "bicycle". |
|
|
| (1169103) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 14:40:48 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Fred G on Thu Apr 3 14:34:03 2014. I actually received an apology from you? I question your sincerity, but I'll accept it. |
|
|
| (1169118) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 15:48:20 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 09:35:13 2014. But how come you aren't addressing Selkirk with that statement, as he's the one that assumes it's Republicans "trying" to stop Democrats from voting. Are you you even reading the line of messages you are responding to?Selkirk's statement didn't have anything to do with the article. |
|
|
| (1169123) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 15:57:07 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 14:07:47 2014. Because it needs to be updated. What was true in 1965 is not the same today."Updated" and "repealed" are drastically different concepts. The Supreme Court said the Act is irrelevant because voter discrimination doesn't happen any more. Meanwhile, there is plenty of evidence that the Act needs more powers, like regulating the number of voting machines per precinct. |
|
|
| (1169124) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 15:58:15 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 09:36:48 2014. Thank you for showing they are mostly old people.60s isn't "old people." |
|
|
| (1169125) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 15:59:39 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by fset on Thu Apr 3 13:29:54 2014. How does a person vote in NY and in NC on the same election day?By airplane or by absentee ballot. |
|
|
| (1169128) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 16:04:55 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 15:58:15 2014. Yes, but they are mostly Seniors. And it also says there a substantial amount of people 71 or older as well. |
|
|
| (1169130) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 16:08:55 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 16:04:55 2014. Yes, but they are mostly Seniors.People in their 60s can generally still see and hear well. And it also says there a substantial amount of people 71 or older as well. The number of poll workers 71 and over is roughly the same as the number of poll workers 40 and under. |
|
|
| (1169133) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 16:20:05 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 16:08:55 2014. Yes, but then when you add those in their 60' it's about half seniors.No way you can play it any other way, the stats show there's a lot of old people involved. |
|
|
| (1169136) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 16:42:44 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 16:20:05 2014. Yes, but then when you add those in their 60' it's about half seniors.Which means it's about half not seniors. No way you can play it any other way, the stats show there's a lot of old people involved And they also show that it's not predominantly 85 year old women with bifocals who can hardly hear. |
|
|
| (1169137) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 3 16:46:14 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 16:08:55 2014. People in their 60s can generally still see and hear well.WHAT DID YOU SAY? |
|
|
| (1169138) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Apr 3 16:48:41 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 09:36:48 2014. You aren't old nowadays until you're 70.The average 70 year old in good enough health to go to a job (and I realize it may be an exaggeration to call working at the polls a "job") has close to 20 years left to live. |
|
|
| (1169141) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 17:56:52 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 08:30:28 2014. Heh. Well ya see? This is why BOTH of us love the hurr-durrShe said "most of the people" which IMPLIES personal experience. She never stated that this was some kind of full-retard, OCD "fact" ... she simply cited that AROUND HERE, pretty much everyone who volunteers at the polls are early-retirement mid-50's types rather than the 85 year old blind, dumbass grannies YOU stated as full-retard, OCD "fact." This is Albany county ... you get to retire at 55 when you work for the state. That's too early for most and so based on their civic work for the state, they're eager to work the polls, VOLUNTEER for jury duty, that kinda civic pride stuff. At no time did she claim that these folks are the norm in Suffolk county or even NYC. So who's WRONG here? Grab a mirror, bro. |
|
|
| (1169142) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 17:57:58 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 17:56:52 2014. Let's try that first paragraph again with the closing tag ...Heh. Well ya see? This is why BOTH of us love the hurr-durr She said "most of the people" which IMPLIES personal experience. She never stated that this was some kind of full-retard, OCD "fact" ... she simply cited that AROUND HERE, pretty much everyone who volunteers at the polls are early-retirement mid-50's types rather than the 85 year old blind, dumbass grannies YOU stated as full-retard, OCD "fact." This is Albany county ... you get to retire at 55 when you work for the state. That's too early for most and so based on their civic work for the state, they're eager to work the polls, VOLUNTEER for jury duty, that kinda civic pride stuff. At no time did she claim that these folks are the norm in Suffolk county or even NYC. So who's WRONG here? Grab a mirror, bro. |
|
|
| (1169143) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 18:14:12 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 09:35:13 2014. He doesn't NEED to because North Carolina is run by republicans and the republican majority put that law together. Maybe it's not RIPTA that has learning difficulties. |
|
|
| (1169152) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 19:12:20 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 3 14:07:47 2014. You're trying to eat your cake and have it and throw it at clowns.The Republicans argue that the Voting Rights Act is unnecessary because there's no more discrimination— therefore, it should be repealed so that they can discriminate. Not 12 hours after the VRA was struck down, Republican-controlled states were debating restrictions to prevent black people from voting. Besides, you know damn well that racism is still widespread and systemic. Unless you're a racist yourself, that is. |
|
|
| (1169157) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Apr 3 19:23:28 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Train Dude on Thu Apr 3 12:38:06 2014. Won't be home, we will be in California then. |
|
|
| (1169158) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by gp38/r42 chris on Thu Apr 3 19:28:52 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Apr 3 16:42:44 2014. And of course that was literal. Lol.Others actually way more 70+ people there than I even expected....along with the 60+ ones. Thank you for reinforcing what I have already assumed through personal experience!!!! |
|
|
| (1169161) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by RockParkMan on Thu Apr 3 19:35:07 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 19:12:20 2014. All Republicans are racists. |
|
|
| (1169162) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 19:37:07 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by ChicagoMotorman on Wed Apr 2 19:40:01 2014. How so, if hardship cases would be provided at no charge.When you say "provided at no charge," you mean that people would be reimbursed for the wages they lost from taking time off to gather up documents, go to the office, apply for the ID, and demonstrate hardship? And they'd be reimbursed for any expenses incurred in the process? You clearly have no idea what it's like to be poor. |
|
|
| (1169164) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Thu Apr 3 19:41:05 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Train Dude on Thu Apr 3 12:38:06 2014. I'd love to thank you in person when I'm in Baltimore on April 26th.Do you hear yourself? Have you lost your mind? |
|
|
| (1169167) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 19:50:08 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 19:12:20 2014. I think that they're on to something though. As long as they insist that it's OK to restrict the vote, then we should encourage that. Restrict the vote for folks who are so clueless that they believe this stuff and give them a simple "reality test" ... fail it, and they can't vote. :) |
|
|
| (1169168) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 19:51:41 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by cortelyounext on Thu Apr 3 19:41:05 2014. Since Baltimore is CSX country, I could certainly arrange for a welcoming committee in his honor while Unca Dan is away. :) |
|
|
| (1169171) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 19:56:29 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 19:37:07 2014. Not to mention that in the Dumbfuckistan states, there's usually a horribly long bus ride (if even available) to GET to that office. |
|
|
| (1169176) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 20:06:47 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by RockParkMan on Thu Apr 3 19:35:07 2014. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt before assuming he was a Republican. |
|
|
| (1169184) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 20:12:58 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 19:50:08 2014. The problem with restricting the vote to sane people is that any country sane enough to pull it off is sane enough not to need it.I could name quite a few voting restrictions that would keep the idiots from screwing things up if only there weren't enough idiots to hijack the restrictions and use them to prevent the sane people from voting. Personally, I'm in favour of having a dummy election on every ballot for an office that doesn't exist or is not holding an election that year. In the runup to the election, the airwaves would be blanketed with ads for nonexistent candidates supposedly running in the dummy election. Any ballot that recorded a vote in the dummy election would be discarded entirely, because that voter (a) clearly doesn't know how the system works well enough to have an informed opinion and (b) clearly demonstrated a propensity to vote on the basis of advertisements and therefore probably doesn't have an informed opinion on anything anyway. |
|
|
| (1169186) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 20:13:57 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 20:06:47 2014. He's a "moderate" ... absolutely despises the democrats and will never vote for one, but he's not a republican. LOL |
|
|
| (1169191) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Apr 3 20:17:35 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by RockParkMan on Thu Apr 3 19:35:07 2014. Lots of racist Democrats too.They preach tolerance but when low-income housing is coming to their neighborhood, they're the first to sign the petition to stop them from moving in. THIW. |
|
|
| (1169193) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 20:22:41 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 20:12:58 2014. When one serves as a poll inspector (I've done it a few times in the past as a republican) and there's a protest against a voter, we have to give them a provisional ballot to fill out instead of letting them at the machines. That goes into an envelope and isn't really counted unless there's a recount required until the final certification happens. But they're not counted in the results that the news operations get on election night because they're sealed, put in a box and off to storage.That all said, I had some fun with a theory of mine on protest voters. I'd simply ask them what Election district they were in. Not a single ONE of them knew the answer! Right there is how you could do it. :) |
|
|
| (1169198) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 20:24:59 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by RockParkMan on Thu Apr 3 19:35:07 2014.    Including these Republicans?
|
|
|
| (1169204) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 20:29:32 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by Nilet on Thu Apr 3 19:37:07 2014. You are being absurd. Most people already have photo IDs to begin with. People who are already employed, for the most part already have photo IDs. |
|
|
| (1169208) | |
Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Apr 3 20:31:48 2014, in response to Re: North Carolina: Voter fraud under investigation; tighter election security sought, posted by ChicagoMotorman on Thu Apr 3 20:24:59 2014. Why? Does the color of their skin make them any less embracers of the party of racism? |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 13 |
||