Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pence Declines His Tinfoil Hat

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • sebfrench76
    replied
    Am i the only one to read each time "penis" instead of "pence" ??

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    Speaking of VPs, what happened to that other guy?
    Have they let him out since he bombed in his debate?

    Honestly, Tim Kaine is kinda horrific, and he would be just one very shaky heartbeat from the Presidency .... ugh, hell of a think for a guy that comes offf as a Creepy-Clown wanna be.

    Leave a comment:


  • NoPref
    replied
    Registrations are not votes.

    When any group pays people on a per-registration basis instead of hourly, it incentives them to submit false registrations. It merely creates garbage registrations. Nobody shows up at the polling place for them. When you pay by the hour to staff a registration location, or only use volunteers and do not award any incentive for number registered, then you don't get garbage registrations. Also, in most (or all?) states filling out a false registration is a misdemeanor crime. The felony only occurs if someone votes under a false name, false registration, etc.

    Mickey Mouse has never cast a vote in the US. Neither has Che Guevara.

    (A town in Peru did elect Pulvopies as mayor or town councilman several decades ago.)

    Leave a comment:


  • lynelhutz
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    How is it an error?
    Exactly! How is it anything at all based on the basic information that a voter cast a ballot and the polling station records correlates that voter with an individual who was deceased at the time of the election.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by lynelhutz View Post
    Nope, it is an error. Absent further information, the element of fraud remains speculative.
    How is it an error?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by lynelhutz View Post
    Before we need to worry about what is offered as "proof" and all the ways it falls far short,

    (1) are you prepared to admit that it is possible for Trump to lose the election even if it is perfectly lawful and fair?

    (2) while the outcome remains uncertain, do you agree that based on current information there is at best a 50% chance that Trump would lose a perfectly fair election?
    Try following the thread, I replied to MarkV's post about proof.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynelhutz
    replied
    Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
    One of the links discusses voter applications in the names of dead people. That is a fact and it is fraud.

    Once an actual application is turned in and it bears the name of a dead person we are no longer speculating.
    Nope, it is an error. Absent further information, the element of fraud remains speculative.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynelhutz
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    Before we need to worry about what is offered as "proof" and all the ways it falls far short,

    (1) are you prepared to admit that it is possible for Trump to lose the election even if it is perfectly lawful and fair?

    (2) while the outcome remains uncertain, do you agree that based on current information there is at best a 50% chance that Trump would lose a perfectly fair election?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cambronnne
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    No here is speculation
    One of the links discusses voter applications in the names of dead people. That is a fact and it is fraud.

    Once an actual application is turned in and it bears the name of a dead person we are no longer speculating.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    No here is speculation

    No speculation, take some time and read the article and review all of the links in it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    No here is speculation
    or

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    No here is speculation

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    Casting doubt on the honesty of the voting process without proof is in effect destroying trust in the democratic process - dangerous and irresponsible.
    Here's your proof:

    http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/13/...l-heres-proof/

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Casting doubt on the honesty of the voting process without proof is in effect destroying trust in the democratic process - dangerous and irresponsible.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by lynelhutz View Post
    Of course like that whiny kid you hated on your team who blamed everyone else when there was a loss, Trump continues to prep for his loss.
    S/A, most of us probably didn't share the same childhood experiences that you did.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X