Iowa GOP spends 2 years and $250K to show there is no vote fraud. Now STFU about it.

[Monster]

If they're immobile, how are they going to vote?

Immobile meaning they have no way to drive to their DMV to get ID. My mom lives about 15 miles from where she'd have to go to get ID, but the closest voting booth is a 5 minute walk away.

 

[Spartanmack]

You gotta be kidding...

How the fuck would they get shit done in Chicago if that was the case?

Ahhhh Chicago. My mom grew up on the south side - she even used to be a democrat but has renounced her evil ways. When she went to vote in her first election, she and my grandmother were turned away because they were told they had already voted. But that was 1964 - it would never happen today...

 

[Sbee]

Ahhhh Chicago. My mom grew up on the south side - she even used to be a democrat but has renounced her evil ways. When she went to vote in her first election, she and my grandmother were turned away because they were told they had already voted. But that was 1964 - it would never happen today...

Oh shit, that's some serious anecdotal evidence, I reverse all of my positions. Fraud is rampant, there's the smoking gun!

 

[tinselwolverine]

Ahhhh Chicago. My mom grew up on the south side - she even used to be a democrat but has renounced her evil ways. When she went to vote in her first election, she and my grandmother were turned away because they were told they had already voted. But that was 1964 - it would never happen today...

Don't tell me, lemme guess; they had already voted for Mayor Daley, right?

 

[Gulo Blue]

Ahhhh Chicago. My mom grew up on the south side - she even used to be a democrat but has renounced her evil ways. When she went to vote in her first election, she and my grandmother were turned away because they were told they had already voted. But that was 1964 - it would never happen today...

They shouldn't have tried to vote twice.

 

[Michchamp]

... she even used to be a democrat but has renounced her evil ways. ..

Yeah right.

she only told you that to get you to STFU and leave her alone at family gatherings. No one likes to hear Fox News talking points screamed in their face at the dinner table.

 

[tinselwolverine]

They shouldn't have tried to vote twice.

Seriously?

Come on, the guy just said they were Chicago Democrats back then...

 

[TheVictors]

A.c.o.r.n.

 

[Monster]

a.c.o.r.n.

a.d.i.d.a.s.

 

[TheVictors]

Lol!

 

[Spartanmack]

Oh shit, that's some serious anecdotal evidence, I reverse all of my positions. Fraud is rampant, there's the smoking gun!

Get a grip. That was a story about Chicago, not evidence of rampant voter fraud. Even you probably know that election fraud in chicago in the 60s was rampant, particularly the 1960 presidential election. If I wanted to offer that as proof of voter fraud, I would have mentioned it long ago and in the other thread. But since you mention it I see you are silent on Monster's anecdote about what a hardship it is for his mom to get an ID, thus proving once and for all that voter ID laws are discriminatory. You're acting like a 3rd grader - please do as you promised yesterday and take your ball and go home, your immature nonsense is a waste of my time.

 

[Spartanmack]

Don't tell me, lemme guess; they had already voted for Mayor Daley, right?

Telling them who they voted for probably would have been a violation of election law or at the very least, a violation of their privacy. But Daley wasn't on the ballot, he was re-elected in 1963.

 

[Sbee]

Get a grip. That was a story about Chicago, not evidence of rampant voter fraud. Even you probably know that election fraud in chicago in the 60s was rampant, particularly the 1960 presidential election. If I wanted to offer that as proof of voter fraud, I would have mentioned it long ago and in the other thread. But since you mention it I see you are silent on Monster's anecdote about what a hardship it is for his mom to get an ID, thus proving once and for all that voter ID laws are discriminatory. You're acting like a 3rd grader - please do as you promised yesterday and take your ball and go home, your immature nonsense is a waste of my time.

I'm finished responding to you on the MSU board, not here, since you can't separate the two.

as for voter ID laws, i'm all for doing everything possible to increase turnout. the risk of in person fraud is negligible at best. if you want to commit fraud in an election it would come with counting the votes, not individual voters, that's an obvious waste of time. I think you shouldn't have to vote in your precinct either. what if you have an hour commute and have to get your kids to school in the AM, then the line is an hour long after that? do everything possible to increase turnout. like i said yesterday, there were 900k eligible voters without ID's in PA, that's a big deal. they aren't all going to turnout but why put a hurdle up?

keep arguing though, refer to the GOP talking points handbook.

 

[Spartanmack]

I'm finished responding to you on the MSU board, not here, since you can't separate the two.

as for voter ID laws, i'm all for doing everything possible to increase turnout. the risk of in person fraud is negligible at best. if you want to commit fraud in an election it would come with counting the votes, not individual voters, that's an obvious waste of time. I think you shouldn't have to vote in your precinct either. what if you have an hour commute and have to get your kids to school in the AM, then the line is an hour long after that? do everything possible to increase turnout. like i said yesterday, there were 900k eligible voters without ID's in PA, that's a big deal. they aren't all going to turnout but why put a hurdle up?

keep arguing though, refer to the GOP talking points handbook.

That's some pretty impressive rhetoric/unsubstantiated dem talking points.

 

[Michchamp]

either the Republican posters here are too dumb to understand that there is no widespread voter fraud justifying voter ID laws, or figure if they just keep moving the goalposts they'll "win" the argument. Or maybe it's one of those "why not both?" kinda things.

 

[Sbee]

That's some pretty impressive rhetoric/unsubstantiated dem talking points.

I'm not a democrat, I agree with them on a lot of things but the best thing about the dems is that they're not republicans. i'm more Anit-GOP than anything, the democrats are a bunch of pussies.

 

[Sbee]

either the Republican posters here are too dumb to understand that there is no widespread voter fraud justifying voter ID laws, or figure if they just keep moving the goalposts they'll "win" the argument. Or maybe it's one of those "why not both?" kinda things.

they should just admit that making it more difficult for poor people to vote in Fla, PA, and OH helps them win elections. it wouldn't be news to anyone and it would save us all a lot of time

 

[Spartanmack]

I'm not a democrat, I agree with them on a lot of things but the best thing about the dems is that they're not republicans. i'm more Anit-GOP than anything, the democrats are a bunch of pussies.

Well, you sure whine like those Democrat pussies while regurgitating the Dem platform talking points. By calling them pussies do you mean they're not liberal enough for you? By the way, I'm not a Republican and I dislike many Republicans as much as I dislike almost all Democrats.

 

[Spartanmack]

they should just admit that making it more difficult for poor people to vote in Fla, PA, and OH helps them win elections. it wouldn't be news to anyone and it would save us all a lot of time

Most of them don't read your DSF posts or watch MSNBC so they probably have no idea that they are actually racist.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Telling them who they voted for probably would have been a violation of election law or at the very least, a violation of their privacy. But Daley wasn't on the ballot, he was re-elected in 1963.

Oh.

I always get those two years mixed.

But it's still true that they probably already voted for Daley.

Not that day though, but just the year before.

And probably had voted for him more than once then, too.