Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Voters being illegally removed from rolls (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25494)

ateamstupid 10-09-2008 12:26 AM

Voters being illegally removed from rolls
 
This is bad.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27093919/

Honu 10-09-2008 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Its bad because of what ? Bad because people couldnt do the simple thing of showing their drivers liscence or state ID to register to vote or bad because they found alot of people who are not eligible to vote trying to?

ateamstupid 10-09-2008 12:55 AM

You clearly didn't read a word of the article, and if you did, you grossly misinterpreted it.

Since I doubt your ignorant ass would bother to try to understand it the second time around..

There's a federal law requiring that state identification databases be used first to confirm voter eligibility and Social Security be used only as a last resort, since the database is fraught with errors.

Certain states are not using state identification first and are wrongly flagging registrations as invalid because of Social Security database errors. Many of these new voters are being illegally taken off the rolls, without notice. You don't see anything wrong with that?

Mike 10-09-2008 07:26 AM

Not directly related to this, but I saw the great :rolleyes: James Carville on CNN the other night, immediately after the debate. He brought up the prospect of what might happen if Obama goes into election day with a widely reported 6,8 or 10 point lead in the polls, then loses to McCain. He didn't elaborate, but suggested that there would be real ugliness to follow. I don't think he meant just the black communities would revolt. Liberal, and now all Dems , were pushed to the edge with the GW Bush election result.

If Obama loses, I won't believe it

jwkniska 10-09-2008 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike
Not directly related to this, but I saw the great :rolleyes: James Carville on CNN the other night, immediately after the debate. He brought up the prospect of what might happen if Obama goes into election day with a widely reported 6,8 or 10 point lead in the polls, then loses to McCain. He didn't elaborate, but suggested that there would be real ugliness to follow. I don't think he meant just the black communities would revolt. Liberal, and now all Dems , were pushed to the edge with the GW Bush election result.

If Obama loses, I won't believe it

if it happens, then that should really tell you how liberal the media is... and how much they fudge all the info they supposedly report.

SniperSB23 10-09-2008 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwkniska
if it happens, then that should really tell you how liberal the media is... and how much they fudge all the info they supposedly report.

Rasmussen/FoxNews matches the other polls so the idea that the media bias is skewing them is ridiculous unless you honestly believe that Fox News is biased towards liberals.

Coach Pants 10-09-2008 10:29 AM

crescent rolls?

ateamstupid 10-09-2008 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwkniska
if it happens, then that should really tell you how liberal the media is... and how much they fudge all the info they supposedly report.

Where do they grow morons like this? Now polling organizations all have liberal biases.

Seriously, get this inane partisan bullshit out of my thread. I'm trying to bring up a major issue.

Mortimer 10-09-2008 11:27 AM

Oh come on..they polls have been cheating for years now.




This is nothing new....just more of the same.

timmgirvan 10-09-2008 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

THIS IS WORSE
http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/?p=1301

dalakhani 10-09-2008 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

There is nothing you can rely on to be more factually accurate than a blog.

So what would that make a blog that cites the New York Post?

Way to go Timmi! We will show them.

Foxnews polls are Rigged for the liberals!!!!

timmgirvan 10-09-2008 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid
Where do they grow morons like this? Now polling organizations all have liberal biases.

Seriously, get this inane partisan bullshit out of my thread. I'm trying to bring up a major issue.

And you're not inane, and Partisan?
CNN has links(vids) about the Obama/Ayers link..for the past 20 years! I don't hear you mentioning that....just that everyone who disagrees with you is a moron.....bring back Oracle,then!

ateamstupid 10-09-2008 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmgirvan
And you're not inane, and Partisan?
CNN has links(vids) about the Obama/Ayers link..for the past 20 years! I don't hear you mentioning that....just that everyone who disagrees with you is a moron.....bring back Oracle,then!

There's no point even responding to you anymore. You've become a running gag on this board. I think Dala just humors you because she secretly hates herself a little bit.

You may think I'm partisan, but either way, this wasn't supposed to be a partisan thread. I should've known, however, that Jwhateverska or you or one of the other ignorant nutjobs would come in here and bring up some right-wing talking point.

Danzig 10-09-2008 02:16 PM

the most important right we have is the right to vote. i don't understand why anyone would think it wasn't that big a deal, or wasn't a problem if some are taken off the rolls, etc. it's a serious issue. again, not sure why it's a party issue to some, it's a basic rights issue, and affects all voters, not just dems, not just reps, not just independant voters. after all, how would you feel if you went to vote and were denied that ability--when you had registered and knew full well you should be able to cast your ballot?

Danzig 10-09-2008 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmgirvan


how is that worse than having a registered voter be denied his right to vote? you're comparing two completely different things. your post serves nothing, as i'd imagine that an equally damning article on an investigation could be found on mccain. dogs chasing their tails, while fundamental rights are taken away from american citizens.

Mortimer 10-09-2008 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
how is that worse than having a registered voter be denied his right to vote? you're comparing two completely different things. your post serves nothing, as i'd imagine that an equally damning article on an investigation could be found on mccain. dogs chasing their tails, while fundamental rights are taken away from american citizens.

^^^^





ateamstupid 10-09-2008 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
the most important right we have is the right to vote. i don't understand why anyone would think it wasn't that big a deal, or wasn't a problem if some are taken off the rolls, etc. it's a serious issue. again, not sure why it's a party issue to some, it's a basic rights issue, and affects all voters, not just dems, not just reps, not just independant voters. after all, how would you feel if you went to vote and were denied that ability--when you had registered and knew full well you should be able to cast your ballot?

Thank you Zig. I thought this would be the majority reaction.. Guess not.

I did have to laugh at Morty's post though.

Mortimer 10-09-2008 02:35 PM

:)

alysheba4 10-09-2008 05:39 PM

morty rules........

timmgirvan 10-09-2008 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
how is that worse than having a registered voter be denied his right to vote? you're comparing two completely different things. your post serves nothing, as i'd imagine that an equally damning article on an investigation could be found on mccain. dogs chasing their tails, while fundamental rights are taken away from american citizens.


correct me if you think I'm wrong but being illegally registred 10-15 times or dead people voting is a little worse than people who haven't voted, or moved, being stricken from the voting roster. It wasn't meant as a party thing, but since the Dems are driving people to the Mosques to register, I'll leave you to your own conclusion!
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ents-to-acorn/

you can't tell me that you approve of these thing.

Danzig 10-09-2008 10:15 PM

did you read the article? it has to do with certain states not following the law about removing voters from rolls. didn't mention the # of voters, how they compare to the population as a whole. has a lot to do with people having moved, and not having all their paperwork completely up to date for one--so, the state sees something doesn't tally with the ss paperwork, and off you go. probably has a lot to do with people updating their SS stuff(so as not to affect getting their federal tax return for example, as we all know you must give a proper physical address) while remaining in their home state, and their drivers license shows their old addy. after all, who updates their DL when they move in state? probably not many folks, i'd imagine they wait til the thing expires to avoid an extra fee.
the article doesn't discuss possible improper registration, but illegal removal of voters. BIG difference.

hi_im_god 10-09-2008 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmgirvan
correct me if you think I'm wrong but being illegally registred 10-15 times or dead people voting is a little worse than people who haven't voted, or moved, being stricken from the voting roster. It wasn't meant as a party thing, but since the Dems are driving people to the Mosques to register, I'll leave you to your own conclusion!

dead. brain dead. what's the real difference?

it's pretty elitist to think a dead person can't vote but a junior high drop out can.

and i hate the idea that american muslims might participate in mainstream politics. we're much better off keeping them marginalized.

i wonder if some smart republican will ever figure out that a culture built around the family might be their natural constituency if you stopped dumbfu<k yahoo's from driving them the other direction.

Danzig 10-09-2008 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hi_im_god
dead. brain dead. what's the real difference?

it's pretty elitist to think a dead person can't vote but a junior high drop out can.

and i hate the idea that american muslims might participate in mainstream politics. we're much better off keeping them marginalized.

i wonder if some smart republican will ever figure out that a culture built around the family might be their natural constituency if you stopped dumbfu<k yahoo's from driving them the other direction.

i missed his 'dems driving folks to mosques' line the first time i read his post...yikes.

i don't know what to say. what, folks who worship in mosques have lost their right to register? i didn't know that.
but you know...had the founding fathers realized just how much trouble we'd have from muslim americans, no doubt there'd be something in the constitution about everyone but them having religious freedom. no doubt about it. :rolleyes:

timmgirvan 10-09-2008 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
i missed his 'dems driving folks to mosques' line the first time i read his post...yikes.

i don't know what to say. what, folks who worship in mosques have lost their right to register? i didn't know that.
but you know...had the founding fathers realized just how much trouble we'd have from muslim americans, no doubt there'd be something in the constitution about everyone but them having religious freedom. no doubt about it. :rolleyes:

The actions are right in front of your noses in print and online! You know damn well what I meant,too

SniperSB23 10-10-2008 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmgirvan
correct me if you think I'm wrong but being illegally registred 10-15 times or dead people voting is a little worse than people who haven't voted, or moved, being stricken from the voting roster. It wasn't meant as a party thing, but since the Dems are driving people to the Mosques to register, I'll leave you to your own conclusion!
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ents-to-acorn/

you can't tell me that you approve of these thing.

Who cares how many times someone registers? It is how many times they vote that is the issue. If registering 15 times allows them to vote 15 times then it is a major issue. If they can still only vote once then who the hell cares?

timmgirvan 10-10-2008 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23
Who cares how many times someone registers? It is how many times they vote that is the issue. If registering 15 times allows them to vote 15 times then it is a major issue. If they can still only vote once then who the hell cares?

Of course it's a big issue......why would they register that many times if they weren't planning to abuse the system? Like I tried to point out, there major investigations in 10 states now about this abuse.

Antitrust32 10-10-2008 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmgirvan
Of course it's a big issue......why would they register that many times if they weren't planning to abuse the system? Like I tried to point out, there major investigations in 10 states now about this abuse.

you mean ACORN, which has registered more imaginary people than alive people it seems. VERY scary group that Obama used to be involved in directly and his campaign has given ACORN $800,000.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...4%7D&dist=hppr

dalakhani 10-10-2008 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32
you mean ACORN, which has registered more imaginary people than alive people it seems. VERY scary group that Obama used to be involved in directly and his campaign has given ACORN $800,000.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...4%7D&dist=hppr

What do you know about acorn besides what you just read in that article? I want to hear this.

Make it quick...no google.

SniperSB23 10-10-2008 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32
you mean ACORN, which has registered more imaginary people than alive people it seems. VERY scary group that Obama used to be involved in directly and his campaign has given ACORN $800,000.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...4%7D&dist=hppr

The whole ACORN thing is just too fishy to be true. If you were going to commit voter fraud you sure as hell wouldn't register as Tony Romo or Terrell Owens. It seems so obvious that it seems more like people messing around to make ACORN look bad.

Antitrust32 10-10-2008 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani
What do you know about acorn besides what you just read in that article? I want to hear this.

Make it quick...no google.


http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/...ims/index.html

And its from CNN

Who cares what I know about ACORN, the facts are out there now. Go ahead and explain away DALA.

Antitrust32 10-10-2008 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23
The whole ACORN thing is just too fishy to be true. If you were going to commit voter fraud you sure as hell wouldn't register as Tony Romo or Terrell Owens. It seems so obvious that it seems more like people messing around to make ACORN look bad.

Its not like it just started happening though.

http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html

dalakhani 10-10-2008 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/...ims/index.html

And its from CNN

Who cares what I know about ACORN, the facts are out there now. Go ahead and explain away DALA.

You are honest...and lipstick.:p

Im not getting into this one.

timmgirvan 10-10-2008 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23
The whole ACORN thing is just too fishy to be true. If you were going to commit voter fraud you sure as hell wouldn't register as Tony Romo or Terrell Owens. It seems so obvious that it seems more like people messing around to make ACORN look bad.

You can't be that naive! why do candidates spend untold millions of dollars for a 300,000 per year job?

SniperSB23 10-10-2008 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmgirvan
You can't be that naive! why do candidates spend untold millions of dollars for a 300,000 per year job?

Cause it is the most powerful position in the world. And what the hell does that have to do with ACORN?

timmgirvan 10-10-2008 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23
Cause it is the most powerful position in the world. And what the hell does that have to do with ACORN?

Artificially inflating the voter rolls to influence the results! I really had to explain that?

Quiet Chris 10-10-2008 04:26 PM

I think everyone should be able to vote, but if you do not have some form of government ID you should NOT be allowed to vote. It really isn't that hard to come up with a drivers license or a picture ID. I think this is the most ridiculous thing going. All you have to do is walk up and say you are somebody and vote. Unreal.

Danzig 10-10-2008 04:49 PM

we show a license here when we vote, i thought everyone did.

Quiet Chris 10-12-2008 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
we show a license here when we vote, i thought everyone did.

Nope. Ton of states where you don't need ID of any kind. KS is just one example. I am not a Republican either, but I have to agree with them that you should have to provide some ID. Who doesn't have ID and if you don't have ID why do you have the time to vote but not get a government issued ID?

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/ma...photo_id_vote/

They actually took this to court and the court said it is ok for a state to make a law stating ID is required, but states still don't have to do it.

MSNBC: The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.

In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to prevent fraud.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.