Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by rivergator, Jul 8, 2013.
It means it's an opinion/guess, and not fact.
What? It would indicate that a handful were, well, not conclusive.
From the link: "Only a handful of questioned votes were inconclusive."
I don't take that to be cleared. And my response to the whole dead voter thing was not just to this particular place but to address the multiple situations I'd heard it in during the election season. However, that the number was not the number originally claimed is a good thing. I don't know why some here seem to feel that when a Republican points something out that could be fraudulent it's meant to be evil or something and can't just be pointing it out because, well, it could be fraudulent. As an American, I'm glad they didn't find 900 votes or whatever that were done by dead people.
Another argument for voter ID I suppose, because again, people can say "well the problem's not THAT bad", but again, one vote cast fraudulently is one vote too many.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. If they said the inconclusive ones were either definitively not fraud or definitively fraud, then yeah, there'd be some opinion.
In other words, icequeen's right, this did not "clear" the election of fraud. But river's also right in that they didn't find any fraud.
Which, on that note ...
I think in this case purposefully is needed in the context of fraud.
Until a Pub was found to do it--then all hell would break loose.
BOTH sides should be intolerant of just one vote being cast by a dead person(of ANY party)....multiple votes(by ANY party)...FRAUD(again--by ANY party).
Only defensive spin and defense happens when it is mentioned one of their own is cited for fraudulent voting. I can't recall exactly when or all the circumstances, but it seems several months ago it was noted that a Pub admitted to voter fraud and ALL of us in here on the right stated loudly that it was wrong and the culprits should be convicted and pay the price. All the left does when anything is mentioned about voter fraud from the left---they go into defense mode.
Big difference in how the left and right look at the core problems--wrong is wrong regardless of who does it. In the eyes of the left--especially in HERE--if it is done by the right, it is a cardinal sin with no excuses whatsoever. If done by the left--it is downplayed or deflected or excused by spin, spin, and more spin.
"One is one too many" is faulty reasoning, since measures to eliminate that one fraudulent voter will disenfranchise many more legitimate voters. If Florida/2000 taught us anything, it should be that our elections are not perfectable events and that realistically we should seek to encourage high turnout and as accurate counting as possible, but in a close one it is not always clear how the people have spoken.
How the eff do they know it wasn't "purposefully"? :no:
More BS lies from the Leftists.
Wow what a super addition to the thread, Rick!
Round & round & round...:wink:
What's on 1st?
Who's on 2nd?
Then I'll cut to the chase... we still need picture ID's to prevent voter fraud.
I'm not sure if that's more or less insightful than posting a facepalm image (is it 2005 again?) in response to two valid points. At bare minimum you can put some effort into disputing them.
They all still seem to think that we don't need picture ID's when voting.
I wonder why?
My entire front page of too hot yesterday was just posts from Rick quoting people and saying "rep". Talk about insightful contributions....
Fraudulent voters lead to fraudulent elections/results. That will also cause people to quit voting. Voter ids can be implemented in a way not to disenfranchise anyone which needs to be the ultimate goal.
I double face palm your rep.