RJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1826 times:
Looks like every vote should count, even if it's fraudulent according to the Ohio Secretary of State. Her response to checking possible fraud? "I don't know when it became vogue to put fear into the voting process, except if you don't want people to vote," Brunner, a Democrat, said. Her office must respond to the complaint by Wednesday.
Seems like the democratic party is just afraid. Maybe afraid to find out how many fraudulent registration cards have been turned in?
So what is the difference between a "selected" leader and a "fraudulent" leader if the election is that close? Where is the democratic party saying "check every card so we know it's legitimate"? Seems to me they would not want there to be any doubt if the election is close.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12319 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1685 times:
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 1): It would appear that it might be you who is running scared and the continued need to dig up dirt or create a story when there really is not one.
Not really, there are at least 12 different states now looking into significant voter fraud.
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 1): Bush's first term, his brother in Florida delivered it for him, so we already experienced the "fraudulent" leader.
No, Gov. Jeb Bush did not "deliver" Florida to Pres. George Bush in 2000, nor did we already experience a fraudulent leader. Bush won FL by 587 votes. The Democrats were concerned over hanging chads, and who the voter really intended to vote for. The democrats successfully managed to see that over 35,000 US Military absentee ballots were not counted at all, state wide.
Quoting AirCop (Reply 2): Do you live in Ohio, RJ? No you don't. So it really shouldn't matter to you what the voting procedures are in Ohio.
We all need to be concerned over fraudulent voting, just as we need to be concerned over disenfrangished voters. We all need to be concerned over voting and who wins OH, as well as the 49 other states. It matter to all of us, otherwise we could be stuck with Obama.
Quoting AirCop (Reply 2): In the 2006 Arizona election, the County Attorney for Maricopa county was yelling about voter fraud, illegals voting. Gee whiz, the only people busted and convicted were white republicans, go figure.
Then they should go to jail. It doesn't matter if those causing voter fraud are Republican or Democrat, they need to go to jail.
Quoting AirCop (Reply 5): Closer to your home, put Del Rio, Texas and Voter Fraud in a search engine and see what you come up with.
Voter fraul is in all 50 of the sates, so is voter disenfrangement.
AirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1650 times:
Anyways hot off the press:
Source: The Columbus Dispatch
Brunner won't need to change voter lists
Appeals court reverses ruling on registrations
Saturday, October 11, 2008 3:36 AM
By and Alan Johnson
A federal appeals court ruled 2-1 last night in favor of Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to put on hold an order sought by the Ohio Republican Party involving information about new voters and concerns about potential fraud.
The three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Brunner is not required to provide county elections boards with the names of voters whose personal information does not match state motor-vehicle or federal Social Security records, as ordered Thursday by U.S. District Court Judge George C. Smith of Columbus.
Brunner had sought an emergency order delaying Smith's order, and the appeals court agreed with Brunner that federal law does not require her to provide the names and that the Nov. 4 election is too close for major policy changes.
The panel noted that the process of matching voter information with state and federal records has been in place since 2007, and that the details about mismatches are available to counties on individual voter records, even if not in one list.
RJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1635 times:
Quoting AirCop (Reply 9): Brunner had sought an emergency order delaying Smith's order, and the appeals court agreed with Brunner that federal law does not require her to provide the names and that the Nov. 4 election is too close for major policy changes.
So again she is successful at dodging part of her job, which is to ensure the integrity of the voting roles. And people had the audacity to complain about Kathleen Harris!