Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

What the Canadians are reporting.

Canada Free Press Link

On July 6, American Thinker published an article by Lee Cary about an interview with a Chicago political machine insider. It contained the following warning:

“In Chicago, the Precinct Captains watch to see who votes and who doesn’t. Then, at the end of the day, others will cast votes for those who haven’t shown up to vote, all under the direction of the Precinct Captain. If the actual voter shows up later, they’re given someone else’s card. The Republican poll watchers don’t stop this. Hell, most of them are actually Democrats.”

The Democrat Voter Fraud Playbook is as follows:

1.ACORN registers the names, legitimate or not.
2.Black Panther, SEIU and other “community organizer” groups intimidate people, especially minorities, from voting Republican.
3.Voter lists remain unscrubbed of felons, dead people, and illegal immigrants.
4.On Election Day, precinct workers submit any unused ballots for Democrat candidates.
5.Democrat officials and politicians pretend like nothing happened.
It’s as easy as that to steal an election.

Actually, Democrat voter fraud is never more widespread than I think.

One of my best friends since grade school is married to a former member of the state Democratic central cmte. I once asked her why it is always Dems who commit the most egregious acts of voter fraud. She basically said that Democrats have a moral obligation to keep Republicans out of office because only confused and uninformed people vote Republican. Because they don't know what they are really doing by voting Republican, Democrats must watch out for their interests by ensuring proper election outcomes. She was serious.

from the same eJournal

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25373" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





wow...

Gil Dobie wrote:What the Canadians are reporting.

Canada Free Press Link

On July 6, American Thinker published an article by Lee Cary about an interview with a Chicago political machine insider. It contained the following warning:

“In Chicago, the Precinct Captains watch to see who votes and who doesn’t. Then, at the end of the day, others will cast votes for those who haven’t shown up to vote, all under the direction of the Precinct Captain. If the actual voter shows up later, they’re given someone else’s card. The Republican poll watchers don’t stop this. Hell, most of them are actually Democrats.”

The Democrat Voter Fraud Playbook is as follows:

1.ACORN registers the names, legitimate or not.
2.Black Panther, SEIU and other “community organizer” groups intimidate people, especially minorities, from voting Republican.
3.Voter lists remain unscrubbed of felons, dead people, and illegal immigrants.
4.On Election Day, precinct workers submit any unused ballots for Democrat candidates.
5.Democrat officials and politicians pretend like nothing happened.
It’s as easy as that to steal an election.

Tell that to Al Gore.

Not more than I think. I've said for years that in any close election there is risk that the Democrats will win because of their net advantage in voter fraud. That's why I had to laugh when DEMOCRATS were claiming that voter fraud cost them the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections. PLEASE. Massive voter fraud in favor of Democrats is just part of the game. It's a given.

Tell that to Al Gore.

I might have a hard time documenting it for you becuase I found the last time I tried to do that that links I'd bookmarked about voter fraud and illegal voting in Florida were no longer valid. But I don't think there's any question that, on balance, voter fraud and illegal voting in Florida worked in Gore's favor. I don't think there's any question that, had only legal and legitimate votes been counted, Bush would've won Florida by a larger margin than he officially did in 2000. I had links to stuff about all the illegal voting in overwhelmingly majority Democratic precincts, stuff like people admitting they voted multiple times for Gore, felons voting, etc., etc. Plus there's the bottom line finding of the media consortium that Bush won the majority of legal votes.

The idea that Gore really "won" Florida in terms of legitimate, legal votes is ridiculous. It really is. If only legitimate, legal voting had been practiced and counted there never would've even been any real question as to Bush winning the State.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Tell that to Al Gore.

I might have a hard time documenting it for you becuase I found the last time I tried to do that that links I'd bookmarked about voter fraud and illegal voting in Florida were no longer valid. But I don't think there's any question that, on balance, voter fraud and illegal voting in Florida worked in Gore's favor. I don't think there's any question that, had only legal and legitimate votes been counted, Bush would've won Florida by a larger margin than he officially did in 2000. I had links to stuff about all the illegal voting in overwhelmingly majority Democratic precincts, stuff like people admitting they voted multiple times for Gore, felons voting, etc., etc. Plus there's the bottom line finding of the media consortium that Bush won the majority of legal votes.

The idea that Gore really "won" Florida in terms of legitimate, legal votes is ridiculous. It really is. If only legitimate, legal voting had been practiced and counted there never would've even been any real question as to Bush winning the State.

On the other hand, the study also found that Gore probably would have won, by a range of 42 to 171 votes out of 6 million cast, had there been a broad recount of all disputed ballots statewide.

None of these findings are certain. County officials were unable to deliver as many as 2,200 problem ballots to the investigators that news organizations hired to conduct the recount. There were also small but measurable differences in the way that the "neutral" investigators counted certain types of ballots, an indication that different counters might have come up with slightly different numbers. So it is possible that either candidate might have emerged the winner of an official recount, and nobody can say with exact certainty what the "true" Florida vote really was.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/w ... orida.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chizzang wrote:from the same eJournal

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25373" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





wow...

With the exception of # 5, it looks like a pretty good list. As for item #9, Roe v. Wade should be overturned, but the legality of abortion should be determined by the states.

CitadelGrad wrote:

Chizzang wrote:from the same eJournal

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25373" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





wow...

With the exception of # 5, it looks like a pretty good list. As for item #9, Roe v. Wade should be overturned, but the legality of abortion should be determined by the states.

Citgrad - Nothing is more more disturbing than seeing a tom periello add below your post. That guy will be a statistic come November,,,,,,,,,,,Virginia has no sympathy for a Pelosi auto-vote like him

What are you talking about?

CitadelGrad wrote:

Chizzang wrote:from the same eJournal

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25373" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





wow...

With the exception of # 5, it looks like a pretty good list. As for item #9, Roe v. Wade should be overturned, but the legality of abortion should be determined by the states.

Yeah it's actually a solid list - there's some horse sh!t in there...
I simply posted that to show that the article on Voter fraud is from a Republican Based Canadian eJournal not from some neutral source - they might as well call themselves FOX NEWS Canada

I hesitate to jump on a whitewash job like this. For every Donkey voter fraud event nationwide, I would venture to say that there's an Elephant one somewhere else.

I will say this, though: I've never personally seen it. I have a Democratic friend who's running for re-election in the CA Assembly, and she would never condone anything like that. As long as she's around, I will never admit to a whitewash job on the Democrats. Specific individuals may be doing stupid things at the national level (Pelosi, Frank, Boxer, and Feinstein are perfect examples). But these blanket statements do nothing except raise ire at those who are innocent.

On the other hand, the study also found that Gore probably would have won, by a range of 42 to 171 votes out of 6 million cast, had there been a broad recount of all disputed ballots statewide.

That may or may not be true, Sky. But in any case it does not rebut what I said about there being very little doubt about Bush having won the majority of votes legally cast in Florida.

The problem with illegal votes is that you can never absolutely say who they were cast for. So recognizing that there was a large number of illegal votes does not mean you can take any votes away from either candidate. So let's say you know there were 5,000 illegal votes cast in areas that historically voted 90% Democrat and voted 90% Democrat again. It wouldn't be unreasonable to say that the Democratic candidate enjoyed somewhere around a +4000 advantage as a result of the illegal votes.

But you can't do anything about it because you don't know with 100% certainty which candidate each individual illegal vote went to. So if you do a statewide recount including all disputed ballots you do not address that problem at all.

And that's why I wish the links I'd saved from the 2000 election were still valid. I could show you that illegal voting in heavily Democratic areas was epidemic in that election. Again, any reasonable person would say that if all of the LEGAL votes had been counted correctly but ONLY the LEGAL votes Bush would've won by more than he did.

And, again, it's like that every time. Voter fraud ALWAYS works in favor of Democrats. And all you need to do to honestly test that is ask yourself which Party seems more interested in combatting voter fraud and which Party seems less interested. If a measure comes up to require stricter requirements for verifying the eligibility of a voter, avoiding multiple voting, etc., just pay attention to which Party tends to favor them and which Party tends to oppose them. They know where there bread is buttered.

JohnStOnge wrote:

On the other hand, the study also found that Gore probably would have won, by a range of 42 to 171 votes out of 6 million cast, had there been a broad recount of all disputed ballots statewide.

That may or may not be true, Sky. But in any case it does not rebut what I said about there being very little doubt about Bush having won the majority of votes legally cast in Florida.

The problem with illegal votes is that you can never absolutely say who they were cast for. So recognizing that there was a large number of illegal votes does not mean you can take any votes away from either candidate. So let's say you know there were 5,000 illegal votes cast in areas that historically voted 90% Democrat and voted 90% Democrat again. It wouldn't be unreasonable to say that the Democratic candidate enjoyed somewhere around a +4000 advantage as a result of the illegal votes.

But you can't do anything about it because you don't know with 100% certainty which candidate each individual illegal vote went to. So if you do a statewide recount including all disputed ballots you do not address that problem at all.

And that's why I wish the links I'd saved from the 2000 election were still valid. I could show you that illegal voting in heavily Democratic areas was epidemic in that election. Again, any reasonable person would say that if all of the LEGAL votes had been counted correctly but ONLY the LEGAL votes Bush would've won by more than he did.

And, again, it's like that every time. Voter fraud ALWAYS works in favor of Democrats. And all you need to do to honestly test that is ask yourself which Party seems more interested in combatting voter fraud and which Party seems less interested. If a measure comes up to require stricter requirements for verifying the eligibility of a voter, avoiding multiple voting, etc., just pay attention to which Party tends to favor them and which Party tends to oppose them. They know where there bread is buttered.

My neighbor in New Orleans used to BRAG about the political corruption in Louisiana.

"... I voted the right way and got me a load of gravel on my driveway..." he said without shame!

Didn't the Illinois "dead" vote put Kennedy over the top in 1960?

I am not suprised that Democrat voter fraud is widespead, they are dying to commit it.

Since there are more Democrats than Republicans, obviously there are more crooked Democrats than crooked Republicans.

Disproportionately more.

We aren't talking about the number of people who are simply voters. We are talking about party operatives. The ones who actively run campaigns, raise campaign funds, work in campaigns in a variety of jobs. Do you really think there are more Democrat operatives than Republican operatives?

CitadelGrad wrote:Disproportionately more.

We aren't talking about the number of people who are simply voters. We are talking about party operatives. The ones who actively run campaigns, raise campaign funds, work in campaigns in a variety of jobs. Do you really think there are more Democrat operatives than Republican operatives?

I don't know and it doesn't matter. They're all crooks with maybe the occasional exception during a leap year.

Crawl over their dying mothers to fvck their dead sisters.

Of course voter fraud exists, and probably on a pretty large scale. And since it's easier and more impactful to do it in big cities, and since Dems enjoy such a large advantage in big cities, it's not hard to get to the conclusion that Dems probably do benefit more from this. It doesn't mean that the GOP doesn't do this (or fraud by intimidation) because they certainly do as well. It would be nice to clean this up but neither party seems to be particularly keen on giving up their ability to sway some elections.

Chizzang wrote:from the same eJournal

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25373" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





wow...

Good article. Thanks for posting.