Democrats preparing three-tiered vote fraud scheme to destroy election integrity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jeanne_S said:
It’s a bribe,it’s illegal
Click to expand...
Only if he talks to the individual and hands them a check/cash and tells them to go and pay off your debt and then go vote for this person. Then you might have have point.

It is all legal what is being done. And majority is by donations. And it is not being done solely by Bloomberg contrary to reporting right extremists.


(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
If it walks like a duck,talks like a duck…intent is everything…
 
The whole voting system has been fixed by both parties in an attempt to gain an advantage - the winner should be popular vote which will never happen because of the rigged system. There is no innocent parties both are guilty.
 
Dovekin said:
This is an example of how poll taxes and other limitations can be manipulated to exclude people from voting.
Click to expand...
ID’s are required for social benefits. If they already have an ID to claim benefits, why not require that ID for voting?

You’ve drawn an unnecessary equivalence between ID’s and poll taxes.
 
The popular vote is not fair representation.I sure as heck don’t want all the coastal,states deciding our elections
 
Zzyzx_Road said:
40.png
Dovekin:
This is an example of how poll taxes and other limitations can be manipulated to exclude people from voting.
Click to expand...
ID’s are required for social benefits. If they already have an ID to claim benefits, why not require that ID for voting?

You’ve drawn an unnecessary equivalence between ID’s and poll taxes.
Click to expand...
Legal requirements can be manipulated. There was a law in PA forbidding a universal ID, that probably would have made the use of cards for government benefits from being used for voting id. It sounds like a good idea, but there are always complications.

Not that this is an argument I was making. It is an explanation of why Democrats oppose IDs. It is the history of abuse that leads them to oppose limitations on voters. Poll taxes and voter ids were just exaples to help explain.
 
Dovekin said:
Not that this is an argument I was making. It is an explanation of why Democrats oppose IDs. It is the history of abuse that leads them to oppose limitations on voters. Poll taxes and voter ids were just exaples to help explain.
Click to expand...
Poll taxes I can understand. ID’s I don’t understand. At all. Not one single bit. Not when IDs are required for literally every other function in the economic and social welfare arenas. Except cash. And even that’s going away someday.

Universal ID’s? That’s a specious argument when every state has its own IDs and have already mandated their use for claiming benefits. So again, why can’t those same IDs be required to vote?
 
Dovekin . . .
Bloomberg is not a Democrat.
Click to expand...
What is he this week?

Republican, “Independent”, Democrat.

Whatever you want to call this guy
Bloomberg who was in one of the DEMOCRAT primary debates,
has always been a leftist politician (whatever you think his party label is this week).
 
Last edited:
JButky said:
And now it’s under investigation…
Click to expand...
It should go nowhere, but it depends how many anti-voting Republicans are involved in the investigatory process.

Paying a fine allowing someone to vote is different than paying them to vote. There is no stipulation that they actually vote. That’s pretty simple.
 
PaulinVA said:
Paying a fine allowing someone to vote is different than paying them to vote. There is no stipulation that they actually vote. That’s pretty simple.
Click to expand...
In the case of Planned Parenthood and abortions. The government says that the money goes for logistics only, and not abortions.

In this case, it is tricky. However, I like to think. What if President Trump spend 16 million, to help felons vote? How would this be reported, and how would I feel about it. And it does not feel right either way. But what is done is done.
 
Last edited:
Family of 4.
Received 8 Mail in Voter Applications.

Friend received 2 in his name, wife none.
Friend called the Secretary of State, told them he didn’t get one. Was asked name. Then told “that’s because you aren’t in our database” “We will send you out one right away” (while holding his 2 applications in his name). Friend’s response: “What database is this, no need to mail me one I am just going to go down to the poll to vote in person”. 2 days later friend received his 3rd Mail in Voter Application. Wife still hasn’t received one.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Rockoh22 said:
In this case, it is tricky. However, I like to think. What if President Trump spend 16 million, to help felons vote? How would this be reported, and how would I feel about it. And it does not feel right either way. But what is done is done.
Click to expand...
I think this is an interesting series of events to look at.

This is an amendment to the Florida constitution that was approved by ballot initiative. 65% of the voters were in favor of it.

The Republicans didn’t like that, and they controlled the legislature and the Governor, so they threw roadblocks up in the form of a law that said before the voting rights were restored, the felons must pay off all debts , including restitution. This was not mentioned in the Constitutional amendment.

The same group that sponsored the amendment initiative is now raising money to pay the debts off so the felons can vote. Not paying them to vote.

It’s hard to see how this isn’t voter suppression on the part of the Republicans.
 
Last edited:
PaulinVA said:
The Republicans didn’t like that, and they controlled the legislature and the Governor, so they threw roadblocks up in the form of a law that said before the voting rights were restored, the felons must pay off all debts , including restitution. This was not mentioned in the Constitutional amendment.
Click to expand...
Yes Republicans tend to be more of law and order. I do not know all the details in what you posted, and I do not trust the media much. I blame the media for the current state of America.

Paying the debt of a crime, to be restored your voting rights does not seem harsh. But I bet there can be good arguments to be made in both sides.

Being hard on sentences is not always a bad thing. I personally know a few people that due to their harsh sentence, they are alive today. Mainly due to addiction. And they are the ones who acknowledge this.
 
Rockoh22 said:
Paying the debt of a crime, to be restored your voting rights does not seem harsh. But I bet there can be good arguments to be made in both sides.
Click to expand...
The thinking is that some of these people will never be able to pay the fine or whatever, so the amendments purpose is being thwarted.

So, is it law and order, or suppression of voters you know probably won’t vote for you?
 
PaulinVA said:
The thinking is that some of these people will never be able to pay the fine or whatever, so the amendments purpose is being thwarted.

So, is it law and order, or suppression of voters you know probably won’t vote for you?
Click to expand...
I did say there can be good arguments to be made either way. There is also the Crime. So until you pay the debt, due to your actions you lost the ability to vote.

I think the larger picture is. What is a right? Do you have the right to vote? Or is that a privilege? I know, we say the right to vote. But is it really a right? I have the right to what? But that is another subject. I am digressing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top