|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Some people say President Obama told illegal aliens they can vote. It is reported that 3,000,000 did just that in California. What about Arizona? What about Florida? How can that happen? The Governor of North Carolina is suspicious about the vote that took him out of office. He wants a recount.
Is this from a reputable source or more internet conspiracy theory drama?
I go by the old adage don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see. I would think if they knew now that illegals were voting they'd have known before the election.
I honestly think the right is setting the stage to claim the election was stolen if the recounts go against them. Too bad though. It wouldn't create as much news if it does. Republicans aren't big into rioting.
Hi Live, It depends on who you listen to.
VIDEO: OBAMA 'ENCOURAGES ILLEGALS TO VOTE'
http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/obama-encour … s-to-vote/
Jerry Brown Signs Bill That Could Let Illegal Aliens Vote
http://www.breitbart.com/california/201 … iens-vote/
Any person who renewed or secured a driver’s license through the DMV may now register to vote, or choose to opt out of doing so. Because illegal immigrants are now eligible for obtaining driver’s licenses, they could be allowed to vote in elections if the Secretary of State’s office fails to verify their eligibility properly.
Brown and the California Democratic party know exactly what they are doing; as a Public Policy Institute survey showed, among unregistered adults, 49% lean toward the Democratic Party and 22% toward the Republican Party. Any bill permitting illegal immigrants to vote would cement the Democratic Party’s hold on California.
Interesting. Politics in America, and particularly liberal states, has become a game. A game where ethics, honesty, the law and integrity are all set aside in order to get what will benefit those in power.
This type of thing (playing games with voting rules in order to gain political advantage in this case) is exactly why Trump was elected. And California, as an entire state, is continuing the same garbage the people of the nation rejected.
The Democratic party appears to have learned little, at least at this point. Perhaps they need a stronger lesson than losing both houses and presidency?
I thought your name is on a list of registered voters. You go in, sign the register, show your id and vote. If that is the case, how can there be illegal voting.
If that is not the case, the voting system IS a mess! I'm in California. I hadn't heard of the issue until an hour ago when I looked it up.
I've been voting absentee for 20+ years.
Liberals have long fought any state requiring id in order to vote. The theory is that poor people are too poor to get a free ID, or that they are too stupid to do so.
But California; apparently that list is generated from drivers licenses. If you have a license, you're on the list of registered voters; all you have to do is produce that license and you're in. It's a great way to get lots of new liberal voters - that they are not citizens is beside the point.
"The theory is that poor people are too poor to get a free ID, or that they are too stupid to do so."
The soft bigotry of low-expectations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrBxZGWCdgs
Like everything else in life, free things always cost something and ID is no different.
Entirely false. All states require some form of proof according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which are mostly controlled by Republicans:
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections- … er-id.aspx
Regarding California: "While this law does automatically register CITIZENS to vote when obtaining or renewing a driver's license, this only applies to CITIZENS who are already eligible to vote." - Snopes
I am an illegal alien with a criminal record and I voted five times in California.
Great Sychophantastic!!! Maybe yo can snitch on your fellow illegals so this matter can be put to bed. If you set up a website, you should make plenty of money.
I have an uncle who speaks no English who voted 15 times for Hillary Clinton in LA. He just went from precinct to precinct. He just showed his library card and they let him vote.
If dead people can vote, why not illegals.
I can only hope FEDs Government gets abolished.
I'm sure if Trump was a speaker on a street corner and nobody knew he was famous. They would listen for a moment, then just walk on by then chalk him up as another insane person.
In general countries like Canada who have 1/10 the population as US and bigger the landmass to live in. Would better control over their illegal, walking dead and insane people.
You would mention The Walking Dead. I love that show!!!!
You are right I'm sure. If Donald Trump were a nobody, no one would listen to him. The fact that he is filthy rich and chooses to be a lunatic is intriguing to many. It made his millions multiply to billions!
we need it for defense and foreign relations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_T … nstitution
When you say FED is for defense , it is working actually opposite as the most Offensive military in the world by far.
When you say foreign Relationship, US and Israel threatened the world more then anyone for natural environment issues and worldwide Corporatism take over that cause destruction of cultures.
Not a design of a friendly and kinder world I want to live in.
This isn't true. I live in North Carolina where recently voter ID was passed. We had to show ID for one election, and then a judge overturned it in time for it to NOT apply for the presidential election. Not all states require voter ID, although IMO, they should.
Wrong, Brett All states require some sort of ID, including NC; some require photo ID, fewer yet, the ones who don't want minorities and other likely Democrats, to vote, will require only certain photo ID that the poor, elderly may or may not be able to obtain cheaply or easily.
I can promise you that I have voted in nearly every election since I turned 18 (and I'm now 58; have been in North Carolina the whole time, and have never been asked for ID except the one time we managed to pass it before it was overturned last year. I would LOVE to have voter ID ... believe in it and think it necessary to avoid fraud (although California seems to have their own problems, even with ID) but at this time, no ID is required in NC, no matter what you read on the Internet, alas. I am here!
I went to look. You are right for NC. It was apparently 1 of 21 or 22 states which had no ID requirement at all.by 2012. In 2013 NC joined 7 other states with racially motivated ID laws.
They were fraud prevention motivated. There is no one here without an ID! The "racially motivated" part is all liberal press. The law was overturned. It does seem that a national election should be governed by national laws, such as one requiring proof of identity!
Yes, you are exactly right. Extremists claim otherwise.
I have a girl who works for me. She is a felon. She is not supposed to vote. She received a voter ID card in the mail. Apparently everyone who gets a driver's license in this state gets a voter card. I know, for a fact, that illegals have driver's licenses in this state. So, it appears that it is possible for an illegal to vote. It is possible for a felon to.
It would be nice if everything was on the up and up, legal and according to laws on the books. Life is not that simple. I find it hard to believe that millions of illegals can vote but it appears that it may be possible. It is certainly something to check into and ensure it isn't happening. I realize as a Democrat you wouldn't consider that to be in the best interests of your goals but right is right. Isn't it?
Convicted felons can vote in many states: https://exoffenders.net/felon-voting-rights/
Some states also allow illegals to get drivers' licenses. Having a driver's license does not automatically allow you to vote.
I am not a Democrat. I am a right of center independent and former Republican who is disgusted by how far right the party has moved.
Thanks promise! The first time I heard that convicted felons couldn't vote was about 5 years ago. I hadn't really thought about it since I didn't have the problem.
Are all crimes equal
1. Is it as bad to bounce checks as it is to kill someone?
2. Does it take a pardon?
3. After completion of parole, do they get the right to vote
4. There are convicted felons that have held office (Look at Weenie, not convicted, but well known for pornography on the Internet. He ran for mayor. Should he be able to vote?)
5. There are many people who don't deserve to vote.
6. Can mentally ill people vote?
Hillary won people vote by 2.2 million, you think in a true democracy that should win. Even though nothing will stop the American collapses because people won't vote to go after bankers.
The electoral college did EXACTLY what it was designed to do. Dude, you need to really do some research on the founding of this country.
Electoral college has yet to vote. Last night a delegate said he isn't voting for Trump.
True. One delegate is meaningless. Plus, if they did decide to try to keep him out, there will be a civil war.
One delegate is meaningless in the sense that it won't change the election.
A list of millions of people asking delegates to change their vote from what they promised...that is NOT meaningless. It means that there are millions of people that didn't get the "Trump Message" that the swamp is to be cleaned up one way or another. It means there are millions of people out there that are quite happy with legislators/leaders that have no ethics, don't follow the laws and don't care what anyone else wants or thinks. It means that there are millions of people that care nothing about anything (not even the constitution or free elections) as long as they get what they want.
Trump & his supporters were threatening us with guns if Hillary won - before the election. You should all be grateful for peace-loving, 'liberal, elitist' protestors. All of you were saying that Trump would 'become more presidential' and NOT continue to be such a jerk if he was elected, but that hasn't happened - why not?! FYI, if he had... his own electors wouldn't be looking for a way to not have to elect him, now.
http://thehill.com/opinion/bill-press/3 … to-america
Trump LIED to everyone about the election being rigged for Hillary, causing the wedge between us to be driven, deeper. If Trump had been a real politician to believe in - he would have also joined in the recount efforts to ensure the results were clear for 'we the people' - instead of continuing the bickering since he supposedly has nothing to worry about. He might even have received some respect from the opposition.
Since the election, Trump has ignored trying to unify our country - while doing everything he can to fracture us right down the middle of every possible dividing line. He’s inspired good people to turn ugly; and ugly people to become uglier.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/11/robert- … the-media/
Trump is a master manipulator and GOP have always tried to be. We all now know why Trump was spending so much time in the rust & bible belts spewing hateful, fear-mongering rhetoric targeted specifically at those citizens who were the most easily impressed by it - kind of like McCain tried to use Sarah Palin in 2008. Trump made it less obvious. He's certainly not stupid.
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/a … 102096.htm
For 8 yrs, GOP made it clear that they do not respect our votes; by trying to convince everyone that government is bad because of us EVIL ‘elitists’ (your NORMAL American neighbors) - while painting themselves as ‘abused’. They refused to work across partisan divides on budgets, immigration laws, jobs programs, climate change, tax reform, energy, etc - AND had a majority, yet Obamacare exists. Citizens became angry with a stalled country; while GOP continued to blame Obama & those who voted for him.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ … ump-214498
Trump only won 20% of the country by a mere 800,000ish votes; and Hillary won by 2.5m more of the popular vote than he did. THAT means that the majority of us did NOT vote for Trump's policies. This is the reason for the protests. GOP are obviously taking their 'win' in gleeful celebration as an opportunity to swipe away as many of the things we have worked so damn hard for and accomplished as a nation as fast as possible.
That is uncool on so many levels. What 'could' be an opportunity for them to connect with 'the people' and develop a renewed repartee with them is pretty much turning out to be a 'shut the fluck up, we'll do what we want' thing - without considering what people were actually voting for or against, in the first place... Its not like white conservatives have enough numbers to elect someone like Trump into office, anymore.
Frankly, a LOT of you who voted for Trump didn't vote for his policies, either - right, white Bernie guys? They couldn't vote for Hillary long before Trump and his 'good 'ol locker room supporters' gave them persmission to hate her, more. Other 'groups' beyond white men had every reason to be JUST as ANGRY as anyone else about anything; and yet we (those of us who showed up) found it in our hearts to vote fair between both Trump & Hillary. But, white men needed to make SURE Hillary didn't get in there, didn't you?
Most women (except white Christians) were able to separate Hillary from Bill’s scandals; and could see that the ones she did participate in weren’t nearly as incriminating as any other male politician before her. If a male politician had went in the election ring with the same email scandal, it would not have phased his chances of winning - and in fact, it would probably not been his worse scandal to overcome. (And, a candidate like Bernie wouldn't have had a chance.)
Media made Hillary's scandals seem like the holocaust; while Trump's hateful, misogynistic rhetoric was made out to be just 'normal locker room talk'. Search YouTube for “70 Awful Displays Of Sexism On Fox News” Its not just GOP men. Women expect this misogynistic attitude from the disoriented right-wing.
Its easier to heal than we realize - 'Christians & ex-Christians Prove God Exists by Debunking Salvation: Science & Spirituality Reveal the Real Jesus Christ' - Look it up. Next time, no more wannabee armchair scientists or Christian militants voting on fake hype, fake news or fake fear.
Call your votes a selection, not a democracy by the people. Call a president of a corporation, not of a country.
Only white Christian male voted when they wrote the constitution now half of women and all races can vote now.
White Zionist US Congress have it worked out for you. So why bother to vote, America, stay following leaders who don't know you and just go back to sleep.
In Missouri, when I voted, I took in my voter's card. I tried to give them my ID and they said they didn't need it, but if I ever didn't have my voter's card that they could scan my ID. I am confused on how an illegal could get around this other than stealing a card?
They can't, conservatives griping about this has about as much credibility as an Elvis sighting....
Alan Schulkin, Commissioner of the Democratic Board of Elections in NYC, talked about De Blasio giving out ID cards (in lieu of a drivers license) that can be used for anything, and didn't vet the people to see who they really are. That anybody can go say, I'm Joe Smith, I want an ID card. That, there's lots of fraud, not just voter fraud. He said, that is why he is getting more conservative as he gets older.
Who exactly has no credibility?
You can walk in to any flea market here and can buy a dozen, get a dozen free, drivers licenses.
In flee markets, that's amazing. I have heard of places all my life where people can purchase fake IDs, Social Security cards, passports, etc. Money talks...but free is better. Teenagers get fake IDs all the time so they can go party in bars. There are black markets, and some freaking States hand out IDs illegally.
I know for a fact that only a driver's license is required in this state. How do I know? Because that is all I presented when I voted.
The fact that Breitbart started this rumor is laughable. It is owned by Steve Bannon, the same guy who is now in the White House with Trump.
It starts right after the recount move by Steing and Clinton. Coincidence? I hardly think so. Trump supporters lapping it up? Of course.
That video was spliced together to make it look like that's what he was saying.
This is such a critical time in our country. This has really caused many to wake up, I hope, and many to be so concerned. When I saw the OP, my mind went immediately to the first video you linked there. The President, giving comfort to a woman that is concerned about not being treated the same way. I was shocked and saddened.
Ideas, including politics and the rule of law in our societies, if not true and good, will always struggle to meet up to, or beat all the lesser ideas. That reality is not within the power of anyone. Thus, throughout history, those with bad or lesser ideas need to grasp SO much for power. Sheer power can not make a bad idea or lots of bad ideas good ones, but they can with brute force MAKE people comply in an immoral way. Good and truthful ideas tend to have a much smoother path, on their own.
Even kids know that when a side needs to cheat to win, they are not really the winners. In our greater case, everyone would lose, because we are talking about our country here. We are talking about our families, our future on this planet, and for our kids and posterity.
It was and is very very critical, that they engage a war in the minds of everyone on all the sides, but especially those that could be drawn in to believe in the horrors of the other side. Create a great set of false ideas. It is unfortunately working like a charm on so many, and it is really scary. I think or hope, that it has shaken many up to wake up and realize, why do we feel like the other side is almost alien to my way of thinking.
What we can know for sure, is that the side most engaged in cheating to win and being so dishonest, is the side that is likely to continue cheat to win. In office or not. When allowed free reign, I think we haven't begun to really understand the consequences. Its a time to do a history refresher also. Well we don't have to, but to our own detriment perhaps.
The first thing I do when I see new names is look at the profiles. You are a beautiful person.
Facebook is trying to stop the flow of fake news. They will have surveys under some ads to help weed out the bad stuff. They will also use artificial intelligence.
I believe people should be held accountable for what they post on social media. Slander, banning from social media and possible criminal charges (in cases like the pizza parlor).
There might be some validity to it: http://www.investors.com/politics/edito … e-in-2016/
As your link points out, anyone thinking that 0 illegals voted is a fool. The question cannot be whether any voted, but how many did so.
"anyone thinking that 0 illegals voted is a fool. "
Please prove it with information from credible sources and not an opinion piece from a right-wing publication.
The abstract from the above article's "proof" says the following:
In spite of substantial public controversy, very little reliable data exists concerning the frequency with which non-citizen immigrants participate in United States elections.
http://www.investors.com/politics/edito … e-in-2016/
"Critics note that a Harvard team in 2015 had responded to the study, calling it "biased." But that report included this gem: "Further, the likely percent of noncitizen voters in recent U.S. elections is 0."
Really? That's simply preposterous, frankly, as anyone who has lived in California can attest. Leftist get-out-the-vote groups openly urge noncitizens to vote during election time, and the registration process is notoriously loose. To suggest there is no illegal voting at all is absurd."
"But there is evidence to back Trump's claims. A 2014 study in the online Electoral Studies Journal shows that in the 2008 and 2010 elections, illegal immigrant votes were in fact quite high."
"some states are so notoriously slipshod in their controls (California, Virginia and New York — all of which have political movements to legalize voting by noncitizens — come to mind) that it would be shocking if many illegals didn't vote. "
'"We find that some noncitizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and congressional elections," wrote Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, both of Old Dominion University, and David C. Earnest of George Mason University.'
"Yes, there is room for skepticism of any claim that's made. But every vote cast by someone who isn't by law permitted to vote disenfranchises American citizens. The charge should at least be taken seriously."
That enough for you? From the link you provided?
Did you actually read the abstract from the study he cites or just believe his opinion and complete twisting of it.
Yes, there is voter fraud in this country. The total found so far is 31 out of more than one billion votes. Even the respectable conservative publications report it. Fortunately, there are some left.
http://fortune.com/2016/10/18/studies-c … ry-common/
Hatred does not justify propaganda.
Here's the study cited on Investors: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar … 9414000973
How is the abstract being twisted by the article?
The other study in the Fortune article is this one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won … lots-cast/
The professor states:
requirements to show ID at the polls are designed for pretty much one thing: people showing up at the polls pretending to be somebody else in order to each cast one incremental fake ballot. This is a slow, clunky way to steal an election. Which is why it rarely happens.
I’ve been tracking allegations of fraud for years now, including the fraud ID laws are designed to stop. In 2008, when the Supreme Court weighed in on voter ID, I looked at every single allegation put before the Court. And since then, I’ve been following reports wherever they crop up.
To be clear, I’m not just talking about prosecutions. I track any specific, credible allegation that someone may have pretended to be someone else at the polls, in any way that an ID law could fix.
So far, I’ve found about 31 different incidents (some of which involve multiple ballots) since 2000, anywhere in the country. If you want to check my work, you can read a comprehensive list of the incidents below.
Is that the same type of voter fraud that would occur with illegals voting? I was under the impression that illegals voting would not involve pretending to be someone else to vote.
Good! You agree then, that illegals (or the dead, perhaps) have a vote count greater than zero. Which is all I said, isn't it? Notice that "Which is why it rarely happens." means that it does happen. Not never - "rarely" does not mean zero, but instead some positive number.
NYC Democratic Election Commissioner, "They Bus People Around to Vote" to get their people in office.
NY law says you cannot ask anybody for an ID, the Commissioner doesn't agree with that, because he wants his vote to count...but then does nothing about the voter fraud. He says he can see a lot of fraud, not just voter fraud. Muslims can vote with burkas on with their faces covered, and no one knows who they are. They could vote several times. "Governor de Blasio doesn't care."
The Commissioner doesn't think much of the "liberal" thing.
Thanks to Project Veritas for the undercover video. They exposed a lot of election rigging and voter fraud...and James O'Keefe filed a complaint against Hillary Clinton and the DNC. Trump is suing them for insighting violence at his rallies...they admitted being paid to do it on undercover videos. So, fraud and racketeering!
Project Veritas Action: undercover DNC Rigging the Election
* http://hubpages.com/politics/forum/1384 … -election-
But that total of 31 incidents cited earlier would still qualify as the 0% mentioned in the other article. For example if the percentage was 0.01 they would round it down to 0. So in terms of percentages zero doesn't have to literally mean zero. I have no clue of the actual stats and being from Canada I have no dog in this fight (even though Trump does scare a lot of Canadians, and many of us really liked Bernie because in many ways he was like a Canadian politician), I'm just saying fraud could exist but not be wide spread enough to have any blip on the radar.
Valid point but not applicable to the critiquing article (http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/cces/new … le-surveys) because the authors do not do this with similar values. For instance, they state an example where assuming a 0.1% error rate would result in 19 citizens out of 20,000 claiming to be noncitizens.
31 is still too large to be rounded down to 0%. That'd be 31/18,737 respondents -> 0.16%.
Also, 31 in the other study is the number of voter frauds by impersonation. That's a separate type of voter fraud from noncitizen voter fraud (worth noting that the other study also found low rates of noncitizen votes, but their most recent sample was from 2005).
The 0% number is (probably) an estimation using the values from the study they criticize. The authors don't elaborate on exactly how they derived this number, but the use of "likely" indicates that they're estimating based on the error rates (i.e. they're implicitly stating it could be a nonzero value, but it's likely to be zero). If that's the case, the critique I dug up from Investors.com is misinterpreting the authors' meaning as a literal 0% value when it's a probabilistic 0% (though the authors of the article could have made that clearer).
Either way, the authors are still using values from a sample which may not accurately represent the number of noncitizens voting. Given these limitations, better investigation is required to find the actual number.
I live in California and honestly have never heard non-citizens urged to vote. I've never seen anything written or televised to that effect. Maybe it is done individually or to an audience of non-citizens.
That's the introductory sentence to set up the justification for the study's creation. Many scientific articles begin by introducing the question or problem as understudied or having unreliable data, in order to present their new work as the solution.
With that in mind, read the conclusive statement of the abstract:
We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.
The most that can be said is that a study saying XYZ is currently being challenged by several academics(1)(2). This is one of the best cases of "move along, nothing to see here" I've ever seen.
(1) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mon … 14c732dfa9
(2) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mon … de346f94f5
Wow. That was an interesting read. I hope we get some type of handle on the situation if it's as bad as what they guesstimate it could be.
Not going to happen, not as long as states control registration and who may vote. The democrats have a stranglehold on the states encouraging that, and they stand to profit mightily from it - the only change will be to increase the numbers for foreign citizens voting in our (or what used to be our) elections.
Would it be possible for the federal government to levy hefty fines on a state proven to allow voting practices in federal elections to be so lax as to allow this to go unchecked? That effects the value of my vote as well as yours.
Not sure at all, but it is my understanding that states can do whatever they want to produce those electoral votes. Should they choose to do so, they can allow your dog to vote.
I live in Minnesota. There are about 50,000 ? Somalis living in St. Cloud. There are about 100,000 Somali voters in Minneapolis, they are why we have ObamaCare. They voted for Al Franken, who cast the deciding vote to pass the legislation.
So! I can't imagine why anyone who is for free markets is against immigration at the moment. Wink, wink!
100,000 Somali voters, or 100,000 American voters that were born in Somalia? It makes a little difference...
True! Some look at people. If you can see the obvious ethnicity, the people are considered illegal.
100,000 non-citizen Somali voters. They get favor.
Evidence that it is happening? Rules for registration, lists of Somali citizens on our voter roles, legislation permitting it, etc.?
Good point! Do the people look Somali? There are some Somali citizens. I don't think you can tell by watching the line.
It would be necessary to a) take list voters signed when they voted and compare to registered voter list
b) make sure all registered voters are living
c) make sure people don't use stolen ID to vote - good luck with that
Right there's none of tat. This isn't truth, it isn't reporting, and it isn't the basis for anyone to start forming an educated opinion.
You haven't looked a state gov'ts lately, have you Wilderness. When you do, you will find the Right-wing controls 62% of governorship's and 62% of state legislatures while splitting control with another 10%.
It seems the GOP is responsible for all this fictional "illegal" voting.
FACT - True illegal voting is minuscule. Orders of magnitude more votes are lost due to Right-wing efforts to suppress Ds from voting.
You keep saying that, that illegal voting is minuscule (although it did use to be non-existent). You have to know that I'm not going to be convinced by simple repetition - do you intend to ever present any proof of it? Or just keep repeating it ad-nauseum it the hopes it will eventually be believed?
Maybe Jill Stein's recount will reveal the illegal ballots.
That's a good article, Mr. Pop. I like saying "Mr. Popo". I'm in love with that whole site. Appreciate you posting the link.
If you just look at a biased "news" source and start a conversation based on that. the entire exercise is based on a blind assumption. Whatever happened to critical thinking?
Why do you continue to feed the Rightwinged beast? How about an unbiased source of this ridiculous claim? I don't care what Trump says, is there any reputable unbiased sources that substatiate such a claim?
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st … not-vote-/
This thing was started by infowars, the trashiest site in town?
Quick how conservatives find it so easy to lie and tell only half the story. If this what we can expect from Trump, I am ashamed to call him my chief executive.
I was watching CNN and the newscaster was asking people about voting and what she thought about recounting ballots. She said the only problem was in California where Obama let 3 million illegals vote. Newscaster: Really! Where did you here that?
Lady: On CNN
NC: No! You did not!
another lady: Everywhere
NC: Name one?
Lady: I saw the video.
NC: No you saw an edited video.
It amazed me that people are so gullible. I thought I would find out how foolish people really are.
Pure right-wing propaganda from Breitbart that has been proven wrong.
Three independent fact checking sites have found the claim of there being millions of illegal votes in 2016 to be unsupported by evidence.(1)(2)(3)
So here's a link to an article on "How to Spot Fake News"
(1) http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st … not-vote-/
(2) http://www.snopes.com/three-million-vot … al-aliens/
(3) http://www.factcheck.org/2016/11/trump- … ud-claims/
Great idea to post all three of those sites. Unfortunately, some people think that they are "liberal" sites just because the fact checks don't square with their beliefs.
So far the only sources cited in this thread to support the claims made in the opening post are:
Breitbart - Described by its owner as "the platform for the alt-right" (the alt right is a neo nazi movement)
WND - The tagline for the TV arm of WND is: "Wherever Christians and conservatives meet, WND TV has you covered." So biased by its own description.
InfoWars - Enough said
Twitter - Enough said
Youtube (Fox News clip) - Enough said
Youtube (a Donald Trump speech) - Enough said
And some claims made in a study, the methodology and statistics of which are being challenged.
In other words, the claims in the OP are (for any rational person) unsupported by reliable evidence.
Project Veritas Action was sited, they have the evidence from a undercover sting operation of election rigging, voter fraud and rigging, plus racketeering. Clinton and the DNC are being sued by Bernie supporters, James O'Keefe and Trump and maybe more.
* https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEE8w- … ze3oX-urEw
Then, there are the hacked DNC emails as evidence as an original source.
Read their emails on Wikileaks for yourselves.
The sites you are trying to smear, used factual evidence...which the liberal MSM and their fact-checkers ignores and calls fake news. Watch the videos for yourselves, Democrats like to brag about their corrupt ways of doing things because they are arrogant from years, and years of running dirty operations when they don't know they are being caught on audio and video. - I'm not saying the Republican establishment and their minions are not guilty of dirty operations also, because they are.
Remember Debbie Wasserman Schultz had to step down as DNC head, she was busted by Wikileaks email dumps. And, some other very guilty people in Clinton's campaign camp got fired or had to step down, I don't remember their names at the moment, but could supply them, they are on some of those videos telling all. lol
O'Keefe was responsible for blowing the top off the ACORN scandal a few years ago, also.
The Truthers Have Won! * http://hubpages.com/politics/forum/1384 … -election-
Just came across this: HUUUGE NEVADA VOTER FRAUD UNCOVERED? WORSE THAN ACORN
* http://www.newsmaxtv.vegas/huuuge-nevad … han-acorn/
December 1, 2016
Today, Megan Barth interviewed Republican Assembly Candidate for District 15, Stan Vaughan, with actual proof of massive voter fraud in his Clark County district. Vaughan brought into the NEWSMAXTV Las Vegas studio and laid it out for all to see, US postal service certified returned mail from 9,200 voters in District 15. Many of the people who were listed as deceased are still on the active voter rolls today. Many of the returned mail came back with 5 people living in a vacant lot with no mail receptacle.
A total number of 17,086 votes were cast in District 15 for both Republican and Democrat candidates. 9,200 voters on the voter rolls who, by law, should not be on the voter rolls is a huuge discrepancy.
Megan Barth said “The Main Stream Media attacked Donald Trump this week for claiming there were millions of illegal votes cast. Well it appears Nevada, which has voted for the winner of the Presidency for the past 108 years may have been stolen and must be investigated by the Feds. Not Obama feds but incoming Attorney General Jeff Session must investigate this issue.”
* http://www.newsmaxtv.vegas/huuuge-nevad … han-acorn/
This is just one District in Nevada.
Prior to broadcasting stories like this, it pays to check out the facts of the matter by doing some research of your own. This one sounds like a Fox "news" propaganda spew.
Here's the truth of the matter:
http://www.snopes.com/obama-encouraged- … s-to-vote/
Many people live and die by Fox News. If Fox didn't say it, "it ain't." If Fox said it, "It is what it is!"
While America was asleep at the wheel former president Bill Clinton negotiated with Canada and Mexico the removal of Americas' sovereignty creating the North American Union. As such the North American Free Trade Agreement was signed...Illegaly, I might add. There is no more America and there are no Mexican or Canadian 'illegals' living here. As such any Mexican or Canadians living in the U.S., whether or not they are a 'citizen' of the U.S., are allowed to vote. This is also why pres. Obama did nothing to 'close' the borders and ultimately urged the so-called 'illegals' to vote. In consideration of these points there is no voter fraud as it pertains to 'illegals' and it wouldn't matter anyway as the people absolutely DO NOT elect the president on election day so why not let illegal aliens vote. I've asked before and I'll ask it again...How is it in America, that people do NOT know that their votes on election day do not elect the president? It's mindboggling to say the least.
As far as local election voter fraud is concerned, the first thing that should be realized is that local elections decide the electoral college seats...Of which elect the president. Redistricting makes voter fraud irrelevant but is the real reason why any particular presidential candidate gets elected. So the real voter fraud is the system itself.
Since my first prediction of Trump becoming president(part two of which is yet to come) has come true, I'll make another one; The U.S. dollar will be phased out and replaced by the Amero within the next four years. For those who don't believe it...Make sure you vote in the next presidential election as I'm sure you'll still believe that your vote for the president matters.
As much as most people refuse to believe it, the U.S. is now part of the North American Union and once the Amero replaces the dollar the transition will be complete.
But, its so much easier to believe that its us against them - and even more fun to fight about it. We're all pretty much children at recess.
Its always the same government in that office. Until people realize how profitable these deep divisions are (in a few different ways); and that ALL of us are subject to various forms of manipulation to ensure a continuing divide - there will be no unity; and that’s the way they want it. Since the election, Trump has ignored trying to unify the country - while continuing to do everything he can to fracture America right up the middle of every possible dividing line he can think of.
Too many of us have been driven 'right' or 'left' with not nearly enough of us marching down the middle. The chasm that exists through both America & The World is a lot more simple than most people realize. Christians & ex-Christians Prove God Exists by Debunking Salvation: Science & Spirituality Reveal the Real Jesus Christ. Look it up. There is no apocalypse for people to base a vote on that next time. No more voting on fake hype, fake news or fake fear.
I saved this tweet on election night while we were waiting for the swing states - its funny!
Not bad, I always try to find a middle ground solution because the truth is much more possibly there, than one extreme or the other. America is the most extreme country I known. Now that America is more divided than ever, it makes it more dangerous than ever.
We may be dangerous to each other. But I don't see how our fractious relationship is dangerous to you, a foreigner.
When America ship sinks, most of Canada is own by US and we are also part of NATO. The BRICS Is more than 3 times the population of NATO and they are not going to take it anymore. Just look at all those other small countries totally crushed by NATO, you don't think the rest of the world dose not see that and they too would join BRICS in a heart beat.
Put your money in gold and run to the southern hemisphere.
I'd be interested in how nations have been crushed by NATO. Could you elaborate?
It is no surprise that US has invading 50 countries since world war 11. NATO was created to defend against USSR with good reason. Now the NATO is a tool for NWO and same old Rockefeller and Rothschild Zionist will Suppy the energy and finance to finish off their third world war. These NATO selected countries have surround around Russia and even China right now looking to set off a false flag, no wonder people burn American flags. Of course Iran , Pakistan, and India will join immediately because they don't want NWO. Or than Hitler dream finally did come true and Hitler statue should stand in Israel.
Dude! I'm looking for your original post. When I find it...I'll comment!
Excellent points Misfit! Van Johnson is going to do a special on CNN. He talked to a lot of Trump supporters who voted for Obama. They talked about HRC not connecting with them. They didn't like being branded as racists.
The white guy Trump surrogate with the white hair (driving me nuts because I don't want to call him the white guy) was agreeing with him. Now I'm feeling bad about saying the "white guy" that I've got to get back on track.
They were discussing how the two extremes seem to control the narrative. Really left people call Republicans gay haters, hateful Christians, etc. Really left people do their share. Most of the people are somewhere in the middle and it is hard to hear what all of them have to say.
The loudest or most visible ain't necessarily the rightest.
Simple answer -- THEY DIDN'T. Now howabout we focus on what our new president is doing?
Just heard Google Chrome is being designed to identify fake sites that make claims of illegal votes. Brian ? of CNN whose show comes on tomorrow at 11 EST will talk about it.
The Democrats were encouraging legal residents to vote in states where ID isn't required to vote or ID that isn't dependent on citizenship gets used. That's on top of busing people around to vote multiple times, helping the retarded and elderly vote but only for Democrats, etc.
Vote Fraud Monitoring Group Says Three Million Noncitizens Voted in Presidential Election
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/im … l-election
Some of these conspiracy theories are going to get people killed. Pizzagate is the closest I've seen to it.
Anyone can throw up a website and get people to believe what they say. I check as many sources as I can before believing something ridiculous.
I can see that people still have their heads up their rear ends! I've already said how; America, Canada and Mexico are now one region, the North American region. It doesn't matter anyway, we don't elect the president so all the hootin' and hollerin' in the world won't change anything. If 3 million illegals voted, so what? What people really should be concerned with is the fact that an illegal immigrants vote for the president has the same power as a legal citizens-NONE, basically meaning there are no 'illegals'. I would suggest (although I know pointlessly) that people research what the writers of the constitution really thought about 'the people'. You'll be very unpleasantly surprised. And last but not least, a large number of Americas forefathers were NOT christian. They did, however, believe in a higher power. The free masons, from way back then to today knew and know this. Once the people of today get a grip on this the sooner they'll understand why christianity gets a raw deal when it comes to the media. So, what it all boils down to is that if anyone is unsatisfied or dissillusioned with America or its processes there are but two things you can do; leave or get over it and go about your daily business as usual. There are millions waiting to move in and take your place.
This is obviously fake.
Vote Here. Vote Aqui. A Spanish speaking person or someone posing as one to get Hispanic voters would have correctly said, "Voto Aqui."
It's not an issue, IMO... It's an old time thing and "demanding recount" is not new.
I think the problem is more "what can you believe?" or "Who can you believe?"
Well, if people just accept what the result is as it is & pray for the elected officials, instead of whining, then life would be much easier. If there is smth you should believe in, it's believing that the new set of officials and support them, instead of complaining. Srsly, whining and recounting, how does it help? It's merely dragging your country (US) down. FYI, everybody is laughing at you. (again, US)
In other words: "just bury your head in the sand". Are you from Australia?
I'm wondering Wrench!
BTW, did you see the racist interviewed by Jake Tapper. This is off topic. I will address it on productive discussion of race. I thought about you as the idiot was speaking.
If you are talking about Jake interviewing Trump, yes I saw the interview. It was quite pathetic, and quite telling. Trumps attitude toward a Mexican American judge who was born in Indiana exemplifies the racist Euro-American. It's all about the one-way street. If a black man was saying the same thing about a white judge you know there would be a host of Hubbers screaming that the black guy was playing the "race card" , and that it was all about "victimology". But here we see that when the shoe is on the other foot, the white guy is screaming "I'm a victim! It's not fair!" This is just one more reason why I have long since lost patience with the Sons of the Pioneers. They talk the talk ... but they can't walk the walk. God help 'em if the Islamic Jihad Society enslaves the white race for about 400 years. I seriously don't think the racist could survive.
I don't need to tell you or anyone else how many people of color have faced all white juries, white judges, and white lawyers in this country over the ;last 250 years. But the racist doesn't see a problem with that. They see nothing wrong with that whatsoever. But that is just one more glaring contradiction that helps to destroy the fiction that "This Land is Your Land ... This Land is My Land ..La,La La". No, this may be "my land" according to God, but according to Billy Bob, Daisy Mae, or Donald Trump, I don't belong here, and I am certainly not wanted. But don't worry. I'm gonna stick around and remind them of their wonderful heritage at least for another 500 years.
No! No! No! It was a heavy set white guy with red hair. He graduated from a university and was having a forum last night. The president of the school didn't want him to do it so he organized another group for a togetherness forum oncampus.
Jake Tapper interviewed the guys and asked him about his views. The guy said everybody else should leave and let America be white again. I wondered what you thought about this hypocrisy. He didn't mention Native American again.
Last night the guy had his forum. Police were there in riot gear. There was a standoff between the two groups.
It's not as effective as me showing you the media. I'll look for it. It make take a few days.
Maybe the Judge was a descendant of Colonialist Mexicans, in other words white Europeans?
Perhaps you should notify Donald Trump. I am sure he doesn't realize that Mexico, like the whole of Central and South America was colonized by evil Colonialist squatters. If the judge is a Criollo then Trump has nothing to worry about.
I believe sometimes racism is unintentional and individuals are such a way unwittingly. By no means should it be minimized or offered as an excuse, however, if people were more understanding of this possibility. On the other hand to cultivate or languish in racism I believe one would have to do so irrationally.
You speak the way you do because you have not educated yourself about racism. And yes, their are also people of color who have not educated themselves, and they are also part of the problem. From my perspective a traitor is far worse than a racist. And so I will deliver yet another great teaching:
As a rule, we are not not intentionally being evil when we step on an ant, or any other little creature crawling on the ground or through the grass. But we are certainly being indifferent. We know that they are down there, and we know that if we took the time to look carefully each time before we took a step on our way to eternity that we could avoid killing many of God's little creatures. But we rarely take the time to be so careful and considerate of life forms so much smaller than ourselves. We casually step on the little animals as we are helping the old woman across the street, or as we are walking up the steps of the Church, and we don't give it a second thought. .
Does this mean we are evil? Not necessarily, but it means we are suffering from anthropocentrism, which is the belief that human beings are the most significant creatures in the entire universe. And we are simply too important to take the time each day to avoid stepping on bugs. By the same token, a racist is not necessarily evil. But they do feel superior. And that feeling of superiority is evident when they use terms such as "race baiting", and "victimology", or when they suggest that anyone who recognizes,acknowledges, or stands against racism is "languishing in racism".
You are the one who is being irrational. Thieves, murderers, and rapists have existed since the beginning of time. However, a rational person would not say, "Gee Ronnie, these crimes have been going on since before Methuselah. Perhaps if we just stop talking about it, and if we stop putting these violent criminals in jail, people will stop committing these heinous crimes. " Here I have made clear the absurdity of your perspective. Racism won't go away just because we bury our heads in the sand. Evil must be destroyed and pulled up by the roots. Goodness cannot abide with evil, as the evil racists must be cast out from among us. We will never reconcile with Manifest Destiny . The Zebra can either change it's stripes, go to another planet, or cease to exist. These are the only choices: Door number 1, 2, or 3.
It's easy for well to do whites to say such. By definition...And implication, the meaning is;
Languish: suffer from being forced to remain in an unpleasant place or situation
...that says it all. It's 1+1=2
1- white folk + 1- their racial superiority mindset = 2- all others stay in your place and get over it.
...And there's no such thing as the utterly rediculous notion of "unintentional" racism. What she really means is sometimes it just 'slips' out. That's really because they've become complacent in the false belief of their own racial superiority. Just like the jews in the desert; in order for god to change the old mindset the old people who held onto it had to go as well. That being said, there is only one way to rid the world of racism and that is to get rid of those who hold it. Luckily for the world nature itself is slowly taking care of that, as it does with all things that don't promote improvement...And what makes actors, who pretend for a living, believe the world cares about what they think? especially when hollywood is the epitomy of racism...Go figure.
Yeah, I hear you and I feel you . I predict that in a few years the cool thing to say will be "I found you ... but then I gave you back". But I agree with your assessment. I have walked down a similar road. I grew up with money. I had two parents who we were always home, and neither of my parents drank, did drugs, or hung out at bars. It was just like Ozzie and Harriet, without the racist overtones.
I had no idea what time it really was until I joined the military and left home. All of my needs were met. Some of my white friends who lived in poor neighborhoods, and whose single mothers were hanging out at the local taverns 3 or 4 night s a week trying to get a man, were always getting in trouble at school, or with the law, and I just couldn't figure out why. Of course, after I got older it was easy to figure out. Sure, some people grow up in hell and pass the test with flying colors, but every story is unique, and comes with a different set of challenges. Someone like myself has no right to judge anyone less fortunate. But I am sure that the majority here who frequently use the new racist code words and phrases like "victimology", and "race card", have always had a safety net. And the biggest safety net of all in this country is being a member of the white race.
I see so much assigned blame, so much knowledge of what is in other people's hearts and minds. People can also look for and insist upon racism.
For instance, if the shoe were on the other foot, and I were trying to make a point about how racist a large group of people are by comparing the people of color to bugs being stepped on or not, someone that is always looking for there to be racism would see that in itself as racist. Do you see anyone here accusing you or racism, by using that as part of your rationale?
As an aside.... I do care very much about not stepping on bugs every day, and know others that do. I save every spider in my house that I can, and other bugs. If I said in another post about how I am very much not a racist person, and I even care about all life, even the bugs.... You get my point. Yet there are these unspoken rules that some can speak a certain way and others may not. Even when the others do not, they are still labeled racist, though trying to desperately be careful to not hurt others that are insisting on racism being there. Always, being there.
Then later you compare the problem and not talking about it to no longer putting thieves, murderer and rapists in jail. Then claim a superior argument. What I observe is a person that has set themselves so high, that they think THEY get to define all the rules, and decide where all the lines are drawn, and then draw upon impossible to know facts about others hearts and intentions, to make SO many of the arguments I see here. THAT, does not seem fair. I just explained why. Its like having the attributes of a God to know so much, yet we know we are dealing with a human or humans. Making up the rules that all have to comply with, and not crossing many an imaginary line, or else.... then still falling short, is not fair. Who made a person to be like that anyway, if not that very person. So many splinters out there, sure. So many logs unseen, perhaps?
Julie do you even know what we are discussing. There is a topic, yes!!! We are discussing all of the false information being disseminated over social media.
If nothing else, people are becoming aware that anybody can put up a fake site, tell a lie, and make lots of money off of a lie. Sometimes it can have deadly consequences.
I'm glad everything is great where you live.
I am well aware of all information. The way you combat false information: by releasing the facts. Unfortunately, in cases where people allege voter fraud, there is not way to find out the truth. Simple way to prevent such a vote fraud allegations would be asking for a proof of citizenship from every person who votes. Plain and simple.
dianetrotter, what evidence we have that you are a real person, not some kind of AI bot?
I really don't know what your investment in this discussion is. I was talking about the guy who shot up a pizza place in Washington, D. C., because he thought Hillary Clinton was running a child sex ring out of the basement.
I won't rehash it. If you have not been following the things discussed here, you won't understand the depth of the discussion. If you don't know about it and don't care, I'm glad.
Do you mind if everyone else who knows the detail of all of the pages continues to have a discussion?
I appreciate you caring that people are laughing at America.
dianetrotter, are you always trying to shut down people who don't share your opinion? OK. If you want to talk about PizzaGate, the Comet Pizza place were guy shows up with a semiautomatic gun demanding something. That is way too convenient for "simple" pizza place owner:
1) Who is this guy, that he is listed among top 50 most powerful people in Washington?
2) Why this guy visited WH 5 times and on 2 of those visits personally visited the President?
3) Have you seen the Instagram screenshots from that guy? Highly inappropriate for PG discussions.
4) What are kids doing in that restaurant after 10PM?
5) Have you seen the art displayed on the walls of this restaurant?
Lastly, nobody in the right mind thinks that HRC is running a child sex ring, but what is she doing associating with people who do? Never mind the creepy emails published in WikiLeaks from and to Podesta
Glad you asked. Illegal voting shows it's ugly head when you realize that the reason the popular vote is different from the Electoral College is that the electoral college does not consider the illegal votes being cast.
The electoral college allows for a certain number of residents within a certain congressional district. If more votes are cast in that district than what the college allows, then those votes are not counted in the college, but they are illegally counted in the popular vote.
This was painfully evident when certain city districts had more votes cast than they had registered voters! What's up with that.
It isn't hard to realize that there must have been millions of votes cast illegally. Read up on how the Electoral College works, you will see what is happening.
How would the college know which votes to ignore if there are too many?
I think you're giving the electoral college far more ability than it has. It is, after all, no more than a collection of electors from each state, with the state, not the college, assigning electors to represent it. The college does not count votes, does not identify voters or qualify them; it's sole purpose is to represent the state they are from in casting votes according to the will of the people there.
They voted for Al Franken who cast the deciding vote to pass the legislation.
We have verified more than three million votes cast by non-citizens.
We are joining .@TrueTheVote to initiate legal action.
— Gregg Phillips (@JumpVote) November 13, 2016
Completed analysis of database of 180 million voter registrations.
Number of non-citizen votes exceeds 3 million.
Consulting legal team.
— Gregg Phillips (@JumpVote) November 11, 2016
* http://www.infowars.com/report-three-mi … al-aliens/
It shows that the honor system doesn't work with some people.
You got that right. The more they cry and complain the more comes out onto what they have been up to...like Hillary needed any other reason to be in prison. Oh but I guess that makes me racist....oh, but is that a white face I see going down that ....hole?
There are 3,141 counties in the United States.
Trump won 3,084 of them.
Clinton won 57.
Not to worry. Considering the recent hold out on the Walter Scott jury who refused to convict a racist cop for shooting a black man in the back 5 times who was unarmed and running the other way, I think it is safe to say that all of the closet racists, which constitute a large portion of the mainstream, can at least let their hair down and relax during the Trump years. And besides, I feel that white racists are people too, and that they should be able to articulate their evil expressions in a truly free society.
Interesting thing Wrench. Trump's attorney general could choose to drop the federal case against this guy.
Interesting take and spin. According to the news, the jury was unable to come together to assign a punishment and a mistrial was declared. That a crime was committed was agreed upon by all 12.
Was it because of the possibility of capital punishment? I don't know and you don't seem to care - it's more important to assign racism as the cause for a non-existent action than to report the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Once again, in your rush to attack the superior intellect, you failed to do your research. And so, I am only further elevated above the common man. The fact is, the judge gave the the jury the option of charging the miscreant cop with murder or manslaughter. Manslaughter does not involve capital punishment. One juror out of the 12 refused to find the defendant guilty on either condition. Let us also keep in mind that North Charleston awarded a $6.5 million settlement to the family of Walter Scott. If city officials did not feel that a crime, and a grave injustice had been committed , I hardly think they would have awarded Walter Scott's family one thin dime. Otherwise, if the city of Charleston is simply settling frivolous claims with the high dollar, then I'm on my way to Charleston to fall down a flight of stairs at a shopping mall.
If not racism, then what would you call it? In the video everyone can see the cop shooting the unarmed man in the back 5 times and then planting evidence ( the taser) to justify the murder. What are you suggesting is the reason, if not racism?
Here are some possible alternative reasons to help out the man from Idaho:
1. Walter Scott was an alien from outer space posing as a black man who threatened to introduce a lethal virus into the atmosphere. After making the traffic stop, the killer cop, using his psychic abilities, saw the future and understood that he had no choice but to kill Scott in order to save millions of innocent people.
2. Walter Scott was the anti-Christ who was about to deceive the entire world and take us all to hell.
Yes, as I have just pointed out, there are clearly other motives besides racism.
And once again you make claims without any evidence they are true. What you are claiming is NOT what I saw on the TV news.
"If not racism, then what would you call it?"
Because you cannot find any possible reason to hold out on a jury means the juror is a racist? While that works fine for a racist making the call, the rest of us can find a dozen reasons to refuse to convict. I know - I sat on a jury with one holdout (also a mistrial) and only one juror could understand why the not guilty verdict. But it wasn't racism - every juror, the defendant, the judge and both lawyers were all white. Still, one juror refused to convict.
But it is obvious to a racist, isn't it, that racism is always the reason a white man is not guilty of something?
Once again I am elevated by your vitriol. Although I have occasionally succumbed to such cathartic temptations, as a rule I seek to refrain from lowering myself to the level of name calling. And so I will take this opportunity not to respond in kind to your vicious and personal attack! Say what you will, you simply misunderstood the news report; no need to shoot the piano player.
So, Wilderness, it ok for the law officer to shoot any unarmed man in the back multiple times, is that the way things done is the celestial paradise known as Idaho? As WB said, the city was forced to pay substantial civil damages, which admitted wrong doing. But criminal charges are withheld because there is an open season on Black men in South Carolina? That sends a strong message and for many of us, not a positive one.
False, false false! http://www.snopes.com/obama-encouraged- … s-to-vote/
Hi, DzyMsLizzy! Snopes has been debunked so many times, its a left-wing rag run by a husband and wife out of their home. Sorry, those fact-checkers the Democrats rely on are there to convince good people they should believe their deceptions. Its a part of the Matrix false reality.
I don't care to prove it again, and again in these forums, again. Believe what you like, or do some individual research and find out for yourself, it doesn't matter to me. I have done my research.
I suggest you read my article on Snopes. It's much larger than a married couple, and they debunk stories that come from both sides of the political spectrum.
Also, the so-called sites that "debunked" Snopes were debunked many times over by them and other fact-checking sites. And, yes, these sites were poorly-written fake news sites, most likely writing out of Macedonia or some place like that.
I saw some of the titles to articles that were said to be put out from Macedonia, where there is much poverty. I didn't bother reading the articles because I knew they were fake. They were suppose to be young people out to earn a buck on ad views from what I read. Some people's kids, huh!
An independent voice in the room! Thank you Dean!
who knows who cares. Without God, morals, honesty and following The Golden Rule for SOME unknown reason, we are sunk. Who can we trust without belief in God? The more rampant the disbelief in Our Creator, the more we will be fooled and the more we will fail due to no
truth percolating amidst us. That half the nation was okay with Hillary is really "enough said."
I agree. Without God's Spirit, the Spirit of Truth we can be easily deceived by those without the truth. I'm believing for a Third Great Awakening.
Geeze, wouldn't it been something to see the dead rise?
Elections expert J. Christian Adams told FOX and Friends on Tuesday morning there are 4 million dead people on US voter rolls. Far left groups continually sue to keep them there. The Obama administration has no desire to clean up these voter rolls.
Trump was talking figures in a per-election speech.
Illegals And Dead People Are Registered Voters
Voter Fraud Proof - 18 Million Invalid Registration - Lou Dobbs
I've heard about dead people on the voter rolls for several years. Seems like Obama wasn't the only president that didn't have a desire to clean that up. Hey, Trump wants to make America great again!
You do realize that hearing about something does not mean it is necessarily true?
There'll be another Great Awakening, though it probably won't look the way that you may be thinking it will look!
According to Salon:
WND is 'the biggest, dumbest wingnut site on the Web'
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center:
WorldNetDaily is an online publication founded and run by Joseph Farah that claims to pursue truth, justice and liberty. But in fact, its pages are devoted to manipulative fear-mongering and outright fabrications designed to further the paranoid, gay-hating, conspiratorial and apocalyptic visions of Farah and his hand-picked contributors from the fringes of the far-right and fundamentalist worlds.
Read a little, lol. Couldn't read more. Any authoritative sources for this story?
Voter fraud is very rare. Most communities have challengers at the polls, and know if someone they do not recognize is trying to vote. In NJ, you must sign a book underneath where you've been signing for years. Once a person dies, the first time they don't show up at the polls their name is taken off, usually from when the coroner takes their SS # and reports the death.
And why are you R's spreading all these lies? If you are so unintelligent you believe this nonsense, the biggest Somali population in the U.S. is in MN. At least get your info from whatever hole in the ground sites you use correct. You won. We have a nut job, white supremacist, who is going to turn us into a Fascist country, apparently what you wanted. He doesn't even know what's in the Constitution, and and now wants to put flag burners in jail for a year? That is a violation of our 1st amendment right (not that I ever wanted to burn our flag, but it's freedom of expression and speech). If I owned a company, I'd pretend I was moving to Mexico too, if I could get a free 7 million bucks. Where does this money come from?
Trump's Rally last night reminded me of Hitler. A gracious, normal person who won would not have led another round of "lock her up," He would have said, "My opponent fought a good fight, and I wish her the very best." George W. Bush did that for Obama, and so on down the line. The man is so ignorant I can't stand it. It's reality TV to him. He has no clue how to run this country.
Challengers at the polls? How does that work in big cities, I wonder.
One would hope voter fraud was rare but I'm afraid that tid bit doesn't lend anyone to have any confidence that practice ensures no voter fraud.
It works because you get enough or as many people who live in your district to sit there all the time the polls are open. They question anyone who is not recognized, or if they are not in the rolls or have not voted before, have to prove who they are. That's how it works on the East Coast. The challengers are paid for the day, I believe it's $100.00, but its from 6AM to 8PM.
I wondered that, too. Especially the part where if you're not recognized personally by the challenger you don't vote.
While I've always produced a drivers license (through at least 4 different voting stations in two different states), I've never been challenged. No one checks my signature (though I do sign) and certainly I've never recognized a single poll worker in my life.
Seems that this "Most communities have challengers at the polls, and know if someone they do not recognize is trying to vote." is just so much malarkey. Or perhaps that location has had considerable voter fraud in the past?
It's for real where I live Dan. Maybe it's only possible to do it in small communities, but Paterson, Passaic and Clifton, three large cities in North Jersey, also do it that way. Members of the local Democratic Clubs are the challengers at the R districts, and Members of the local Republican clubs are challengers at the mostly D districts.
My husband was off the rolls just months after he died, and I didn't initiate anything to have him taken off (too much else to do).
It may be. But I've lived in communities from less than 1,000 to about 100,000 now and not a single one has used that procedure or anything like it. The current precinct is small enough that I've never waited more than 5 minutes to vote and generally walk straight to the ballot table. I don't think it's common at all to actually put any effort into verifying ID.
Is it a hangover from mob days when thugs made sure who was voting and who it was for? NJ, you said?
LOL, could be. But it's true. I was the Treasurer of my local D club for around 10 yrs. and my husband was the Sergeant at arms. When the polls close, local people go to the districts, ( we only have 8) and actually collect the tape with the votes on them and count them at the election HQS. It's a town of only 10,000 where I live though. But it's orderly and fast. We don't have long lines. We used to vote in schools until all the school shootings, now it's in the Firehouse, Vet's Hall, places like that.
A person who never voted in one of our districts would be questioned or asked for ID of some sort. We all have to sign in to a large book and you sign under all the other voting times you signed. We mix up R's and D's, because it depends on how many people will volunteer to be challengers.
I'm going to be honest. That challenging thing sounds like it could be intimidation. I'd frown on that here. If you have id you should bee allowed to vote. Period. Some stranger shouldn't be allowed to harass you in the process.
The challenger way we do it in NJ isn't threatening. Usually it's any local person who needs to earn a little extra cash, they sit and read and quietly watch who comes in to vote. The voters sign a book, and if they never voted before, the challenger might ask for ID, or look at a list to see if the person is registered to vote. It's not intimidating.
When the polls close, one D and one R go to each district, and together we get the results, both checking each other to make sure we both have the correct R figure and D figure for votes. The districts get added together when they get reported to who is at the top of the party chain in the district, then to the County reps for both sides. It's all peaceful and calm, everyone is treated with respect or at least decency (we've had a lot of battles over the years). Normally nobody gets challenged and it's a boring job. But I've never heard of anyone unregistered trying to vote, and lived here almost 30 years.
That all sounds so confusing. The right Dem and the right Rep figures? No one is asking these questions or documenting such as that here and I'd be a little miffed if someone attempted to do it. It's none of their business a voter's possible party affiliation. I guess you guys up north just take the parties more seriously than we do.
That's not the point. The point is nobody who isn't registered to vote, can vote. This forum is about UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO VOTE.
A few neighborhood people from the area are there to see that it all goes smoothly. The only people who care about party affiliation are the ones collecting the votes at the end when the polls close. You would prefer one number which didn't split who was a R and who was a D, or whatever? Just one total of how many people voted? That doesn't even make sense.
Why does simplicity seem confusing? All the parties are on the ballot, but this area has D's and R's. All the parties are on the ballot, but there isn't a large group of them here who seem to care about them.
Because of Trump causing so much division, we did have a policeman outside. Just in case of a problem. I'm signing off now.
You are right, the forum is about undocumented people being allowed to vote. You brought up the way you say your district handles it. I was simply commenting on those practices. I think they would unfairly inhibit anyone. And, yes. I would prefer one number which didn't split who was R and who was D or whatever. Just one total. I have no idea how that couldn't make sense to you. You guys (the parties) do everything you can to sway the vote; which is what parties do. The polls should be separate and free from party strongarming and party manipulation. I don't think party officials should have any place at the polls.
You choose to perceive and participate in division. And many choose to drag this on. Another problem with parties, in my opinion. Another way of parties attempting to strongarm and intimidate the rest of us.
When you are asked if you are registered, nobody asks your party affiliation, my bad. Whatever state or part of it you live in has a Head of the Democratic Party and Head of the Republican Party, and Head of Whatever Party comes out. Do you think the machine votes just take themselves to the newsrooms to be counted? You are showing a lack of knowledge about how many channels the counts pass through, after being CHECKED at the beginning. It works and if the voter is on the list of registered voters for the area, as they almost always are, it's easy.
Didn't you ever have to move and even if it's the same state, re-register to vote in your district? Maybe only NJ does it, or maybe you are from a different country, sorry if I didn't check. Also, you don't have to be affiliated with a Party to vote in a Presidential Election in the U.S.
Each state and district or area has many people, so there have to be divisions, or districts, to make a voter count possible. Check out your local D or R club. They are very busy that night. They get the votes from their area up the chain of command (and every state has one) and then the votes for the state get totaled and reported. You were never involved or cared about your politics at the local levels, sad, because it all begins there. I'm sorry and frustrated that I can't get you to understand the process which goes on before CNN or whatever calls the winner for your state. It's identified by the CANDIDATE of the Party, so I also don't understand how you think one total vote helps an election. You still have to know who won, Trump R or Clinton D Of course, you can add them together to see who voted in total. I'm talking about the checks and balances to see if you are registered to vote, then what happens at the close of the polls.
Possibly when death certificates are filed, it triggers other things in the government system.
I've lived in five states. Voted in all of them. Never been challenged. Never seen anyone challenged. This was the first year I used my driver's license. Usually presented both that and my registration card.
You look so honest. Why would they check your ID?
If California's illegal voters alone were to be recounted , it would far more than offset the Clinton popular win . But ---Why don't the right throw in a recount threat of the two or three most liberal west coast states, Washington , Oregon .............I'll bet the illegal vote alone would amount to five to ten million votes. Even dirty tricks are fair to such liberals.
This is just the WDL factor working its way through their emotions on the election loss.
WDL,? Whiney Democratic Losers.
This seems to be the point. If those recounts find anomalies the propaganda machine is already running.
Back to the OP, is there any evidence that 3 million people committed voter fraud in California? Or any people at all?
All I see is wild speculation based on a few seconds of an interview.
Anyway, you will likely have Sessions as attorney general, a man known for racism and malicious voter suppression. So things will get worse, misinformation or not.
Sessions once famously described 3 voter registration activists helping to enroll black voters as 'a disgrace to their race'. He alleged voter fraud and prosecuted said activists with zero evidence.
You do not know what you have unleashed on the world.
I hope.... "what we unleash on the world ' Is a national voter I.D. Card . We require a license - tag for the following ,
-driving a car
-catching a fish
-going to a movie
-flying a plane
-driving a taxi
-crossing a border
-joining the NRA
-joining a club
But any illegal immigrant - felon - foreign student can vote.
What ID do voters use in California? Also what ID is required to get a driving licence?
I'm sure that it varies state to state , how about this , A BIRTH CERTIFICATE., all the more justification of central, federal government - unified rules ,laws from state to state , we are either a nation and a nation of laws or we aren't ?
That's where I'm confused. My license was suspended over a glitch in the system. I had to show birth certificate, and two other forms of id. It was a nightmare to get another one. But illegals have licenses. I think if you speak fluent English and you look indigenous you are treated differently when applying.
I read that they verify citizenship when getting a driver's license. The license is deginated to show "citizen" or whatever the status is.
I just checked my license. It doesn't say anything on it. Had the girl who works for me check hers. Hers doesn't denote her as a felon but she was warned by her parole officer that she could not vote.
Diane , Not where I live , in Vermont , all you do is verify your name to master check list . But if you're not there on the list , I'm sure they put you on it anyway .
What interests me is that both sides appear to have their propaganda machines running full blast but both sides are blind to one and gungho in support of the other.
Well, as I understand it, the Green Party is organizing recounts in three states. Those will be actual recounts and will provide solid evidence, one way or the other on the accuracy of the vote. I can't imagine anyone will challenge the recount.
Wild speculation of the WND kind is not evidence.
What is at stake is America's relationship to the truth here.
My concern is that this willingness to sacrifice the truth, currently eating into US values, spreads. The Brexit campaign in the UK was marred by glaring falsehoods. Its beginning to feel as if the Enlightenment never happened.
"My concern is that this willingness to sacrifice the truth, currently eating into US values, spreads."
I agree that this is a tremendous problem. But another one, just as large, is the insistence that the ends justifies the means, and whatever it takes to get the results wanted is acceptable. We see it in Bexit as well - when the vote didn't go as desired immediate cries for a complete re-vote arose, as the people obviously case their votes in error, or without knowing what they were voting for. And when Trump was elected a recount is necessary to get someone else. With the entire political structure against him, it is almost certain that when enough "recounts" are done he will lose to Clinton - if the states chosen don't provide the necessary "proof", more will be added until it does.
It is, at the bottom, modern politics at work, and one of the big reasons Trump was elected in the first place.
Nobody asked for a recount of the vote, at the time. No one doubted that it was accurate.
Since the vote, the Conservative government has repeatedly, said 'Brexit means Brexit', 'the people have spoken' and so on. The Labour Party has not challenged the vote or declared an intention of opposing Brexit.
A couple of aging former Prime Minsters have suggested a second referendum but that is not going to happen unless, perhaps, there is massive popular demand (hard to imagine).
"A couple of aging former Prime Minsters have suggested a second referendum"
And so have lots of people. So has the media. And that is the point being made: if you don't get the results you wanted, make an end play until you DO get what you wanted.
While I don't see it happening in Brexit, it could. Just as it could in "recounting" Clinton's votes until they are higher than Trumps.
The revote should reveal the fraud if it is designed to validate each vote rather than just count.
....yada yada enlightenment.""
What is the truth? The world is a dangerous and dark place. Does the truth not stand as a lighthouse as the storms toss the ships of falsehoods upon the rocky coasts? The truth is not as easy as it sounds, you see. What is truth when your helicopter is taking RPG fire? Its all about the truth of saving your own life and the lives of your comrades in arms, no doubt. What does the truth mean when your LZ is hot, say in Chicago or Bosnia? What is the truth when you are under sniper fire? The truth is just one convenient link away from a goofy youtube video no one ever saw. Pulease.
You expressed what I have been talking perfectly. Especially the blank space. Thx for that.
Yw. Ps. the only thing coming up green in the green party as far as J. Stein is concerned is her portfolio.
I am interested in the truth but I honestly think most in the fray are most interested in discovering truth which supports their position. I think that to believe no illegals voted in a national election is too naive to believe. The question of how many is important to determine. If it is a high number and it is swaying the outcome of some elections that is a problem which needs to be corrected. I realize democrats cringe at the thought of anyone believing anyone might believe any did.
As I said. Getting a driver's license in this state also causes a voter card to be mailed. Automatically. I'd be curious how those who are not allowed to vote are monitored. I would have loved for the girl I work for to have gone down and tried. All they do when you walk in to vote is look at the I.D. given (I handed over a driver's license) and compare it to the rolls they had on the table. I know these people and I know how the government of this county works. It isn't the most efficient or well managed.
So you know, I have no problem with any recounts, anywhere in the U.S. Nothing wrong with double checking results, as long as the U.S. taxpayer doesn't have to foot the bill.
whether its true or not, its seems like this generation wants to try the opposite of all conventional . changed has come
Also guys, be sure to only read those sites that call themselves fact-checking sites. Remember, if there's fact next to their name, it must be true.
Easy answer. They didn't. Every study ever undertaken has shown claims of widespread voter fraud to be BS.
Many of the most popular pro-Trump fake news sites are located in Velles, Macedonia, apparently. They are run by teenagers who noticed that Trump Facebook supporters will click anything that is pro-Trump and anti-Democrat. They also noticed that fake news garners more clicks than real news.
The site owners do not care about politics they just want the ad income from Facebook.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman … .foVbWVg5z
You could call this foreign interference in the US election but I would put the focus on the gullibility of US voters.
I found this interesting. Chip and Joanna Gaines have worked miracles with dumps for years. It is one of the most popular HGTV shows. Last month, they were in Christianity Today Magazine. Now someone wants to have them taken off television because they "probably" don't support same sex marriage.
Should we not have a balance in our lives? Will Christians be banned from the airwaves? Is this a lie? NO! It happened to the Benham Brothers. These are the kinds of things that tip people to Trump as opposed to HRC.
BuzzFeed’s hit piece on Chip and Joanna Gaines is dangerous
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act … ad58e8059d
HGTV fires Benham brothers for Christian beliefs; 'If faith costs us a TV show then so be it,' say brothers
The network pulled the plug after protests from gay activists.
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/h … /37290.htm
"Should we not have a balance in our lives? Will Christians be banned from the airwaves? Is this a lie? NO! It happened to the Benham Brothers. These are the kinds of things that tip people to Trump as opposed to HRC."
Maybe I'm missing your meaning, but I'm puzzled... Why would this situation be blamed on Hillary and drive people to Trump? While I realize that there were many many people in the gay community who voted for Trump, I really think most Millenials were not aware of the party he is attached to. It seemed to me that a lot of people were voting just 'for him' and not even considering his political party. They like Trump because he said that anyone could use any bathroom in his tower. Whatever. The Republicans are (currently) founded on the ideals of Christian militants who are not even SORT of 'gay-friendly', etc. You don't vote FOR people who are adamantly against your very existence - at least, you shouldn't and probably wouldn't if you knew better.
I agree with you that this is a ridiculous situation; but Christians are the ones who make such a big deal about these same-sex issues when they should be non-issues, by now. I mean, what do you care if you think someone is going to go to hell because they're gay? Mind your own business; and stop judging people and claiming yourselves to be more 'worthy' than those perverted 'sinners' - and maybe 'the left' (which is an all-inclusive group of all races, genders & sexual orientations) might stop pushing back so hard against stuff like this. Its a two-way street.
Hillary lost because of racism & misogyny. Its plain as day. The few people who came out to vote (mostly white men); came out to make sure Hillary DIDN'T win - very few actually voted because they thought Trump's policies were 'the best ones'. It was mostly spite - and oh yeah, emails! The rest of the country stayed home because they didn't want to make a choice between the two - which, is still a vote. "Nope, I refuse to vote for that crook Hillary and I don't care if Trump wins - it would serve her right!"
If that exact same email scandal had happened to a male politician 1) it would have been buried among a lot more devious scandals than Hillary has under her belt, and barely brushed over; and 2) a candidate like Bernie would not have had a shot at the Democratic nomination to begin with.
Bernie supporters couldn't vote for Hillary before Trump became the GOP nominee (its not like Bernie could run under his own party and win); so guess who they voted for? (Yeah, most also voted for Obama 2x.) They are the uber-liberals that you all keep complaining about. They are the ones who want absolutely everything to be free for everyone. They want not just Obamacare, they want free Universal Healthcare for absolutely everyone, as well as free college, etc. THESE people SPLIT the Democratic Party in HALF during the nomination process - Bernie was almost the nominee! (Kind of like how Trump was successful in hijacking the GOP.)
It will be interesting to see how things play out with all those uber-liberals & ultra-conservatives in the same bed for four years. Of course, since Trump is pretty much re-establishing the GOP war regime - libs are going to find out just how much fun they can be. I hope you all remember whose fault it was when/if the time for saying 'I told you so' ever comes.
Just want to point out that 'I told you so' doesn't mean much when the only other option was Hillary because the logical response will be 'it could have been worse'.
Also, your defense of those who would have people lose their jobs simply because they are Christian can be countered with the same comment you made 'Mind your own business; and stop judging people'. As you said, it is a two way street. Two wrongs do not only not make a right, what they usually end up doing is setting stage for a whole lot more perceived wrongs.
It is not plain as day that Hillary lost because of racism and misogyny. As long as that is the belief of some we can't move forward as a nation to address the real reasons Hillary lost. Hillary quite possible could have lost to a two headed pony from a sex show in the Philippines. If that was the only opponent fielded against her. Would we then have claimed she lost because of sexual perversion? Hillary represented all that was wrong with Washington and there is so much wrong there, so many people are completely and irrevocably disgusted, that her winning would have been an uphill battle against anyone or anything.
None of this equates to spite against Hillary. This is karma. Long overdue karma. Anyone complaining that she was treated different than any man might have been ignores the fact that Hillary played the game as well (if not better) than any man in Washington. She paid the price for playing the game. A game we, the people, never asked to be played..consistently complained about politicians playing it...and remained completely ignored for many years while this country went deeper into debt without clear evidence that our tax dollars were being spent in a manner which was in the best interests of all.
I will say that had Obama care been well planned, well implemented and had achieved the things promised by the administration there might have been some type of reprieve for Washington. But, it lived down to the worst of all of the criticisms and it ended up pushing many moderates to the right.
I do agree with you that the next four years will be interesting. And, I predict that if they don't learn to work together, put our interests first through reasonable and intelligent compromise because that is what will best serve America. We are a nation of liberals, conservatives and all the rest of us in between with a little liberal and a little conservative in our views....and do everything in their power to turn our government around; what we saw this election cycle will just be the tip of the iceberg.
My point is that people are extreme on both ends. Anyone in the middle that doesn't believe what an extreme believes is demonized. That causes people in the middle to weigh that extra situation and vote for one extreme versus the other.
All this couple did was appear in a Christian magazine. Now there is a move to get them off of television. They have been Christians the whole time their show was on. What changed other than them being in a Christian magazine. It is their First Amendment right to choose any religion they want to be part of.
Maybe my example was a little abstract. I was trying to talk about things that drive people to one end versus the other.
The site owners do not care about politics they just want the ad income from Facebook.
Which makes them more honest than ABC NBC CBS MSNBC CNN and all their hollywood freak shows.
One of the wonderful things about Christianity in times gone by was the believe that all truths led to God. This made Christians very careful in their evaluation of facts. Scholars, jurists, philosophers and commentators were scrupulous in their pursuit of truth. Even ordinary folk generally held that dishonesty was the work of Satan.
Seems that things have changed. The comfort of hearing what you want to hear has become more important.
How was bibly study or church today? ...?
But I do believe Christians should turn off ABC NBC CBS msnbc and cnn and well all of broadcast tv if they are concerned about dishonest reporting of the news. The only thing honest about tv is when THey use the term programming.
In the UK, broadcasters (not newspapers) are bound by law to report the news honestly and without bias. This means presenting the facts in a straight forward way without spin and making sure that the opinions of all parties involved in the news item are fairly represented.
Any broadcaster who gets it wrong will have at least one of the political parties on their backs, journalists will be fired, and there will be a scandal. This makes broadcast news a bit dull but pretty reliable.
You can sink into the swamp of politics by picking up a newspaper.
I reckon the US needs at least a few solid reference points when it comes to the dissemination of news. Dull but honest broadcasting.
Consider yourself lucky if it is true. I cannot remember when US News was honest. But it is much worse than that. Add in entertainment, shows, movies, game shows and commercials. 24/7 some overt some subtle.
Whats all this about someone named Stuart Hall and or Jimmy Savile?
Maybe someone with exemplary critical thinking skills can help me figure this out. Where I come from we have local tv and newspapers that still do a little investigative reporting. It usually involves nursing home abuse or some contractor taking advantage of an eldely home owner. Bottom line its the news agency the elderly can trust! Kind of a motto.
Anywho, it looks like we got a couple of fellers in I guess the UK who for decades seem to have raped small children. And it looks like the BBC investigated it and exposed it and the bobbies came and took them away.
But the confusing part for me is that instead of that happening, they actually worked for the BBC?
Can someone figure this out? Which is true?
Blamed on a culture of deference by numerous inquiries. In other words, you can get away with anything if you are rich and famous.
And just to point out that none of the characters in those scandals were journalists or even news presenters. They were all celebrity entertainers.
None of this excuses the kind of macho culture that allows the strong to prey upon the weak.
Savile had 450 complaints. Characterized as Britains most prolific sex offender. 28 victims under the age of 10 years old. Had a BBC broadcast show for 25 years. 450 complaints. Would you characterize BBC world news as being reliable? How many complaints would it take for them to kind of figure it out?
After Brian williams space shuttle was shot down by SAM missiles over Moscow. I started following goofballs like Andrea Mitchell on Twitter. The night before the election her and team nbc were celebrating their historical win of electing the first woman president. And I laughed. I don't look at them as news agencies I look at them as really really really dumb comedians.
Lol. I reckon you should run for President. You have all the qualifications.
I dont know what you mean exactly. But if I were president I would lawyer up x10 and get rid of the executive branch and have the lawyers create some laws after the fact and use executive powers, orders and privilages to make it happen. Just like they do now, but one last time for the right reason.
That is why most Presidents were prior lawyers.
What would you do Mr. Castlepaloma if elected? Excuse me. Mr President CastlePaloma.
Will, the "all truths" thing may have been a generic religious belief. It was never a Christian belief. The main thing about Christianity is that it is not something that should be forced on people. Many go off half cocked, thinking that they are supposed to become Christians. They are WRONG. It is an individual/personal decision.
I've heard many people say they use to be Christians but are not. They say that because they went to church, usually coerced as children.
Unfortunately, Christianity gets the bad rap because of people trying to elevate themselves.
Doesn't get a bad rep from me. And I don't know many Christians who support falsehood as a way of life.
Of course, many small churches are poorly led by barely educated preachers and they can be a menace, especially if those preachers only tell people what is easy to hear. When Christianity is subverted in that way, it is just another form of mindless populism
Its different here in America. Throughout our history the small churches usually were the schools. Just the same as Harvard and Yale were originally built to train ministers and such. Usually the ministers had extensive libraries to contribute. Kind of the same way as the hospitals and charities. Im sure they educated, tended the wounds of, gave food to, gave a few bucks to an uneducated person who was suffereing from disease and rebelling against the Lord.
Christianity, taught as in the Bible, is a work on the individual. The way the person lives should make others want to know about the life.
There are crooks in all size churches and on the street corner. They will be held accountable by God.
I note that someone starting shooting at Comet Ping Pong a couple of hours ago.
Just one more example of how conspiracy theories play out in populations who cannot differentiate between truth and fiction.
Pizzagate is the big thing now! Gen'l Flynn's grandson(?) started it.
Indeed. The question is why?
Why do people seem more likely to believe what they read on the web? Is it because it's a new form of mass communication so unlike TV, radio, newspapers etc, people haven't developed the same mistrust of it as a medium? Is it because the web is a more democratized form of communication (anyone can communicate to millions of people in an instant) so people think it bypasses the various biases of the mainstream media? What's the deal? Why are people so lacking in critical thinking skills when it comes to the web and stories like those in the opening post? Is this the way it's always been, but because of the web, we get a more of a glimpse of what people are thinking?
Confirmation bias. There's a lot of people out there that want to hear something that affirms to their own beliefs rather hearing cold-hard facts. There's an old saying: A horrible truth is much better than a fanciful lie. However, most people will take the fanciful lie if it fits with their beliefs (especially if it's ideological).
I like that. Then...a knowledge filter is a fundamental feature of science and human nature, where people tend to filter out things that don't fit. So! For example in science we find that evidence that doesn't fit the excepted paradigm tends to be eliminated. Its not taught, its not disused, and people who are educated in scientific teachings don't even learn about it and can be ignorant of truths all their lives.
We can take that to other levels. I prefer the truth, no matter how horrible it is to learn. Its discovery that is exciting to me, and I suppose I have detached myself emotionally to a great deal so I can research objectively. Its liberating!
That's the Pizzagate I was talking about. Gen'l Flynn's son was involved with starting that being posted on Breibart back in October.
I think people who are in government positions should be fired for knowingly promoting falsehoods.
FCC should find fake sites and people slandered should be able to sue for 1 million dollars. That will cut some of that *hit to the quick.
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to put its pants on."
I've heard that one before I love it. I must remember it. Thank you!
Or to paraphrase from Hitler: "Make the lie big, make it simple, and keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."
Actually Winston Churchill was bought off politician in 1936 and given $40,000 by the Zionist banker sacrificing what was to come in the future...
The deal later during world war, Britain was to give half of Israel to the Zionist jews along with milliary supplies backing and financial backing. Then to bring back the Jews from several countries to their assumed myth homeland with fake documents . In exchange for America milliary rescure the British from the Germans. Of course all of this cost sacrificing the British Empire.
Don't you wish , most of us could all get along and work together better, like how the greedy megalomaniac do. With one big difference in a positive way, not in such a negative way.
One little correction, Soviet Union, Britain and USA were under Khazar-Jewish-Zionist control and only Germany was not....The phoenix rising is a Khazar symbol and what they mean is that their empire was destroyed in the Caucasus in the 13th century but now they will rebuild it in Israel...They are not semites as they claim....They like to lie a lot...
When Hitler got elected in 1932 his policy was to send jews to Israel. Later he did make a formal agreement in Haarvara contract with Germany and Zionist jews. General Zionist work under the table in a secret society.
Yes, secret society because "other" people or "goi" are cattleor subhumans for them and can be sacrificed....Right now a financial crisis might wipe out a lot of people but not them because they will know in advance what will happen...Again, these are Kahazars, ancient Asian tribe which accepted Judaism as their religion and have nothing to do with biblical Jews...
I figured there were a lot of people that voted illegally, but the fact that people illegals are able to vote. However, I guess its finally over. I find it so amusing how people are still trying to overturn the vote simply because they are frustrated. He won fair and square.
It is difficult for a non-US citizen (legal and illegal immigrants) to vote in a US election and there's no way that 3 million illegals are pulling it off. The only ways that a non-citizen can vote are taking someone else's voter registration card and ID and posing as that person at the polling place, or getting a voter registration card through a clerical error (which happens, but is rare.) The first scenario does happen a lot, but it's usually citizens using their dead/elderly/invalid relatives' voter registration cards to "vote early and often." Legal and illegal immigrants don't generally have easy access to a deceased or invalid citizen's voter registration.
And just because you can get a driver's license as a non-citizen doesn't mean you will automatically get put on the voter rolls. Plenty of Permanent Residents, foreign students, K1-visa mail order brides, and other kinds of legal immigrants get driver's licenses and yet there's no epidemic of legal immigrants getting registered to vote. If savvier legal immigrants aren't pulling off voter scams, how in the world are illegals doing it?
I don't have a voter registration card. I've never had a voter registration card. And I've voted in every national election for the past 40+ years.
So when you say it is necessary to steal a voter registration card in order to vote, well, they can have mine. No need to steal anything.
Don't you have to tell them your name and then sign the register? I've voted absentee for so many years I can't remember.
Yes to both, plus provide ID. But there is no voter registration card. That seemed to be the hangup - that the card was difficult to get through fraud - but it isn't even required here.
ok. I thought you give your address. It shows you registered there. You sign by your address.
I do know that county can determine how many years a person did/did not vote.
In FL, I have a voter ID card but never use it. I give my drivers license which they scan and read the info from (not sure what other ID is acceptable), then sign a register and go vote.
Now that does jog a dim memory from 20 years ago when I registered. I may have received a card, but if so I've never used it. Just the DL, which is not scanned at all; the picture is compared to my face, the name found on their list and I'm given a ballot.
How that list is generated I haven't the faintest. I can assume it is from a 20 year old registration process, but don't know that to be true - one would think that eventually I would be asked to verify that I'm still alive, still live in the same place and have a right to vote in that precinct! But it hasn't happened in 20 years. (I'll add in here that a DL is good for 8 years; that's a long time to go without verification.)
I guess the assumption is that the DMV is doing all that...but they don't, either. They just take my money and a photo and hand over a new license. And those checking voter registration have no idea if that license is fake or not (forged DL's are a dime a dozen in most big cities) - they just make another assumption that it is good. Certainly a volunteer octogenarian that has trouble using an alphabetical list of names isn't going to be able to spot fake licenses.
I do things online. I haven't been inside DMV in over 20 years. online access is supposedly very secure; however, I guess Russia can tell us more about our security.
Had to get a new photo last time, requiring a physical visit. But you're right - everything else is online.
Although that may change - I have the time and the DMV here is easy to get into and out of. Couple that with unreasonable fees to save them money by eliminating live cashiers and I may go back to physical visits.
Or maybe they will start charging for physical visits as well as checks by mail and online access. That state's hunger for every more money is incredible.
It probably would be good to required that people pass a driving test after a certain number of years. The person may not have accidents but might cause a lot of others to have accidents.
After a certain age, vision tests are required. I'm not aware of any driving test. I'm also not positive that such would be legal unless it was every 10 years or something like that. Not age based.
I was. Cataract surgery fixed that and now it's not bad.
I've heard that you see things you've never seen before after that sugery.
I'm wearing tinted prescription glasses. My doctor said mine is not bad and I should always protect my eyes from the sun.
It's encouraging to know about that surgery. TY!
I don't know about seeing things never before seen, but for sure you see things you haven't seen in years. You will not get the eyes of a 20 year old, but they are so vastly improved over what they were that it is incredible.
Diane, if you have even small cataracts, can I suggest a series of hubs on the experience of having cataracts, choosing a new lens and having it implanted? The first of the series is on my carousel - you might find it interesting or useful. I know, for instance, the almost terror at the idea of cutting into my eye all too well, but the experience was so incredible that all that just faded into the sunset. To watch as a new lens is worked into place and suddenly have things *pop* into view, things that couldn't be seen just minutes before, was something else.
WHAT?????? You were awake? Oh heck no!
Were you anesthetized even a little?
I need all of the advice I can get.
I just had carpal tunnel surgery. I need two knee replacements. I had a hip replacement 11/2011 which has been painful 24/7. I'm going through a series of groin shots to stop pain. I may have to have the hip replacement re-done. I'm too old for all of this.
No anesthesia. Something to relax the patient, but that's all. Could watch as the new lens was inserted, unfolded and pushed into place. Could see the little tube used to suck out the old lens pieces and the gizmo that broke it into pieces. Turns out there are no pain receptors in the eyeball - something I hadn't known. When you get dirt in your eye, it is the eyelid, not the eyeball, that feels it.
But cataract surgery is really easy. It's the most common surgery in the world now, and about as slick as surgery can be. No pain and very little recovery. Most of that, in fact, was because they wanted it dilated for several days (that paralyzes the muscles that focus the lens). No stitches. Nothing but 15 minutes of lying quietly and then a wonderful new world comes alive for you. New colors, new details. When I got home, almost didn't recognize my own kitchen; walls were white instead of the dingy yellowish color I had been calling white. Trees were dark green, vibrant with color and had needles now!
It is amazing how wonderfully made we are.
I'll let you know when I walk the plank.
Huh, didn't know that. Apparently that's true of the brain too. Funny how that works.
I didn't either, until then. Yes, the brain is the same - no feeling sensors inside the gray matter.
Interesting in that a year later, I had a small adjustment done via a YAG laser. The doctor pinned back the eyelids and then set some kind of small lens directly on the eyeball. Couldn't feel it at all - the only problem was when he washed off the grease sealing it and it tickled.
Thank God I don't need brain surgery ... yet ... I don't think???
The 2005 REAL ID Act implements the following:
- Title II of the act establishes new federal standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver identification cards.
- Changing visa limits for temporary workers, nurses, and Australian citizens.
- Funding some reports and pilot projects related to border security.
- Introducing rules covering "delivery bonds" (similar to bail bonds but for aliens who have been released pending hearings).
- Updating and tightening the laws on application for asylum and deportation of aliens for terrorist activity.
- Waiving laws that interfere with construction of physical barriers at the borders.
As to the first bullet, here is the documentation needed:
- A photo ID, or a non-photo ID that includes full legal name and birth date
- Documentation of birth date
- Documentation of legal status and Social Security number
- Documentation showing name and principal residence address
And then there is this "People born on or after December 1, 1964, will have to obtain a REAL ID by December 1, 2014. Those born before December 1, 1964, will have until December 1, 2017, to obtain their REAL ID."
It is the proof of birth and citizenship that creates the problem for a small segment of America. A typical example is: you are born in 1930 in Georgia, and your black. In those days, having a record of live birth was problematic for everybody but whites, and even poor whites had problems. Now suppose you move to North Carolina. (The basic facts were litigated) Now, 80 years later you have to "Prove" you are an American in NC in order to vote. How does this person easily do this given they may or may not have had a certificate of birth or, if there was one, does it still exist?
There is another case involving nuns who couldn't get the required ID (in Ohio or PA, I think). Consequently, these people, and there are a lot of them, are disenfranchised by laws designed to stop something that isn't happening.
Pretty sure I did not provide a birth certificate in 1996 when I moved into my current state (don't think I had one until I got a passport around 2010). A utility bill and a prior drivers license; and as that license is required to be changed the day of the move by law in my state (not enforced, obviously), don't see how a utility bill could be required.
Somewhere in the 80's I helped one of our employees get SS. Black, born alongside the road and then given to a neighbor as an infant, he lied about his age to enlist in the army at 15. Round and round and round - the SS finally accepted a handwritten line on the flyleaf of the family bible as to when he was born but it took weeks to accomplish and I doubt he could ever have done it without help.
All that you say is true (though someone over 80 years old is surely on SS and has a SS identity), but when you end it with "something that isn't happening" I'd be really interested in proof of that statement. We hear it a lot, but I've never seen any documentation that anyone at all has looked at millions of voters to verify they are legal. Not even the documentation that says they are. No one checks every name in the registration records for validity. I've seen where only 31 out of billions of votes was illegal, and you can believe that each and every voter was investigated to see if they were a citizen permitted to vote if you want, but I don't. And I am positive beyond any doubt whatsoever that there were more than 31 votes out of even 1 billion that were illegal. Incorrect voting from honest errors (wrong precinct, perhaps, or not knowing that some felons cannot vote) will be higher than that.
We just say it doesn't happen, and that's good enough. Is it?
Once again I am behind the curve, I hadn't heard about the Real ID Act. I could make a joke about semi-rural living, but that probably wouldn't cover it. I just don't remember hearing about it.
I checked DHS's FAQs about the Act and they said the REAL ID requirements do not apply for voting or voter registration purposes. How does it disenfranchise voters?
I believe the concept is that if you have to provide a government ID then some people will lose the chance to vote because they are unable to obtain that ID.
Government ID is an overly broad category. Restrictive voter ID laws have been written to make it inconvenient or expensive (relative to poor people's income) or both to obtain the specific ID that state wants. It is that practice that keeps getting shot down in court.
Those practices are also the reason the feds passed the Voting Act in the first place, the one the Right is trying so hard to get rid of.
I understand that; anything above $0.00 is considered unavailable and beyond the means of the poor. And that includes bus fare (usually free to the indigent) to get to the office. Of course, an hour of time (plus the 2 hours required to actually vote) is "inconvenient" for the poor as well, although the rest of us manage to squeeze it in after work.
I just don't swallow the nonsense, that's all. As far as I'm concerned it is but a rather obvious ploy to continue to allow illegal voting as the assumption is that the majority will vote Democrat. Obviously unproven, but that is the unspoken assumption (by D's; Republicans are obviously quite outspoken about the idea).
Your first wrong assumption is that there is more than a handful of illegals voting ... there is not ... show me any legitimate comprehensive study to show there is. You have been shown in many forums and hubs studies which proves there isn't. Illegals voting is simply fake news.
"Your first wrong assumption is that there is more than a handful of illegals voting ... there is not ... show me any legitimate comprehensive study to show there is."
I'm sorry, but I have never seen anything of the sort, either way. Lots of claims, but never any data and never even a claim that legitimacy of millions of voters was tested. Closest I've come to that was someone claiming that 31 out of billions of votes was illegal...without ever saying how they tested. So...how about you show me a research project where at least 1 million voters (perhaps in southern California) were verified (valid ID and valid residence location at a minimum), either before or after they voted? When it comes up with 0 possible illegal votes, then you have a case to claim there aren't enough to worry about. And when it shows 1,000 or more that could not be verified then you accept that it is almost certainly happening. (In between we'll have to fight about it).
Until then, guess we'll just both have to accept that we might have a problem and that we might not. Under those circumstances, I'll err on the side of caution and put up a few simple roadblocks to illegal voting. Like a picture ID and registration every 4 years.
Your understanding of what it is like to be poor is very narrow indeed.
Assume you have two kids and working in Houston, just to pick a place. You earn above minimum wage at $10/hr or $20,800/year before taxes (it takes about $35K for that kind of family to barely survive without having to trade of necessities like food and health care). You need to go to Atlanta, GA to get your records. You have no HS diploma, your female and you work a second part-time job to bring a little more money in.
Now, how reasonable is it to assume you can just waltz into Atlanta to get what you need.
Now why in the world would you have to cross half the country??? Can that $20,800 not provide a 35 cent stamp? Or make a phone call using that free phone provided to you?
(PS: if you're trying to live in Houston on $20,800 you'd be far better off to get out of town. Haven't lived there but would bet it's a losing proposition. Of course, I also don't understand how two full time workers (your female and you), working more than two full time jobs, are earning just 20 G. That's illegal; are you and your female illegal aliens, working under the table(s)?)
Pretty sure he meant you're* female - it's the single mother with two kids working several part-time jobs scenario.
I understand your "government ID" thought, but if that ID is to be considered as only a Federal government ID, then to have any impact the Act would have to be amended later to remove the voting exception it now has.
Otherwise, that government ID could also be a state government ID, which it appears are generally easier to obtain than the REAL ID.
I recall from previous voter ID conversations that many, (if not all), of the states that have newly imposed ID requirements have also included programs to facilitate getting one. Such as considerations for folks that could not produce a birth certificate.
My original question remains; If the REAL ID cannot be required for voter identification, how is it pertinent to disenfranchising a certain group of citizens?
From Esoteric's post:
"- Title II of the <Real ID> act establishes new federal standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver identification cards."
The Real ID cannot be used for voting purposes, but the act makes requirements for both DL and non DL ID cards? Getting a little complex, here.
If I understood My Esoteric's inference, by the Act's inclusion in a voter fraud/ID topic, that it is the burden of the proofs needed to meet REAL ID standards that will disenfranchise some older citizens.
He provided these REAL ID standards;
"As to the first bullet, here is the documentation needed:
- A photo ID, or a non-photo ID that includes full legal name and birth date
- Documentation of birth date
- Documentation of legal status and Social Security number
- Documentation showing name and principal residence address"
Driver's Licenses are the typical form of voter id. ipso factso... That 80 yr. old black woman can't meet the standards - so she can't vote.
That was my take on his comment. It might be wrong, I hope not. I already had eggs for breakfast.
My point was that the Act specifically says it cannot be a required ID for voting or voter registration. There were also tangents concerning state compliance standards. Originally that states adopt the REAL ID documentation My Esoteric listed. Later, DHS issues a final rule that put the verification, specific types, and acceptable alternative documentation decisions, right back into the state's hands - because it was admitted that there was no feasible verification mechanism for Federal use.
This is where my initial reply came in. My recall is that the states, (at least most, if not all), that added new voter ID requirements also included programs that practically made getting an ID as easy as a phone call, (hang on). Voter information and education, (about the ID services available), mobile units that either visited like the library or clinic bus, or in some cases to specific addresses, and fee waivers where needed. There were even affidavit processes designed to substitute for the lack of physical paper documentation - like that 80 yr. old black woman whose only recourse to a birth certificate would be a note of her birth penned in the family Bible.
In short, programs to alleviate those first bullets mentioned. So I asked where the voter disenfranchisement was in the REAL ID Act.
Guess I am still behind the curve. If the Act can't require its own ID card, and it doesn't control state's driver's license and ID card requirement efforts, so it won't disenfranchise any voters, so why was it mentioned?
If there is a way, Russia will figure it out.
I really don't get your obsession with illegals (and now Russians?). Whatever voting scam an illegal could pull off a legal could do ten times better, but you are hyper-focused on the subset of non-citizens who are illegal. The typical illegal immigrant in the US is an unsophisticated unskilled laborer from a third world country who doesn't care one bit about politics or voting. They are simply not voting in droves. They are kind of too busy being overworked and underpaid by the law-breaking citizens who hire them.
Immigrants are your everyday Jesus, taking on the sins of the world.
So it was the Russians...
Interesting theory. The Russians are influencing undocumented American Citizens to vote. Once the Russians have forced them to vote for Trump, they then force them to get jobs that are normally done by heavy equipment. Almost brilliant in a sinister way. Once elected then Trump surrenders to a small group of undocumented communists.
I was segueing from the 3,000,000 to the bipartisan investigations into Russia manipulating us.
by PhoenixV10 months ago
Did illegal aliens vote for Hillary in California?If so how many?
by American View18 months ago
If all the I illegal Aliens said tomorrow they are voting Republican, would the Dems desire Voter ID cards, would they want the voter rolls updated, would they have backed Obama's amnesty for the young illegals?
by Credence25 years ago
Greetings all, check out this article and if you are so inclined share your thoughts. I think that this Trump guy is a bull in a china shop and is the reason the GOP has so little credibilty with Hispanic and, in...
by Mikel G Roberts2 years ago
My opinion is no, we should not.The problems of failed or "third world" countries have resulted in millions of people fleeing those countries to steal the better life the people of other non third world...
by alexandriaruthk5 years ago
Should illegal aliens be given path to citizenship?Some of them cross the border and others overstayed their visa. What is your opinion about this?
by MikeNV6 years ago
$10 Billion per month to spend in Afghanistan per month "fighting terrorists". How many people know the cost of a Gallon of fuel to the military in Afghanistan is $13 per Gallon?30,000 AMERICAN TROOPS on...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.