Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
What is with this point that requiring ID to vote is racial voter suppression?
Comments
-
I've stated multiple times the number of known voter fraud is close to zero. Especially relative to the billions of votes cast. Which time confused you?DoogieMcDoogerson said:
Thanks for your response. So you must not think there's much voter fraud going on, or you do and you're comfortable with it...2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
I take it you believe that millions of illegals voted in the last election. -
If there were widespread voter fraud, it would be caught. The rest of your list is awesome. Throwing out racist for absolutely no reason.MikeDamone said:
How about registering to vote? No proof of citizenship required?2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
Poll tax? Because you think certain people aren’t capable of getting an ID. Typical racist leftist.
Yeah, a few votes matter. Retard.
“The election was held on November 2, 2004, with the initial count showing Gregoire trailing Rossi by 261 votes. However, a legally mandated machine recount reduced that lead to only 42 votes, then a hand count that was requested and funded by the state's Democratic Party gave Gregoire a 10-vote lead. Following a State Supreme Court ruling that allowed several hundred ballots from King County to be included, her lead was further increased to 130 votes,[17] but when the vote was certified by the state's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, at the end of December, one vote which had been counted in Thurston County past the deadline was disqualified and her lead was reduced to 129 votes.[18] Washington's Republican leadership then filed suit, claiming that hundreds of votes, including votes by felons,[19] deceased voters,[20] and double voters,[20] were included in the canvass, but on June 6, 2005, Judge John E. Bridges ruled that the Republican party did not provide enough evidence that the disputed votes were ineligible—or for whom they were cast—to overturn the election.[21]”
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Dead-voted-in-governor-s-race-1163612.php
Of course you’ll say no “known fraud changed this election”. Perhaps the unknown did. Having proof of who a voter is would be the only way to be sure.
200 people drove drunk Friday in your town. 1 was caught. So that’s proof that no more than 1 person drove drunk.
You’re an imbecile. And a racist. -
I called it.2001400ex said:
If there were widespread voter fraud, it would be caught. The rest of your list is awesome. Throwing out racist for absolutely no reason.MikeDamone said:
How about registering to vote? No proof of citizenship required?2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
Poll tax? Because you think certain people aren’t capable of getting an ID. Typical racist leftist.
Yeah, a few votes matter. Retard.
“The election was held on November 2, 2004, with the initial count showing Gregoire trailing Rossi by 261 votes. However, a legally mandated machine recount reduced that lead to only 42 votes, then a hand count that was requested and funded by the state's Democratic Party gave Gregoire a 10-vote lead. Following a State Supreme Court ruling that allowed several hundred ballots from King County to be included, her lead was further increased to 130 votes,[17] but when the vote was certified by the state's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, at the end of December, one vote which had been counted in Thurston County past the deadline was disqualified and her lead was reduced to 129 votes.[18] Washington's Republican leadership then filed suit, claiming that hundreds of votes, including votes by felons,[19] deceased voters,[20] and double voters,[20] were included in the canvass, but on June 6, 2005, Judge John E. Bridges ruled that the Republican party did not provide enough evidence that the disputed votes were ineligible—or for whom they were cast—to overturn the election.[21]”
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Dead-voted-in-governor-s-race-1163612.php
Of course you’ll say no “known fraud changed this election”. Perhaps the unknown did. Having proof of who a voter is would be the only way to be sure.
200 people drove drunk Friday in your town. 1 was caught. So that’s proof that no more than 1 person drove drunk.
You’re an imbecile. And a racist.
And your a racist. Poll tax. Lol. Racist fuck.
It doesn’t have to been widespread to make an impact. Idiot. -
No one is looking in Democrat states2001400ex said:
If there were widespread voter fraud, it would be caught. The rest of your list is awesome. Throwing out racist for absolutely no reason.MikeDamone said:
How about registering to vote? No proof of citizenship required?2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
Poll tax? Because you think certain people aren’t capable of getting an ID. Typical racist leftist.
Yeah, a few votes matter. Retard.
“The election was held on November 2, 2004, with the initial count showing Gregoire trailing Rossi by 261 votes. However, a legally mandated machine recount reduced that lead to only 42 votes, then a hand count that was requested and funded by the state's Democratic Party gave Gregoire a 10-vote lead. Following a State Supreme Court ruling that allowed several hundred ballots from King County to be included, her lead was further increased to 130 votes,[17] but when the vote was certified by the state's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, at the end of December, one vote which had been counted in Thurston County past the deadline was disqualified and her lead was reduced to 129 votes.[18] Washington's Republican leadership then filed suit, claiming that hundreds of votes, including votes by felons,[19] deceased voters,[20] and double voters,[20] were included in the canvass, but on June 6, 2005, Judge John E. Bridges ruled that the Republican party did not provide enough evidence that the disputed votes were ineligible—or for whom they were cast—to overturn the election.[21]”
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Dead-voted-in-governor-s-race-1163612.php
Of course you’ll say no “known fraud changed this election”. Perhaps the unknown did. Having proof of who a voter is would be the only way to be sure.
200 people drove drunk Friday in your town. 1 was caught. So that’s proof that no more than 1 person drove drunk.
You’re an imbecile. And a racist.
It's been caught when people look
Educate yourself -
Link?RaceBannon said:
No one is looking in Democrat states2001400ex said:
If there were widespread voter fraud, it would be caught. The rest of your list is awesome. Throwing out racist for absolutely no reason.MikeDamone said:
How about registering to vote? No proof of citizenship required?2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
Poll tax? Because you think certain people aren’t capable of getting an ID. Typical racist leftist.
Yeah, a few votes matter. Retard.
“The election was held on November 2, 2004, with the initial count showing Gregoire trailing Rossi by 261 votes. However, a legally mandated machine recount reduced that lead to only 42 votes, then a hand count that was requested and funded by the state's Democratic Party gave Gregoire a 10-vote lead. Following a State Supreme Court ruling that allowed several hundred ballots from King County to be included, her lead was further increased to 130 votes,[17] but when the vote was certified by the state's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, at the end of December, one vote which had been counted in Thurston County past the deadline was disqualified and her lead was reduced to 129 votes.[18] Washington's Republican leadership then filed suit, claiming that hundreds of votes, including votes by felons,[19] deceased voters,[20] and double voters,[20] were included in the canvass, but on June 6, 2005, Judge John E. Bridges ruled that the Republican party did not provide enough evidence that the disputed votes were ineligible—or for whom they were cast—to overturn the election.[21]”
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Dead-voted-in-governor-s-race-1163612.php
Of course you’ll say no “known fraud changed this election”. Perhaps the unknown did. Having proof of who a voter is would be the only way to be sure.
200 people drove drunk Friday in your town. 1 was caught. So that’s proof that no more than 1 person drove drunk.
You’re an imbecile. And a racist.
It's been caught when people look
Educate yourself -
What part of educate yourself did you not understand. Shit head.2001400ex said:
Link?RaceBannon said:
No one is looking in Democrat states2001400ex said:
If there were widespread voter fraud, it would be caught. The rest of your list is awesome. Throwing out racist for absolutely no reason.MikeDamone said:
How about registering to vote? No proof of citizenship required?2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
Poll tax? Because you think certain people aren’t capable of getting an ID. Typical racist leftist.
Yeah, a few votes matter. Retard.
“The election was held on November 2, 2004, with the initial count showing Gregoire trailing Rossi by 261 votes. However, a legally mandated machine recount reduced that lead to only 42 votes, then a hand count that was requested and funded by the state's Democratic Party gave Gregoire a 10-vote lead. Following a State Supreme Court ruling that allowed several hundred ballots from King County to be included, her lead was further increased to 130 votes,[17] but when the vote was certified by the state's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, at the end of December, one vote which had been counted in Thurston County past the deadline was disqualified and her lead was reduced to 129 votes.[18] Washington's Republican leadership then filed suit, claiming that hundreds of votes, including votes by felons,[19] deceased voters,[20] and double voters,[20] were included in the canvass, but on June 6, 2005, Judge John E. Bridges ruled that the Republican party did not provide enough evidence that the disputed votes were ineligible—or for whom they were cast—to overturn the election.[21]”
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Dead-voted-in-governor-s-race-1163612.php
Of course you’ll say no “known fraud changed this election”. Perhaps the unknown did. Having proof of who a voter is would be the only way to be sure.
200 people drove drunk Friday in your town. 1 was caught. So that’s proof that no more than 1 person drove drunk.
You’re an imbecile. And a racist.
It's been caught when people look
Educate yourself -
So you can't provide support of mass voter fraud either. Ok pookie.MikeDamone said:
What part of educate yourself did you not understand. Shit head.2001400ex said:
Link?RaceBannon said:
No one is looking in Democrat states2001400ex said:
If there were widespread voter fraud, it would be caught. The rest of your list is awesome. Throwing out racist for absolutely no reason.MikeDamone said:
How about registering to vote? No proof of citizenship required?2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
Poll tax? Because you think certain people aren’t capable of getting an ID. Typical racist leftist.
Yeah, a few votes matter. Retard.
“The election was held on November 2, 2004, with the initial count showing Gregoire trailing Rossi by 261 votes. However, a legally mandated machine recount reduced that lead to only 42 votes, then a hand count that was requested and funded by the state's Democratic Party gave Gregoire a 10-vote lead. Following a State Supreme Court ruling that allowed several hundred ballots from King County to be included, her lead was further increased to 130 votes,[17] but when the vote was certified by the state's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, at the end of December, one vote which had been counted in Thurston County past the deadline was disqualified and her lead was reduced to 129 votes.[18] Washington's Republican leadership then filed suit, claiming that hundreds of votes, including votes by felons,[19] deceased voters,[20] and double voters,[20] were included in the canvass, but on June 6, 2005, Judge John E. Bridges ruled that the Republican party did not provide enough evidence that the disputed votes were ineligible—or for whom they were cast—to overturn the election.[21]”
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Dead-voted-in-governor-s-race-1163612.php
Of course you’ll say no “known fraud changed this election”. Perhaps the unknown did. Having proof of who a voter is would be the only way to be sure.
200 people drove drunk Friday in your town. 1 was caught. So that’s proof that no more than 1 person drove drunk.
You’re an imbecile. And a racist.
It's been caught when people look
Educate yourself -
No it hasn’t you lying piece of crap. Most all states that require voter ID offer a free state voter ID for those who can’t afford one, and voter participation actually increased in Georgia after they passed their voter ID law. Hondo as per usual is talking straight out his ass.2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem. -
Who gives a fuck what a lying Kunt like you says Hondo?2001400ex said:
I've stated multiple times the number of known voter fraud is close to zero. Especially relative to the billions of votes cast. Which time confused you?DoogieMcDoogerson said:
Thanks for your response. So you must not think there's much voter fraud going on, or you do and you're comfortable with it...2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
I take it you believe that millions of illegals voted in the last election. -
Just Google "Chicago voting". Even the dead vote a great deal.2001400ex said:
Link?RaceBannon said:
No one is looking in Democrat states2001400ex said:
If there were widespread voter fraud, it would be caught. The rest of your list is awesome. Throwing out racist for absolutely no reason.MikeDamone said:
How about registering to vote? No proof of citizenship required?2001400ex said:
Requiring ID to vote has been shown to be a form of a poll tax. I do not support it as it's not shown to be effective at reducing voter fraud. It has shown to make it harder for some people to exercise their constitutionally given right to vote.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Answer these questions:
Do you object to requiring ID to vote / register to vote? If so, why?
Isn't knowing who voted, precisely, fundamental to having a nice accurate election? I mean why be sloppy about this?
You ask isn't know who voted..... Show me any amount of known voter fraud that would change an election. In other words, you have a solution in need of a problem.
Poll tax? Because you think certain people aren’t capable of getting an ID. Typical racist leftist.
Yeah, a few votes matter. Retard.
“The election was held on November 2, 2004, with the initial count showing Gregoire trailing Rossi by 261 votes. However, a legally mandated machine recount reduced that lead to only 42 votes, then a hand count that was requested and funded by the state's Democratic Party gave Gregoire a 10-vote lead. Following a State Supreme Court ruling that allowed several hundred ballots from King County to be included, her lead was further increased to 130 votes,[17] but when the vote was certified by the state's Secretary of State, Sam Reed, at the end of December, one vote which had been counted in Thurston County past the deadline was disqualified and her lead was reduced to 129 votes.[18] Washington's Republican leadership then filed suit, claiming that hundreds of votes, including votes by felons,[19] deceased voters,[20] and double voters,[20] were included in the canvass, but on June 6, 2005, Judge John E. Bridges ruled that the Republican party did not provide enough evidence that the disputed votes were ineligible—or for whom they were cast—to overturn the election.[21]”
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Dead-voted-in-governor-s-race-1163612.php
Of course you’ll say no “known fraud changed this election”. Perhaps the unknown did. Having proof of who a voter is would be the only way to be sure.
200 people drove drunk Friday in your town. 1 was caught. So that’s proof that no more than 1 person drove drunk.
You’re an imbecile. And a racist.
It's been caught when people look
Educate yourself
