Quote:
Originally posted by codymc12
You could very well be right.
But a Democracy that doesn't thoroughly investigate any allegation of voter fraud, however slight or suspect the source, runs the risk of some day not being a Democracy. Being right 1 out of a 100 times, when it comes to investigating voter fraud, makes the process of checking it out acceptable to me, and I don't think it's something to ridicule. I would hope that Bush and Rove would agree, and I would imagine they do.
|
there is voter fraud every election on a grand scale in philadelphia but it goes unpunished because the liberals have philly locked up.
There was a riot in 2000 in front of the democratic mayor's office because the people they promised money to for their vote hadn't yet been paid.
As long as liberals want to point ONLY to things that don't quite add up and call them fraud and then look the other way at blatant fraud on their own side, they will continue to be mocked.
Quote:
Originally posted by codymc12
In so far as driving 'normal Americans' (whatever that means) away from the party - statistics don't back this up. 1% less than half of those who voted, voted against Bush. Close to half the nation apparently doesn't agree with your definition of 'normal american.'
|
wrong.
the liberals went out and signed up plenty of new voters. the republicans did not match anywhere near what the dems did.
come election day, manny manny more people turned out to vote and voted for the president. you can imagine what you'd like but "normal Americans" (sad you either pretend or really don't know what they are) went out and voted.
Their number easily overcame all of the liberal kiddies who registered to vote.