America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 8 years ago by DrafterX. 65 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
Only in California
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
DrafterX Offline
#51 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 4:41 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,560
tonygraz wrote:
Did you need some outdoor work done ?


sure do.... when can you stop by..?? Huh
tonygraz Offline
#52 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 5:04 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,284
250,000 Mexicans not enough ?
teddyballgame Offline
#53 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 5:05 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
tonygraz wrote:
Hey dummy, you wouldn't have noticed if I didn't push you to look again. I'm not the one that voted for George W twice.



Hitting a nerve on you eh? You supply the link, then say the link is too old. I point it out and you flip.
Fun watching your liberal mind self implode.

Yes I voted 2X for Bush, held my nose and pulled the lever.

And you are the absolute fool that voted for Obama twice and wear your ignorance as a badge of honor.

I am no special pleader for GW. Bush was a bad president and as a thinking conservative male, I can step back from my party and call them out when I don't like what is going on . Where as you goose step behind der leader.

Or are you one of those who voted more than twice for Obama? Slobbering all over yourself so you could vote "D"
Voting multiple times for an empty suit.

You must be proud.
tonygraz Offline
#54 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 5:13 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,284
You have a lot of blood on your voting hands. And a near depression to boot.
Covfireman Offline
#55 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 6:37 PM EST
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
Where are the convictionsor arrests for the voter fraud that teddyballgame keeps bringing up?
teddyballgame Offline
#56 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 9:38 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
and I suppose in Chicago there were no dead people voting for JFK?

C'mon Covfireman.. don't be a sap.
tonygraz Offline
#57 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 10:11 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,284
I don't recall the democrats ever requiring a picture ID and then closing all the DMV offices where you could easily get one. When more people vote, republicans lose.
teddyballgame Offline
#58 Posted: Wed, Oct 28 2015, 11:31 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
why wouldn't you require a picture ID?

One of the most critical rights, the right to vote over who governs us, and you don't want a photo id to prove you are who you say you are?

76% of America wants that.

Yes 76% and that includes 58% of "regular" democrats (this doesn't include sheeple like you tony)

92% Republicans and 78% of no affiliation.

The only reason democrats in office scream foul when voter id is brought up, is that they want illegal votes.

You need a photo id to check out a book, to board a plane, to buy liquor, to get a gun

I suppose these are also all "racist- Jim Crowe type antics?"

This was the latest Rasmussen poll.

Again tony, you are on the wrong side.
tonygraz Offline
#59 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 9:37 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,284
I see some different numbers and thought the poll questions were flawed. The survey was done in August before the DMV closing spree in a southern state may have been news. Republicans are always trying to restrict the vote because a big turnout means pub loss.
TMCTLT Offline
#60 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 10:00 AM EST
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
tonygraz wrote:
I see some different numbers and thought the poll questions were flawed. The survey was done in August before the DMV closing spree in a southern state may have been news. Republicans are always trying to restrict the vote because a big turnout means pub loss.




d'oh!
teddyballgame Offline
#61 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 11:12 AM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
tonygraz wrote:
I see some different numbers and thought the poll questions were flawed. The survey was done in August before the DMV closing spree in a southern state may have been news. .



Yes that is always the case, you "see some different numbers"- dems like to re-write facts and history to fit their agenda.

This isn't a one off poll.
Time and time again polls such as this have shown these numbers.
Go on, try and find some polls of "your numbers" that tell a different tale.

And exactly how does this suppress voter turnout? Virtually everyone has a photo ID.

Here is some facts from this link:

http://dailysignal.com/2012/02/24/heritage-vs-aclu-at-voter-id-debate/

A case brought by the ACLU in Georgia against its ID law was dismissed by a federal judge because the ACLU could not produce any witnesses who would be unable to vote because of the ID requirement.

voter turnout actually increased after the Georgia and Indiana laws were put in place. In 2008, the turnout of Democratic voters increased more than 6 percentage points in Georgia over the 2004 election when there was no photo ID law in effect, and it increased more than 8 percentage points in Indiana.





tonygraz wrote:
Republicans are always trying to restrict the vote because a big turnout means pub loss.


There are never big turnouts that end in republican wins

Except that time when Ronald Reagan won in 2 landslides.

The second one he won EVERY state but Minnesota (by 3000 votes).
By your president's count that is 56 out of "57 states" that your brilliant leader thinks make up the U.S.

But I guess that is because nobody turned out to vote for Ronaldus Magnus
banderl Offline
#62 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 11:51 AM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
teddyballgame wrote:
Yes that is always the case, you "see some different numbers"- dems like to re-write facts and history to fit their agenda.

This isn't a one off poll.
Time and time again polls such as this have shown these numbers.
Go on, try and find some polls of "your numbers" that tell a different tale.

And exactly how does this suppress voter turnout? Virtually everyone has a photo ID.

Here is some facts from this link:

http://dailysignal.com/2012/02/24/heritage-vs-aclu-at-voter-id-debate/

A case brought by the ACLU in Georgia against its ID law was dismissed by a federal judge because the ACLU could not produce any witnesses who would be unable to vote because of the ID requirement.

voter turnout actually increased after the Georgia and Indiana laws were put in place. In 2008, the turnout of Democratic voters increased more than 6 percentage points in Georgia over the 2004 election when there was no photo ID law in effect, and it increased more than 8 percentage points in Indiana.







There are never big turnouts that end in republican wins

Except that time when Ronald Reagan won in 2 landslides.

The second one he won EVERY state but Minnesota (by 3000 votes).
By your president's count that is 56 out of "57 states" that your brilliant leader thinks make up the U.S.

But I guess that is because nobody turned out to vote for Ronaldus Magnus




I seem to remember a recent court case finding that there was not enough actual voter fraud to justify more restrictions on one's constitutional right to vote.


Here's the first one that I found:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/06/us/appellate-panel-says-texas-id-law-broke-us-voting-rights-act.html
In a 147-page opinion issued in the fall of 2014 after a two-week trial, a district court judge, Nelva Gonzales Ramos, said the law “creates an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote” and blocked its enforcement.

She noted the lack of evidence that voter fraud was a threat and cited expert testimony that about 600,000 Texans, mainly poor, black and Hispanic, lacked the newly required IDs and often faced obstacles in obtaining them.


Not sure if that's the one that I'm thinking of but I'm too busy to waste any more time on this nonsense today.
I'd still like to see you provide any proof of your claims about illegal aliens stealing a California election in the 1990s.
Covfireman Offline
#63 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 12:15 PM EST
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
teddyballgame wrote:
and I suppose in Chicago there were no dead people voting for JFK?

C'mon Covfireman.. don't be a sap.




Come on teddyballgame, it took republicans 50 years before they decided to fix something they thought was a problem ? You want to see a sap look in the mirror. Don't just buy the party line use your head for something other than a hat rack.
teddyballgame Offline
#64 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 12:54 PM EST
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
Unlike your head, mine is not stuck somewhere I cannot put a hat on it!

You know as well as I do, this is a political football issue.

Racism is always cried here.
DrafterX Offline
#65 Posted: Thu, Oct 29 2015, 12:54 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,560
When they restrict voters, only restrictors will have votes... Not talking
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
Back to Top