democrats question military votes

2006-11-04 20:03:53

#1

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Nov02/ … ry,00.html

there are those that suggest that the democrats are doing this to try and stifle the military vote, which traditionally, goes to the republicans.

from boortz.com

DEMOCRATS WORKING TO SUPPRESS MILITARY VOTES ..... AGAIN

Democrat Party disdain ... bordering on outright dislike ... of and toward our men and women in uniform is what pounded me back into reality earlier this week. John Kerry made his insipid remarks about soldiers in Iraq and Democrats, by and large, remained silent. Harold Ford stepped up, and perhaps one or two others, but by and large Democrats were content to let Kerry make yet another in his long string of remarks denigrating our military without condemnation.

Kerry's remarks served to remind me also of the Democrat's penchant for trying to suppress military votes. Sadly, too few Americans remember that in 2000 Al Gore and the Democrats sent hoards of lawyers to Florida during the recount debacle. These particular lawyers were charged with one responsibility. They were to fan out to every single voting district in Florida and do everything they possibly could to make sure that military absentee ballots were not counted in the election. Funny, isn't it, how the media doesn't seem to be too eager to remind us of this attempt at voter suppression. But let the Republicans support the idea of a voter proving his identity at the polls and all media hell breaks out.

Well ... here we go again. New Jersey Democrat Congressman Rush Holt has fired off a letter to Donald Rumsfeld challenging a Pentagon program that allows service members to request and submit ballots in the upcoming election via fax or email. Holt, wanting to appear as if he's actually trying to protect our troops, says the system could expose them to identity theft.

Yeah ... right.

Democrats know that military personnel are more likely to vote Republican than Democrat. They also know that there is a wave of anger in the military over Kerry's remarks. Time to get out there and make sure those military votes don't count .... again.

Last edited by lowing (2006-11-04 20:04:21)

2006-11-04 20:07:02

#2

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6947|Canberra, AUS

Could you please provide another source, I don't think ANYONE trusts Fox News (apart from you, it would seem)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2006-11-04 20:09:46

#3

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

Spark wrote:
Could you please provide another source, I don't think ANYONE trusts Fox News (apart from you, it would seem)

Yeah I am the only one that watches fox network which is number 1 for news and information.

2006-11-04 20:14:27

#4

dubbs: Member; +105|6904|Lexington, KY

Spark wrote:
Could you please provide another source, I don't think ANYONE trusts Fox News (apart from you, it would seem)

He supplied two sources, Fox News, and Boortz.com.

2006-11-04 20:14:41

#5

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/ … 2-17-51-16

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 01239.html

need more??

2006-11-04 20:16:23

#6

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1731562/posts

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/voting_military

how bout some more??

2006-11-04 20:20:01

#7

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/voting_military

yet another one...........let me know when you feel the article is true..

2006-11-04 20:22:14

#8

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6873|132 and Bush

The only people that can lose this election for the Dem's are the Dem's.

BTW lowing I think you made your point..lol

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-11-04 20:24:10

#9

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/ … 2-17-51-16

enough yet???......Oh I think so

2006-11-04 20:25:20

#10

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6873|132 and Bush

lowing wrote:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VOTING_MILITARY?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-11-02-17-51-16

enough yet???......Oh I think so

If you pay attention to the bottom and it's says AP or Reuters you are good to go. Expect to see it everywhere. AP is your source, everything else you posted is just spamming different sites with an AP feed.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-11-04 20:25:47)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-11-04 20:29:23

#11

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

Kmarion wrote:
lowing wrote:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VOTING_MILITARY?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-11-02-17-51-16

enough yet???......Oh I think so
If you pay attention to the bottom and it's says AP or Reuters you are good to go. Expect to see it everywhere. AP is your source, everything else you posted is just spamming different sites with an AP feed.

just tryin to cover my bases.........after all the AP or UPI could be in bed with fox news just feeding them propaganda, but they wouldn't feed it to the Washington Post.

2006-11-04 20:31:21

#12

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

hellooooooooooooo spark, dubbs????!!!........Bueller... Bueller??

2006-11-04 20:34:51

#13

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6873|132 and Bush

No they all get the feeds (Streams). Depending on which way the news outlet leans is what determines what they share with their media audience. One side will publish while the other side will try to find something to answer with. Typical main stream.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-11-04 20:37:33

#14

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6947|Canberra, AUS

That's a lot better, thanks.

NOW I can have a decent look.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2006-11-04 20:38:23

#15

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

Kmarion wrote:
No they all get the feeds (Streams). Depending on which way the news outlet leans is what determines what they share with their media audience. One side will publish while the other side will try to find something to answer with. Typical main stream.

Oh I know, I am just being a smart ass now.

2006-11-04 20:46:40

#16

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6947|Canberra, AUS

You know, you guys (americans in general) could solve all these problems if you just standardised your voting system.

Here, it's just a piece of paper, a pencil and a few numbers. That's it, no hassles, and NOT ONCE has an election been disputed.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2006-11-04 20:49:33

#17

lowing: Banned; +1,662|6923|USA

Spark wrote:
You know, you guys (americans in general) could solve all these problems if you just standardised your voting system.

Here, it's just a piece of paper, a pencil and a few numbers. That's it, no hassles, and NOT ONCE has an election been disputed.

elections are disputed by democrats who loose. then the question each recount until they can come up with a recount in their favor. trouble is, they could never find a recount that favored them......SO this trick might work.

2006-11-04 20:50:56

#18

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6873|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:
You know, you guys (americans in general) could solve all these problems if you just standardised your voting system.

Here, it's just a piece of paper, a pencil and a few numbers. That's it, no hassles, and NOT ONCE has an election been disputed.

Try it with 160 million registered voters. (Roughly 8 times the entire population of AUS).

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-11-04 20:54:20

#19

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6947|Canberra, AUS

But the beauty of the system here is that it has NEVER, EVER shown any problems. It can't - there can't be any amibiguity of who's voting for who (how hard it is to read a '1'?), and you don't have to deal with multiple platforms.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2006-11-04 21:00:08

#20

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6873|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:
But the beauty of the system here is that it has NEVER, EVER shown any problems. It can't - there can't be any amibiguity of who's voting for who (how hard it is to read a '1'?), and you don't have to deal with multiple platforms.

I'm glad your system is problem free 9not sarcasm). The only problem I have with your system is forcing everyone to vote. I had a debate earlier with someone else a couple days about this in these forums so I will not pull away from the topic . Search Compulsory voting I'm sure you will find it.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-11-04 22:32:46

#21

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6801|Global Command

Stupidest thing the dems ever did ( besides get behind Al Gore as president ) was to snub the military vote.
Americans may be stupid, but we're not dumb. Disallowing absentee ballaots ( or attempting to ) is just fucking sleezy.

Why am I not suprised their doing it again?

2006-11-04 22:39:53

#22

jonsimon: Member; +224|6767

ATG wrote:
Stupidest thing the dems ever did ( besides get behind Al Gore as president ) was to snub the military vote.
Americans may be stupid, but we're not dumb. Disallowing absentee ballaots ( or attempting to ) is just fucking sleezy.

Why am I not suprised their doing it again?

Because you're biased against them inherently.

You asked, I answer.

2006-11-04 22:59:57

#23

TeamZephyr: Maintaining My Rage Since 1975; +124|6801|Hillside, Melbourne, Australia

Your voting system in America is the most rooted voting system in the democratic world.

2006-11-04 23:02:54

#24

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7008|Salt Lake City

lowing wrote:
Spark wrote:
You know, you guys (americans in general) could solve all these problems if you just standardised your voting system.

Here, it's just a piece of paper, a pencil and a few numbers. That's it, no hassles, and NOT ONCE has an election been disputed.
elections are disputed by democrats who loose. then the question each recount until they can come up with a recount in their favor. trouble is, they could never find a recount that favored them......SO this trick might work.

Want to take away the electoral college, and then try that comment again? Mmmmkay, didn't think so.

2006-11-04 23:16:35

#25

Masques: Black Panzer Party; +184|6994|Eastern PA

From both links:

In a letter to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Democratic Rep. Rush Holt said the electronic registration and voting service is well-intentioned, but could expose troops to identity theft, or allow hackers or others to tamper with the ballots when they are in transit.

And ATG, Gore never sought to have military ballots disqualified (or any other absentee ballots disqualified.

Subsequent to the circuit court’s order, the Secretary announced that she was
in receipt of certified returns (i.e., the returns resulting from the initial recount) from
all counties in the State. The Secretary then instructed Florida’s Supervisors of
Elections (Supervisors) that they must submit to her by 2 p.m., Wednesday,
November 15, 2000, a written statement of “the facts and circumstances” justifying
any belief on their part that they should be allowed to amend the certified returns
previously filed. Four counties submitted their statements on time. After
considering the reasons in light of specific criteria,5 the Secretary on Wednesday, November 15, 2000, rejected the reasons and again announced that she would not
accept the amended returns but rather would rely on the earlier certified totals for the
four counties. The Secretary further stated that after she received the certified
returns of the overseas absentee ballots from each county, she would certify the
results of the presidential election on Saturday, November 18, 2000.
On Thursday, November 16, 2000, the Florida Democratic Party and Albert
Gore filed a motion in Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in Leon County,
Florida, seeking to compel the Secretary to accept amended returns.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/docs/flo … pinion.pdf

Basically after the initial recount (mandated by Florida law due to the closeness of the result) both candidates were allowed to request manual recounts in contested counties and those counties were then able to submit amended recount totals. Harris disallowed the amended totals even after the counties adhered to her criteria. Gore then sought to have her accept the amended returns, not to get military and absentee votes disqualified. Gore's suit was brought after Volusia county's suit against Harris when she declared that the manual recount would be invalidated the following day (her declaration was on Nov. 13 targeted toward the 14th). This is by far not enough time to correctly tabulate millions of votes.

BF2S Forums democrats question military votes

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

ATG wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

Board footer