Reagan Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 Think again! This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reagan Posted January 28, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 Anyone that refuses to believe there’s voter fraud is goofy as a road lizard. A simple look at the voting results in some areas of Philadelphia is proof enough for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 8 minutes ago, Hagar said: Anyone that refuses to believe there’s voter fraud is goofy as a road lizard. A simple look at the voting results in some areas of Philadelphia is proof enough for me. So, if results don’t suit you, must be fraud? The names Paxton and Abbot came up with are “suspected”, and will have 30 days to prove their citizenship. You know, that old American hallmark of guilty until proved innocent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 5 minutes ago, UT alum said: So, if results don’t suit you, must be fraud? The names Paxton and Abbot came up with are “suspected”, and will have 30 days to prove their citizenship. You know, that old American hallmark of guilty until proved innocent. Oh, the old hallmark that all the Dems forgot about during the vote on Kavanaugh? Tigers2010, Ty Cobb and PhatMack19 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reagan Posted January 28, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 18 minutes ago, Hagar said: Oh, the old hallmark that all the Dems forgot about during the vote on Kavanaugh? BAAM!! UT -- you stepped into that one face first!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 5 minutes ago, Reagan said: BAAM!! UT -- you stepped into that one face first!! Poor Brett. You guys got a pair of big boy pants amongst you? Politics is tough business. Election fraud is a totally different issue. Again, you compare apples to oranges and claim victory. There is no statistical corroboration linking in person voter fraud to election results. Fraud is almost exclusively perpetrated in the absentee voting process. Any of you remember Clarence McNeely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenash Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 8 minutes ago, UT alum said: Poor Brett. You guys got a pair of big boy pants amongst you? Politics is tough business. Election fraud is a totally different issue. Again, you compare apples to oranges and claim victory. There is no statistical corroboration linking in person voter fraud to election results. Fraud is almost exclusively perpetrated in the absentee voting process. Any of you remember Clarence McNeely? Did Peter Strzok and Lisa Page investigate the statistical corroboration? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 13 minutes ago, UT alum said: So, if results don’t suit you, must be fraud? The names Paxton and Abbot came up with are “suspected”, and will have 30 days to prove their citizenship. You know, that old American hallmark of guilty until proved innocent. In the 2012 presidential election, there were 59 voting divisions (a Philly term) in Philadelphia that had zero votes for Romney. Of the 59 divisions, the lowest turnout was 139 voters, and the highest 612 (avg city wide is 616 per Div). So, to be generous, I’ll say an avg of a little over 300 voters in thos 59. That’s somewhere between 18 to 19 thousand voters. And yes, these 59 were predominantly black. My point is, if every single voter that went in wanted to vote for Obama, some would inadvertently vote for Romney. Maybe because they’re drunk, on drugs, (and I’m sure that happens all over the country to all races), or just messes up. Someone was either doing it for them, or helping them as they voted, and I’m pretty sure that comes under the heading of voter fraud. Proof? People are fallible, and that’s an irrefutable fact. We’re not all rocket scientist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 8 minutes ago, stevenash said: Did Peter Strzok and Lisa Page investigate the statistical corroboration? No. You tell me to prove what I say or think with statistical evidence. If you think in-person voter fraud is epidemic, prove it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 7 minutes ago, Hagar said: In the 2012 presidential election, there were 59 voting divisions (a Philly term) in Philadelphia that had zero votes for Romney. Of the 59 divisions, the lowest turnout was 139 voters, and the highest 612 (avg city wide is 616 per Div). So, to be generous, I’ll say an avg of a little over 300 voters in thos 59. That’s somewhere between 18 to 19 thousand voters. And yes, these 59 were predominantly black. My point is, if every single voter that went in wanted to vote for Obama, some would inadvertently vote for Romney. Maybe because they’re drunk, on drugs, (and I’m sure that happens all over the country to all races), or just messes up. Someone was either doing it for them, or helping them as they voted, and I’m pretty sure that comes under the heading of voter fraud. Proof? People are fallible, and that’s an irrefutable fact. We’re not all rocket scientist. Any convictions? Any indictments? Any empirical evidence at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenash Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 1 hour ago, UT alum said: Any convictions? Any indictments? Any empirical evidence at all? There are no convictions or indictments on Mrs. Clinton. Do you believe she is innocent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 11 minutes ago, stevenash said: There are no convictions or indictments on Mrs. Clinton. Do you believe she is innocent? Deflect from the real issue - voter fraud. Hillary Clinton’s old news, man, she got beat. She holds no power in federal government. Let it go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenash Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 My question implies that, under certain "circumstances" the justice system is not present. Do you agree or disagree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baddog Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 Anyone who would give their precious right to vote to an illegal alien, a right that men and women have given their lives to defend, is not an American at all. An aside: Hillary Clinton is old news and she lost. Someone needs to tell her she lost and she seems to stay in the news. Hagar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhatMack19 Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 18 minutes ago, UT alum said: Deflect from the real issue - voter fraud. Hillary Clinton’s old news, man, she got beat. She holds no power in federal government. Let it go. She’s thinking of running again..... This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Reagan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 2 hours ago, PhatMack19 said: She’s thinking of running again..... This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up She’s old news. Never would get nomination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reagan Posted January 28, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 14 minutes ago, UT alum said: She’s old news. Never would get nomination. Well -- she cheated ol' Bernie out of the nomination last time. And THAT'S a fact. So, one never knows when it comes to cheating! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenash Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 5 minutes ago, Reagan said: Well -- she cheated ol' Bernie out of the nomination last time. And THAT'S a fact. So, one never knows when it comes to cheating! but wait, you cant say she cheated because there were no indictments!!!! And, since there were no indictments regarding the email scandal, she actually is innocent!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 3 hours ago, UT alum said: Any convictions? Any indictments? Any empirical evidence at all? Any concerns since it’s a Democratic city? No. Any investigation by the City? No. One thing you need to understand young feller, in Democratic controlled areas, there are no laws if the actions aids, or is approved by The Party. A prime example of this occurred in Portland, Oregon where ANTIFA took over several city streets, and attacked drivers at will, with no interference by the Police. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 15 minutes ago, stevenash said: but wait, you cant say she cheated because there were no indictments!!!! And, since there were no indictments regarding the email scandal, she actually is innocent!!! And no investigation or indictments concerning the 60+ dead bodies she’s left in her wake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 26 minutes ago, Reagan said: Well -- she cheated ol' Bernie out of the nomination last time. And THAT'S a fact. So, one never knows when it comes to cheating! Again, that’s politics, and as far as I know she used party rules to outmaneuver him. Wasn’t pretty, but that’s not illegal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 31 minutes ago, Hagar said: Any concerns since it’s a Democratic city? No. Any investigation by the City? No. One thing you need to understand young feller, in Democratic controlled areas, there are no laws if the actions aids, or is approved by The Party. A prime example of this occurred in Portland, Oregon where ANTIFA took over several city streets, and attacked drivers at will, with no interference by the Police. Unless you’re Methuselah, I ain’t no young feller. Looks like both sides had a fight in Portland, and no one from either side was arrested. To suggest that Democrat controlled areas are lawless is not only absurd, but also an insult to the law enforcement community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UT alum Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 35 minutes ago, Hagar said: And no investigation or indictments concerning the 60+ dead bodies she’s left in her wake. Yeah, Ted Bundy was a lightweight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted January 29, 2019 Report Share Posted January 29, 2019 5 hours ago, Hagar said: Quote SNAFU Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.