|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform |
![]() |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:32 AM Original message |
The argument against a Senator standing up without absolute proof |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:34 AM Response to Original message |
1. Again, you're failing to remember that.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
forgethell
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:40 AM Response to Reply #1 |
5. So you're not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:46 AM Response to Reply #5 |
18. Sure, but doesn't every lobby group do the same? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
forgethell
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:57 AM Response to Reply #18 |
133. Yes, they probably |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:58 AM Response to Reply #133 |
136. And the main goal in this is to get major overhaul in the election system. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
berniew1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:30 AM Response to Reply #136 |
150. There is strong evidence of fraud and systematic suppression; proper to in |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:43 PM Response to Reply #150 |
165. Trust me, I know there is........ |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Peace Patriot
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 01:17 PM Response to Reply #5 |
173. Yup, you got that right. It's do or die for the Democrats. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bowens43
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:35 AM Response to Original message |
2. Yes, by all means let's roll over and play dead again. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:36 AM Response to Reply #2 |
4. I have seen no evidence of fraud |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:40 AM Response to Reply #4 |
7. And I have seen NO evidence of a legitimate win by Bush |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabra
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:41 AM Response to Reply #4 |
8. Well then can you tell us what you consider fraud? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:50 AM Response to Reply #8 |
25. Find about 100,000 uncounted Ohio ballaots |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:00 AM Response to Reply #25 |
50. It's 93,000 and if Florida 2000 is any indication, ~ 7-10% will |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
k8conant
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:50 PM Response to Reply #25 |
167. No---there are 200,000 phantom Ohio Bush ballots... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darknyte7
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:44 AM Response to Reply #4 |
15. That's because you're in denial Walt... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:48 AM Response to Reply #15 |
20. Actually, it's my considered opinion that the fraudists |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:40 AM Response to Reply #20 |
119. Deleted message |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:47 AM Response to Reply #119 |
127. It;'s a term out there in the blogosphere |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jo March
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:03 AM Response to Reply #119 |
140. I like that, TIA. Card carrying fraudists. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:50 AM Response to Reply #4 |
26. Deleted message |
fasttense
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:08 AM Response to Reply #4 |
68. It didn't seem to bother them in 1876. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
luaptifer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:42 AM Response to Reply #4 |
121. no evidence of fraud but developing largescale pattern of irregularity n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saracat
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:59 PM Response to Reply #4 |
169. Why can't you agree to disagree instead of constantly looking for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:36 AM Response to Original message |
3. There IS proof |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:44 AM Response to Reply #3 |
14. exit polls are NOT proof of anything |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:48 AM Response to Reply #14 |
21. That is NOT what I said |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:49 AM Response to Reply #21 |
23. the odds and exit polls are not proof |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:52 AM Response to Reply #23 |
32. Hello, is this thing on? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:54 AM Response to Reply #32 |
36. This option in the Senate is not a trial or investigation |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:55 AM Response to Reply #36 |
39. Plus keep in mind.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:59 AM Response to Reply #39 |
46. That's why I qualified my original statement |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:00 AM Response to Reply #46 |
53. Well Conyers isn't a fool, he wouldn't ask Senators to stand unless.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:01 AM Response to Reply #53 |
55. I'm not convinced of that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
goclark
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 01:09 PM Response to Reply #55 |
171. And he would risk his life for an opportunity |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
forgethell
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 04:50 PM Response to Reply #55 |
181. Of course he is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:10 AM Response to Reply #53 |
72. sure he would |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cookies7
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:44 AM Response to Reply #72 |
123. ask me anything |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:55 AM Response to Reply #72 |
158. That's called demagoguery, hey cookie have you found J Conyers to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
k8conant
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:52 PM Response to Reply #36 |
168. Duh...that button is on *'s desk n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
goclark
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:53 AM Response to Reply #32 |
157. Tell um Atman! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:52 AM Response to Reply #3 |
28. Deleted message |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:57 AM Response to Reply #28 |
42. Tell that to the Ukranians...and the US who backed them |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:00 AM Response to Reply #42 |
49. Based upon exit polls and eyewitness testimony from international poll |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:03 AM Response to Reply #42 |
63. Deleted message |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:08 AM Response to Reply #63 |
69. Yes, the Ukraine anology is a specious argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fasttense
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:11 AM Response to Reply #63 |
76. What about the people who admitted to voting twice in Ohio and FL? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:13 AM Response to Reply #76 |
82. Shh....don't mention the discrepencies in registered voters/votes, either! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:21 AM Response to Reply #82 |
96. There are over 6000 of those in WA right now, Who knows how many in other |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:17 AM Response to Reply #76 |
92. I guess I missed that, the only press I have seen on that specific |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SicTransit
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:42 AM Response to Reply #42 |
153. US backed Ukraine because of hard proof of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:02 AM Response to Reply #3 |
58. If there was proof, you wouldn't have to worry about 1 or 2 Senators |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rockedthevoteinMA
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:40 AM Response to Original message |
6. Here we go again... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:42 AM Response to Reply #6 |
10. Lock this puppy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:53 AM Response to Reply #10 |
33. Sorry you feel that way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:42 AM Response to Original message |
9. I have not considered the long term ramifications as of yet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:44 AM Response to Reply #9 |
13. Yep, it's definitely a "nuclear option" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:54 AM Response to Reply #13 |
35. Deleted message |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:55 AM Response to Reply #35 |
38. And if there was conclusive evidence |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:59 AM Response to Reply #38 |
45. Walt, if the was CONCLUSIVE evidence, we wouldn't be here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:02 AM Response to Reply #45 |
59. Then no Senator should contest! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:10 AM Response to Reply #59 |
74. I-N-V-E-S-T-I-G-A-T-I-O-N |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:12 AM Response to Reply #74 |
79. Nope, contesting the election is C-O-N-V-I-C-T-I-O-N |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FreepFryer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:19 AM Response to Reply #79 |
93. That is the singularly most asinine observation from Walt yet. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:29 AM Response to Reply #93 |
107. Walt is afraid of what people will think of him |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unpossibles
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:40 AM Response to Reply #79 |
118. first of all, it is not a conviction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
k8conant
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:59 PM Response to Reply #79 |
170. Hardly:... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:00 AM Response to Reply #38 |
52. Deleted message |
SueZhope
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:42 AM Response to Original message |
11. the time is Now to stand |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KittyWampus
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:43 AM Response to Original message |
12. Do Investigators Have Absolute Proof When Asking For Search Warrants |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:44 AM Response to Reply #12 |
16. This isn't asking for a search warrant |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SueZhope
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:52 AM Response to Reply #16 |
30. lack of evidence |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:53 AM Response to Reply #30 |
34. Isn't that disgusting? And WE'RE the crazy lunatics???? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SueZhope
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:00 AM Response to Reply #34 |
48. How dare we want to stand up for democracy and human rights |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RevCheesehead
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:56 AM Response to Reply #30 |
40. Lack of evidence didn't stop them from invading Iraq, either. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SueZhope
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:07 AM Response to Reply #40 |
67. unjust wars thats a different story |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RevCheesehead
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:14 AM Response to Reply #67 |
83. Yeah, good ol' government lookin' out for us. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mzmolly
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:45 AM Response to Original message |
17. You've got a point, but ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:48 AM Response to Reply #17 |
22. the time to '' 'debate and discuss' what went on in Ohio" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:54 AM Response to Reply #22 |
37. It will bring the issue to a head, and lead to reform..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:56 AM Response to Reply #37 |
41. It will defnitely bring something to a head |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:00 AM Response to Reply #41 |
51. It's not nuclear.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:02 AM Response to Reply #51 |
56. Aye, it's a "You know that we know that you know we know" warning...n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:05 AM Response to Reply #51 |
64. It's nuclear because it WILL change how these things are done in the futur |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:20 AM Response to Reply #64 |
94. EVERY LAST ELECTION FROM THIS POINT FORWARD WILL BE CONTESTED! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:22 AM Response to Reply #94 |
98. Exactly, the Republicans can build the same case in Illinois if they chose |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:43 AM Response to Reply #98 |
122. Fine. LET THEM. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
earthside
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:29 AM Response to Reply #64 |
106. The Rigged Game |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:41 AM Response to Reply #64 |
120. Didn't BUSH already do this when he whined to the courts in 2000? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
forgethell
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 04:46 PM Response to Reply #120 |
180. Wait, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:16 AM Response to Reply #51 |
90. you dont think it could not change the outcome? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:21 AM Response to Reply #90 |
95. And all the while the republicans would cite the contesting of the 2004 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:10 AM Response to Reply #90 |
144. Nothing will be overturned, unless smoking guns are found...... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mzmolly
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:03 AM Response to Reply #41 |
60. I agree with you on the media, sadly. And I hope who ever does contest |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:03 AM Response to Reply #41 |
62. people are forgetting how unpleasant 2000, 2002 and 2004 were |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:06 AM Response to Reply #41 |
65. Especially with dems like you helping them frame us that way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:23 AM Response to Reply #65 |
100. you want to give the GOP another tool to fuck over Democrats |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TruthIsAll
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:32 AM Response to Reply #100 |
110. LET THE REPUKES INVESTIGATE US, ALSO. WE WANT PAPER BALLOTS! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:28 AM Response to Reply #110 |
149. I know you have a lot invested in this fight |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fasttense
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 01:14 PM Response to Reply #41 |
172. And in 1876 it set such a precedent that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mzmolly
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:01 AM Response to Reply #37 |
54. E.X.A.C.T.L.Y! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mzmolly
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:00 AM Response to Reply #22 |
47. You are correct, it's only a part of the process that must take place. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
smartvoter
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:48 AM Response to Original message |
19. If 86 of 88 counties breaking recount laws in Ohio isn't enough to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:51 AM Response to Reply #19 |
27. Exactly! If I were a County Clerk in charge of elections.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KatieB
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:50 AM Response to Original message |
24. Another scenario - Presidency to Dems leads to sweeping change N vote law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:52 AM Response to Reply #24 |
29. I think you're dreaming |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eomer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:57 AM Response to Reply #29 |
43. You must be the one dreaming... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:09 AM Response to Reply #43 |
70. Because the Republicans will be able to alter the outcome |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:57 AM Response to Reply #29 |
44. Not if he/she frames it as a call for reform..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pgh_dem
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:09 PM Response to Reply #29 |
160. That would be the election reform... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TimmyBoy
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:13 PM Response to Reply #29 |
161. As opposed to the black boxes that decide it now? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 09:52 AM Response to Reply #24 |
31. If nothing else, this super-pushes the issue of election reform, yes... n/ |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rucky
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:02 AM Response to Original message |
57. Scardey Cat |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FreepFryer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:03 AM Response to Original message |
61. I'm looking forward to seeing how much discouragement you give DU today. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fasttense
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:07 AM Response to Original message |
66. It sets a precedent? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:09 AM Response to Original message |
71. Deleted message |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:10 AM Response to Reply #71 |
73. Ad hominems are indicative of a lack of counter argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:12 AM Response to Reply #73 |
78. Now that I can agree with you on.....n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:13 AM Response to Reply #73 |
81. On that I can agree with you......n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FreepFryer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:14 AM Response to Reply #73 |
85. Sorry, most posters here aren't stupid enough to think you're listening. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eomer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:10 AM Response to Original message |
75. Walt, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:14 AM Response to Reply #75 |
84. Not wihtout an accurate citation of Ohio election law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eomer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:15 AM Response to Reply #84 |
88. Double golly! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:51 AM Response to Reply #88 |
128. Actually, yes I do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:56 AM Response to Reply #128 |
132. I believe"randomly" is specified but it's not a statute it's an SOS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mod mom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:12 AM Response to Original message |
77. Equal Protection was deliberately denied: Proof Election Fraud! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:15 AM Response to Reply #77 |
86. Who deliberately denied equal access |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FreepFryer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:16 AM Response to Reply #86 |
89. Once again Walt asks you to do his own work for him. Sorry, read up. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Karmadillo
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:12 AM Response to Original message |
80. If the Republicans engage in the treason you predict, it's up to us |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:15 AM Response to Original message |
87. It's all about the desperate hope of overturning the election |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:16 AM Response to Reply #87 |
91. Exactly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:23 AM Response to Reply #91 |
99. Deleted message |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:34 AM Response to Reply #99 |
114. Actually, it would be closer to insanity |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:21 AM Response to Reply #87 |
97. NOT "exactly" at all |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:24 AM Response to Reply #97 |
101. "I Believe" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:27 AM Response to Reply #101 |
104. Deleted message |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:39 AM Original message |
This is an open forum and I sure appreciate all views especially |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:13 AM Response to Reply #104 |
146. I see you have nothing substantial to offer |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:24 AM Response to Reply #97 |
102. I did not say all, I said most., and i fervently believe that is the case |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:25 AM Response to Reply #102 |
103. Not to mention irregularities in Washington |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PinkPantherChick
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:29 AM Response to Reply #103 |
105. It wasn't won--it was earned through a contested election and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:33 AM Response to Reply #103 |
112. Walt, we WON it because we DID contest it! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FreepFryer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:11 AM Response to Reply #103 |
145. And the freep goes on (n/t) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
insane_cratic_gal
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:35 AM Response to Reply #97 |
115. Agree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
moggie12
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:30 AM Response to Original message |
108. I hope Walt keeps spewing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:33 AM Response to Reply #108 |
111. Deleted message |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:39 AM Response to Reply #111 |
117. There was no evidence to support contesting the election |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TruthIsAll
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:47 AM Response to Reply #117 |
126. YOUR LACK OF FACTS IS SHOWING, WALT. THE DEMS CONTROLLED THE SENATE |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:57 AM Response to Reply #126 |
134. PArdon me, I erred |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LoZoccolo
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:01 AM Response to Reply #134 |
139. NOW WHO SAYS ALL CAPS DOESN'T WORK |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
moggie12
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:46 AM Response to Reply #111 |
125. Ah, Watergate, there was a conspiracy you could love! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:52 AM Response to Reply #108 |
129. No one is going to pay attention unless someone makes a BIG noise.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eomer
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:30 AM Response to Original message |
109. You are avoiding the Ohio recount issue |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bread_and_roses
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:34 AM Response to Original message |
113. Minority and low-income voter suppression |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:45 AM Response to Reply #113 |
124. I waited 3 1/2 hours to vote, dissuade me, no way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bread_and_roses
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:35 PM Response to Reply #124 |
164. The courage and tenacity of individuals |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mohinoaklawnillinois
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:55 AM Response to Reply #113 |
130. Thank you kenzee 13, you just expressed what I believe happened |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:05 AM Response to Reply #130 |
141. If nothing else, Senators could make impassioned speeches..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carni
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:35 AM Response to Original message |
116. Yeah, better to do nothing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:58 AM Response to Reply #116 |
135. Unfortunately the individual Senator would have a lot to lose...... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flyarm
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:37 AM Response to Reply #135 |
152. what would they have to loose?? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grumpy old fart
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 02:15 PM Response to Reply #152 |
177. note; I said "Individually"..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carni
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 02:01 PM Response to Reply #135 |
175. In short none of them have enough integrity |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flyarm
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:55 AM Response to Original message |
131. maybe you can say that and feel good about it until... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Darkhawk32
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:01 AM Response to Reply #131 |
138. Big hugs to you! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mohinoaklawnillinois
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:33 AM Response to Reply #131 |
151. Flyarm, you've hit the nail right on the head. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bearfan454
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 10:59 AM Response to Original message |
137. The repuke wins anyway with Triad and Diebold Walt Starr |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jo March
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:07 AM Response to Original message |
142. Walt, why do you do this? Why don't you just work on getting |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:23 AM Response to Reply #142 |
147. Walt is trying to prevent a titanic amount of damage from being released |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
righteous1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:49 AM Response to Reply #142 |
155. I cannot speak for Walt, but i personally see a great deal of danger |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
berniew1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:10 AM Response to Original message |
143. EIRS hotline reports document widespread touchscreen fraud in most swing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
berniew1
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:26 AM Response to Original message |
148. The proper course is to investigate before approving; sets good precedent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Doremus
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:24 PM Response to Reply #148 |
162. "Anti-fraudists" are advocating status quo |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
merh
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:43 AM Response to Original message |
154. Read this! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nmoliver
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:53 AM Response to Original message |
156. The Republicans will do it anyway |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ThirdWheelLegend
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:25 PM Response to Reply #156 |
163. This is exactly the point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Blue State Blues
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 11:56 AM Response to Original message |
159. Never underestimate the power of a politician ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saracat
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 12:50 PM Response to Original message |
166. Excuse me? What does it matter? If democracy is dead? If the vote wasn't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Imagevision
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 01:19 PM Response to Original message |
174. Piece of cake --Fraud evidence? Bush wants the case thrown out |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Imagevision
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 02:05 PM Response to Original message |
176. We have absolute proof! - lets get to court, do discovery! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Debbie13
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 02:30 PM Response to Original message |
178. There is too much pointing toward fraud. It has to be investigated |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 03:50 PM Response to Original message |
179. kick |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bettyellen
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 04:50 PM Response to Original message |
182. NOW WHO"S WITH THE CRAZY THEORIES????? HA HA WALT !!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Carolab
![]() |
Wed Jan-05-05 04:51 PM Response to Original message |
183. That's crap |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thu Jun 20th 2024, 10:46 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC