Sunday, January 12, 2014

Will a GOP win in November mean the return of "Jim Crow"?

It's 2014, and the midterm elections are upon us. While people are pondering what the election  results will bring such as either higher or lower taxes, spending etc, the ever insane lunatic Chris Matthews of MSNBC has a very different perspective on what a GOP victory would mean. Since this was Chris Matthews, what he said had to be something incredibly stupid and of course, it had to do with playing the race card. If Republicans retain the house and win control of the senate, will that mean a return of "Jim Crow"? Now you may be asking who would say something so incredible insane and stupid. I'll let you all figure it out.



Since Obama's popularity has plummeted, is the new tactic by the left to try and gin up support for Democratic candidates by playing the race card  of fear if the GOP dominates in November? I would like to think that there are blacks who are smart enough besides myself and others who will see through what people like Matthews is doing, but sadly, there are people who are way beyond gullible and stupid, and they bite the same baited hook over and over again that people like Chris Matthews cast out.

27 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have to wonder what is it going to take for someone like Chris Matthews and the other staff at MSNBC to realize that they are low in the ratings, Jim Crow is long gone and majority of the American public are fed up with the race card being played.

I am sure that there are gullible people out there who do believe in this claim, but whenever you present the evidence to those to discredit the likes of Chris Matthews and to prove that he is a fraud, most of the time it is like talking to a brick outhouse.

-Big Pop

10:20 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

Chris Matthews isn't the only "journalist" who suspects a kind of "Jim Crow 2.0." The Cambridge Journal recently published a study making a similar claim;

"Our results indicate that proposal and passage [of recent voter laws] are highly partisan, strategic, and racialized affairs. These findings are consistent with a scenario in which the targeted demobilization of minority voters and African Americans is a central driver of recent legislative developments".

Pennsylvania State Rep. Mike Turzai(R), literally let the cat out of the bag when he publicly stated "Voter ID laws will help Romney win his state... DONE"! After he made the statement I "trolled" some right-wing websites citing that it was clear evidence of voter suppression. My post's were viciously attacked. Some even went so far as to claim that "he didn't even say it", and "that's not what he meant."

Although I won't go as far to call it "Jim Crow", I am convinced that many Republican controlled local jurisdictions are attempting to suppress voters and voter turnout.

3:04 AM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

p allen "Chris Matthews isn't the only "journalist" who suspects a kind of "Jim Crow 2.0." The Cambridge Journal recently published a study making a similar claim;"

And the Cambridge Journal is just as mental as Chris Matthews. Put two nuts together and you have an Almond Joy allen.

Allen quoting the Cambridge Journal
""Our results indicate that proposal and passage [of recent voter laws] are highly partisan, strategic, and racialized affairs. These findings are consistent with a scenario in which the targeted demobilization of minority voters and African Americans is a central driver of recent legislative developments"."

It's a good thing I never look to academia to teach me about common sense. The GOP controlled both houses of congress from 1994-2006, that was twelves years. During that time, did the Republican controlled congress implement anything that the Cambrige Journal mention? If the answer is no, then the next logical question is, why would it be expected to happen now if the GOP retakes control of the Senate? What the Journal didn't mention is that the concentration of blacks are in the inner cities which which all have Democratic mayor in mostly Democratic controlled states. Now that I think about it, what voter law legislation has been brought up for a vote in congress in the last 40 years by Republicans that would have negatively impacted black voters?

p allen "Pennsylvania State Rep. Mike Turzai(R), literally let the cat out of the bag when he publicly stated "Voter ID laws will help Romney win his state... DONE"! After he made the statement I "trolled" some right-wing websites citing that it was clear evidence of voter suppression. My post's were viciously attacked. Some even went so far as to claim that "he didn't even say it", and "that's not what he meant." "

Ok, so let me see if I have this right, how would a voter ID law in Pennsylvania have won the state for Romney other then making sure the dead, felons and illegals not voting? As for you trolling right wing sites, did you have fun? lol Anyways, what does anyone's response have to do with how such a law in Pennsylvania would "suppress" black voter turnout"?

P Allen "Although I won't go as far to call it "Jim Crow", I am convinced that many Republican controlled local jurisdictions are attempting to suppress voters and voter turnout. "

Tell how a law where ALL voters are required to have a Photo ID leads to "surpresion" allen, that is all I want to know.

Were Democrats trying to suppress black turnout to the Democratic National Convention last June in Charlotte, when they required a "PHOTO ID" to enter? Those racist Democrats, trying to disenfranchise black democrats from attending the convention allen

11:05 AM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

Here's another illustration of black supression via the requirement of requiring a Photo ID

Last year, Massachusetts Democrats required participants to present Photo ID's in order to enter their state convention Where was the NAACP on this allen? How could they let this atrocity stand?!!

11:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I will assume that Chris Matthews is a Democrat. Does he not realize that it was the Democratic party that enacted and enforced Jim Crow laws?

-Big Pop

4:50 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"Ok, so let me see if I have this right, how would a voter ID law in Pennsylvania have won the state for Romney other then making sure the dead, felons and illegals not voting?".

Loooooooool!!!! The dead? Felons? Illegals? When you go into "conservative talking point mode" all your common sense completely shut's down!

Turzai was the one who "predicted" Romney would win Pennsylvania because, in his words, "voter I.D. was done!" But guess what happened.... ROMNEY LOST THE STATE BY SIX POINTS! Hell, it was closer in neighboring Ohio and Virginia. So, Turzai was DEAD WRONG!

Secondly, why would he think that the dead, felons and illegals were voting? Again, his voter I.D. law was "done" and Romney still loss, so what happened? Did the dead, felons and illegals vote anyway? If they did, the state wasted a lot of tax payer money on NOTHING!

So lets recap your nonsense...

Turzai said the law would "allow Romney to win the state...done!" WRONG! Romney lost the state. You posited that the law was meant to stop the dead, felons and illegals from voting. They didn't vote because no one has proved they have, or ever did. Thus, the voter Pennsylvania voter I.D. law effectively did nothing more than unequivocally prove that voter fraud was NON-EXISTENT!

8:17 PM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

p allen "Loooooooool!!!! The dead? Felons? Illegals? When you go into "conservative talking point mode" all your common sense completely shut's down!"


When you can't deal with reality, you simply dismiss it as a "talking point". Fortunately others, see things for how they are
Exhibit A: Illegals caste votes in the presidential election in Ohio

Exhibit B:Ohio Poll Worker Convicted On Multiple Counts Of Obama-Biased Voter Fraud

Exhibit C: Indiana Dem official sentenced to prison for '08 ballot fraud in Obama-Clinton primary

Exhibit D: Guilty pleas resolve all five voter fraud convictions in Iowa

Exhibit E: More Acorn Voter Fraud Comes to Light

Exhibit F: Milwaukee Man Pleads Guilty to 5 Counts of Voter Fraud

I can give you more, but chew over those conservative "talking points".


2:12 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"I can give you more, but chew over those conservative "talking points".

SURE!!! Give me as many "talking points" as Fox can find for you! Melowese Richardson is Fox's poster child for Fox News. Here's an Ohio News Outlet account of the voter fraud cases they are investigating.

"Few Ohio cases of voter fraud pan out. Despite all the attention given to people voting twice or casting a ballot for someone else, actual fraud in Ohio is fairly rare.

Statewide, 270 cases were referred to the the Secretary of State’s office for review. Franklin County, with 92 cases, led the state"
.

Mind you, the Fox News article was published Dec. 16, 2013. The Zainsville article was done Dec. 26, 2013. In the article it states; "Statewide, 270 cases were referred to the the Secretary of State’s office for review." Which means they have yet to "PROVE" if all the cases were actually "voter fraud."

In Ohio, statewide, 5,632,423 votes were cast, and 270 cases are "being reviewed" for possible voter fraud. That's approximately one fifth of one percent (0.005). In politics 0.005 is a statistical tie. So I declare that vote fraud in Ohio and anywhere else, is statistically NON-EXISTENT! Until Fox comes up with some real facts and numbers, it's all smoke-screens and "talking-points."

10:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tyrone, could any of those voter fraud counts possibly disqualify Obama from both elections?

-Big Pop

10:59 PM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

-Big Pop "Tyrone, could any of those voter fraud counts possibly disqualify Obama from both elections? "

It's hard to say Big Pop, there was voter fraud by Obama supporters in the battle ground states especially Ohio, the magnitude of the fraud has yet to be determined how big of an impact did it have on the election.

p allen "In Ohio, statewide, 5,632,423 votes were cast, and 270 cases are "being reviewed" for possible voter fraud. That's approximately one fifth of one percent (0.005). In politics 0.005 is a statistical tie. So I declare that vote fraud in Ohio and anywhere else, is statistically NON-EXISTENT! Until Fox comes up with some real facts and numbers, it's all smoke-screens and "talking-points."

I don't care if it's 0.0005% allen, voters should not have their legitimate votes diluted by fraudulent voters. Some people like myself actually care about the integrity of elections allen. Furthermore, were any of the stories that I posted that were from Fox News lies and if so tell me how they were lies. You should know by now that you can't discredit the messenger merely because of the messenger. Facts are what they are. Only two of the six stories I posted were from Fox News,Oopos!!

1:43 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

Big Pop;"Tyrone, could any of those voter fraud counts possibly disqualify Obama from both elections?".

Voter fraud only occurs when the other guy wins...

First off, in each state where President Obama won, the total vote tally wasn't even close. I believe the closest total vote count was in Florida, where the president won by about 80,000 votes. Thus if one could account for 80,000, or even half that amount as legitimate fraud, it would be the "STATES" system that would be scrutinized. Unless the "STATE" could prove the candidate him or herself had something to do with fraud, the state would have to suck it up.

And what if a state was able to unequivocally prove voter fraud. There still would be several questions that would need to be answered. Was the candidate or his campaign involved? Who actually received the votes? Did either candidate or his campaign know fraud was occurring? Did one candidate set the other up to make it appear that the other side committed fraud? These are the question that must be answered before any candidate could even be considered to be disqualified.

So without undeniable proof that the candidate, or the candidates campaign was involved, accompanied by thousands perhaps tens of thousands of fraudulent votes, you'd have as much a chance of disqualifying the president as you would by "clicking your heels together, closing your eyes and crossing your fingers!"

3:48 AM  
Blogger Thersites said...

Wow! Demogoguery runs amock at MSNBC!

5:39 PM  
Blogger -FJ said...

Of course, the Left NEVER investigates vote fraud, because there isn't any. Instead, they concentrate on vote "suppression".

btw - how many convictions for vote suppression were there in the last election?

1:45 PM  
Blogger -FJ said...

Oh, wait!

Attempts at preventing voter fraud is de facto PROOF of vote suppression in democrats eyes.

Convictions, though non existent, prove NOTHING!

You can't argue with these idiots, Tyronne. They already have discounted the facts to fit their agenda.

1:52 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"Were Democrats trying to suppress black turnout to the Democratic National Convention last June in Charlotte, when they required a "PHOTO ID" to enter? Those racist Democrats, trying to disenfranchise black democrats from attending the convention allen".

Huh??? I'm not getting your point. Am I missing something?? Oooooohhh, I get it. You're playing "DUMB!"

Deliberate Useless Mindless Bulls#!t...D.U.M.B.!

Okay, I'll play "DUMB" with you...

According to you, these Republicans are requiring PHOTO I.D.'s to disenfranchise black Republicans from attending the convention. Scroll to the bottom of the page where it boldly states;

"Photo ID – this is required for participation at the National Convention"!

CB;"Last year, Massachusetts Democrats required participants to present Photo ID's in order to enter their state convention Where was the NAACP on this allen? How could they let this atrocity stand?!!".

On this California Republican registration form, it clearly states THE EXACT SAME THING THE SIGN IN CHARLOTTE SAID!. Where were the racist Tea Party? How can they let this atrocity stand!!!

What's really stupid about this, is not just the fact that you're comparing attending a convention, to voting in a national election. It's like comparing "apples to oranges." Also, it's the fact that "YOU" and Keegan Gibson, (who wrote the article about the sign at the Charlotte Convention), didn't take into account that THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WOULD BE THERE! Of course those in attendance will need to show ID.

But Gibson, and you who want to compare the two. So, being that the Republicans were hell bent on PHOTO ID for voters, it seems to me that they would WANT THE SAME PHOTO ID POLICY FOR ENTRY INTO THEIR OWN NATIONAL CONVENTION!!! Which, by the way, THEY ALREADY DO! So this time you win Tyrone! You've won a game of D.U.M.B!

Dumb post and dumb argument Tyrone. Just plain D.U.M.B.!

1:36 AM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

p allen "
"Few Ohio cases of voter fraud pan out. Despite all the attention given to people voting twice or casting a ballot for someone else, actual fraud in Ohio is fairly rare."

You are utterly hopeless allen, you really are. Again, reality is not your friend. I can post 100's hundreds of stories of voter fraud cases,and you should simply dismiss them as "rare". Thankfully there are people who see what is going on and will not tolerate it happening.

p allen "First off, in each state where President Obama won, the total vote tally wasn't even close. "

Wrong yet again, take a look at the election map.
Presidential Election Results

Obama won Ohio by only 1.9% over Romney

Obama won Virginia by 3.0% with 1.4% of the vote going to a third party candidate or write in. Of course there are blue states which went big for Obama just as traditional red states went big for Romney, but none of that is the point. Where the integrity of the vote is most important is in the battle grounds states, and that is where most voter fraud cases have happened. There should be nobody voting twice or registering fictitious voters period. The left can't even explain how requiring a photo id be presented is racists considering that everybody will have to comply not just one racial group.

p allen "
Dumb post and dumb argument Tyrone. Just plain D.U.M.B.!"

What's D.U.M.B allen is the fake, weak and pathetic argument that if people having to show a photo ID, it is somehow going to "disenfranchise" black voters. You nor any other liberal can even make 10% intelligent case to validate the claim. It's absurd and laughable.

p allen "
On this California Republican registration form, it clearly states THE EXACT SAME THING THE SIGN IN CHARLOTTE SAID!. Where were the racist Tea Party? How can they let this atrocity stand!!!"

Here's the difference allen. Republicans aren't the ones bitching about having to show an ID to admittance nor would they be bitching about having to show their photo ID when they go to vote. Don' think I didn't notice you deflect attention off the link I posted and tried to make an issue about the GOP dong the same thing.

1:00 AM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

p allen "Okay, I'll play "DUMB" with you..."

Oh,you are "playing" dumb, got it. lol

p allen "According to you, these Republicans are requiring PHOTO I.D.'s to disenfranchise black Republicans from attending the convention. Scroll to the bottom of the page where it boldly states;"

Nah, because black Republicans have had no problem showing their Photo Id's in order to gain entrance to Republican conventions nor would they have an issue with showing a Photo Id is it was required to vote. The only ones who seem to have an issue are some black and white Democrats. I wonder why that is?

-FJ "Oh, wait!Attempts at preventing voter fraud is de facto PROOF of vote suppression in democrats eyes."

lol, you just described the absurdity of liberal logic perfectly -FJ. With liberals it never about presenting proof or evidence to back up their claims, it's all about the "seriousness of the charge". They can not with a straight face explain how a law that says that every naturalized or native born citizens must present a valid state Photo ID card will suppress black voter participation.

-FJ "You can't argue with these idiots, Tyronne. They already have discounted the facts to fit their agenda"

And without the facts, they completely lack any valid argument and they shouldn't be taken serious. They haven't figured out that talking points are a poor substitution for facts.

Thersites "Wow! Demagoguery runs amok at MSNBC!"

It's what they do best. If they could only do Journalism as well.



1:21 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"Wrong yet again, take a look at the election map.
Presidential Election Results
Obama won Ohio by only 1.9% over Romney"
.

Say whuuuuuuuuddd? I gave you the facts. I said; "I believe the closest total vote count was in Florida, where the president won by about 80,000 votes".

Damn Tyrone... you must have taken a bad pill... take another look at the map "YOU" posted a link to. Mouse over Florida and look at the graphic.

Barack Obama- 50.0
Mitt Romney- 49.1

Now, stop using "conservative" re-writing, make it up, say anything, truth doesn't matter, got your own facts, low-to-no information, don't read or do research, so tell them anything TALKING POINTS! Do the correct math, and admit you're wrong so we can move on and have an honest conversation.

2:02 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"What's D.U.M.B allen is the fake, weak and pathetic argument that if people having to show a photo ID, it is somehow going to "disenfranchise" black voters. You nor any other liberal can even make 10% intelligent case to validate the claim. It's absurd and laughable".

If you refuse to believe something Tyrone, there's no way anyone, or anything will ever convince you. This is whats known as "abnegation" (aka; denial). The psychology of the denial of voter suppression can be compared to the psychology of Holocaust denial, where an ideology trumps the actual truth of the actions. Voter suppression was LAW in this country for several decades. A psychology of denial allows one to believe that it never happened, so nefarious forces can attempt to suppress voters again. Moreover, Congress had to pass laws to prevent it even in the face of constitutional rights.

Conservative icon Paul Weyrich co-founder of the powerful conservative organization The American Legislative Exchange Council, once told an audience (where former President Ronald Reagan also spoke), that;

"They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down".

So here's the conservative who co-founded one of the most powerful and notable conservative organizations (an other organizations that are actively in operation today) "vocally promoting" an agenda that effectively would disenfranchise American citizens. Conservative even give an "award" named in his honor.

Allow me to make light of a case in point in your psychological disorder of denial. Mike Turzai blatantly stated that "voter ID would win a state for a candidate." Yet, each time I mention it, you "duck and dodge" giving a direct response to his assertion, or directly to the issue.

So, all I'm asking is that you explain how Turzai's plan was NOT meant to "suppress" voting in his state? Romney lost Pennsylvania by more than 250,000 votes. Your response was, "making sure the dead, felons and illegals are not voting." Yet you (and Turzai) have yet to show where 250,000 votes in his state were fraudulent. Hell, you haven't shown 10,000...5000...1000....100, hell even 50 cases of in-person fraud in his state. There was more than 5 MILLION votes cast in Pennsylvania. In 2007 the Justice Department issued a report showing that from 2000 to 2007 about 120 people have been charged, and 86 convicted people were convicted of voter fraud. In 2012 Pennsylvania officials admitted that they had no prosecutions for voted fraud.

So the question remains, why would Tursai believe that Voter ID would "win the state" for Romney, when state officials admitted they had not prosecuted, or found any cases?

4:01 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"Nah, because black Republicans have had no problem showing their Photo Id's in order to gain entrance to Republican conventions nor would they have an issue with showing a Photo Id is it was required to vote".

Negro PUH-LEEEEEEEZZZZ! You really don't expect me to believe that do you? Obviously Democrats have no problem with showing ID to enter "A CONVENTION" either!!!!

If you had known that Republicans had the exact same policy, you would have never posted a link to the dumb article. The idea of the article (as you claimed yourself) was the so-called "hypocrisy" of Democrats opposing "voter ID laws." Why would Democrats, or Republicans be concerned about "voter fraud" at their own conventions? I don't believe that you knew that Republicans had the EXACT SAME POLICY at their conventions, otherwise you would have never posted it.

Showing an ID to attend a convention where the President of the United States will be present, has absolutely nothing to do with showing an ID to vote! It's an illogical assertion which pales in comparison. It's D.U.M.B.!

CB;"The only ones who seem to have an issue are some black and white Democrats. I wonder why that is?".

You wonder why because you've chosen not to believe it. Therein, you've convinced yourself it isn't happening. As I've told you, if you choose not to believe it, there's no way anyone, or anything will convince you of the truth. All I can do is show you what you choose not to believe...

Here's Pennsylvania Republican Party Chairman Rob Gleason ADMITTING that their voter ID plan helped effect the 2012 election by cutting President Obama's percentage. But it appears that you're programmed not to accept the truth when these guys speak. It seems like you're hearing something totally different from what they're saying. To me, that's strange.

5:19 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

Hah! Conservative pundit and film maker, Dinesh D'Souza has been indicted for voting law violations. Right-wing sites are already claiming the Obama Administration is behind the indictment. I wonder if they thought the Bush administration was behind the indictment and conviction of Tom Delay. Oh wait...that make no sense. Delay was a Republican. I guess it only makes sense to right-wingers when grand juries indict while President Obama is in office.

7:23 PM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

p allen "So here's the conservative who co-founded one of the most powerful and notable conservative organizations (an other organizations that are actively in operation today) "vocally promoting" an agenda that effectively would disenfranchise American citizens. Conservative even give an "award" named in his honor. "

I'll ask the question again, how is my vote suppressed or disenfranchised when I show my Photo ID allen? Just tell me how it is or say the obvious, it isn't.

p allen "Here's Pennsylvania Republican Party Chairman Rob Gleason ADMITTING that their voter ID plan helped effect the 2012 election by cutting President Obama's percentage. But it appears that you're programmed not to accept the truth when these guys speak. It seems like you're hearing something totally different from what they're saying. To me, that's strange."

You did it!! You found the smoking gun allen!! Ah no you didn't actually. I know common sense isn't your friend but stay with me on this one. Rob is correct. If a fraudulent name is registered, nobody could just walk in and claim to be that person and vote under that name. Since a valid ID wouldn't stop that cold, no fraudulent vote could be cast, duh allen. Furthermore, no mention of race was mentioned in that clip. You "assume" that it impacted blacks, assumptions are a poor substitution for facts allen.

Maybe Rob Gleason supports Photo ID laws to prevent incidents that happened like this in 2008 Again, facts are not your friend allen.
You are blind beyond belief allen.
Clifton Mitchell helped register nearly 2,000 voters for the community group ACORN. But not one of them actually existed Going back to what I said, if no Photo ID is required, all party groups have to do is get 2,000 people to say they are that person no question asked and that would be 2,000 fraudulent votes cast. Understand this allen?

8:46 PM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

Revised "You did it!! You found the smoking gun allen!! Ah no you didn't actually. I know common sense isn't your friend but stay with me on this one. Rob is correct. If a fraudulent name is registered, anybody could just walk in and claim to be that person and vote under that name. Since a valid ID would stop that cold, no fraudulent vote could be cast, duh allen. Furthermore, no mention of race was mentioned in that clip. You "assume" that it impacted blacks, assumptions are a poor substitution for facts allen.

p allen "
Negro PUH-LEEEEEEEZZZZ! You really don't expect me to believe that do you? Obviously Democrats have no problem with showing ID to enter "A CONVENTION" either!!!!"

If the have no problem showing a Photo ID to vote, then why would it all of a sudden be an issue to show one to vote? It doesn't make any sense allen. What am I missing?

p allen "Showing an ID to attend a convention where the President of the United States will be present, has absolutely nothing to do with showing an ID to vote! It's an illogical assertion which pales in comparison. It's D.U.M.B.! "

So showing an Photo ID to enter a political convention is OK.

Showing a Photo ID to cash a paycheck is OK.

Showing a Photo ID to get a passport in order to travel is OK

A cashier asking a person to show a photo ID when presenting a check is OK.

A cashier asking a person to present a Photo ID when buying cigarettes or alcohol is OK

Yet a Poll worker asking to see a Photo ID is just plain evil, wrong, racist etc? No allen, that objection is plain DUMB and deceptive! Talking points don't work with me. Better bring the meat of your argument, because your veggie tray is running low.

8:57 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"I'll ask the question again, how is my vote suppressed or disenfranchised when I show my Photo ID allen? Just tell me how it is or say the obvious, it isn't".

Of course it isn't. It's not. Showing ID to vote is in now way suppressing your vote. Showing ID does not keep anyone from voting. If you show ID in Michigan, you're able to vote. No one "should" stop you from voting if you have proper ID. There, you question has been answered. Now answer mine.

In your own "OPINION", why did Mike Turzai say that voter ID could win a state for a candidate? Hypothetically, let's say he wasn't talking about Romney. Let's say, "any candidate." Why would a Republican that pressed to have a "LAW" enacted, make the claim that a "LAW" would win an election for a candidate?

CB;"Maybe Rob Gleason supports Photo ID laws to prevent incidents that happened like this in 2008 Again, facts are not your friend allen".

You're playing D.U.M.B. again Tyrone... Thirty-eight people charged out of 3.7 million voters? Whats that percentage? 1/100000th of 1/100000th percent...or something like that? Hell, the government allows a higher parts per million of impurities in drinking water than that! Seems to me you'd be more worried about microscopic bacteria you ingest, than a minuscule 38 voters in the 3.7 million voter Virginia election.

And Clifton Mitchell didn't register "2000 voters", he registered "2000 NAMES."

CB;"So showing an Photo ID to enter a political convention is OK.

Showing a Photo ID to cash a paycheck is OK, etc.., ect..."
.

You're equating "cashing a check" with voting? Buying alcohol with voting? Okay, I'll play along...

Which one of those photo ID requests has "Federal Legislation" that insures you have the right to do it? Better still, which one was a "law, with rules and regulations" designed specifically so a people of certain ethnicity weren't allowed to participate? Which one???? Apples and Oranges Tyrone. They teach you these weak "Talking Points", but they don't tell you how to defend them...

11:42 PM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;" Rob is correct. If a fraudulent name is registered, nobody could just walk in and claim to be that person and vote under that name. Since a valid ID wouldn't stop that cold, no fraudulent vote could be cast, duh allen".

Arrrgggghh... This is getting to be a bit insane. Perhaps you're just not comprehending what I've written over and over again. Let me ask it, and put it in as simplest terms as possible...

Total votes cast in the 2008 election for President Obama in Pennsylvania was, 3,276,363. Five percent of that total is 163,818. How does a voter ID law cut 163,818 off a candidates total? Please explain....

4:53 AM  
Blogger Alpha Conservative Male said...

You are so freaking dense allen. How in the hell can liberals in one breath complain about Florida in the 2000 election in claiming Bush stole the election, yet now they don't want safe guards to ensure that "every valid vote is counted". You all are such frauds and fakes. You can NOT tell me in detail how the requiring of a Photo ID suppresses black turn out. All you have is an empty talking point. The reality of truth exposes it for what it is, a hollow talking point. Read this very carefully and slowly allen. Tell me how my vote as a black male will be suppressed by having to show a photo ID. Reread it again, then answer.

1:38 AM  
Blogger p. anthony allen said...

CB;"Read this very carefully and slowly allen. Tell me how my vote as a black male will be suppressed by having to show a photo ID. Reread it again, then answer".

Showing ID to vote is in no way suppressing your vote. Showing ID does not keep anyone from voting. Your vote is not suppressed by showing ID. You can vote showing photo ID. Asking for or demanding Photo ID is not suppressing your vote. I keep answering it and you keep asking. Is there something wrong?

So, I answered your question. Showing Photo ID does not suppress your ability to vote. I show Photo ID every time I vote in Michigan. I've been doing it for 40 years, with no problem. NOW ANSWER MY QUESTION.

Prominent Republicans in Pennsylvania have publicly stated that Photo ID helps their candidates. One PA. Republican stated that, "Photo ID helped cut 5 percent from President Obama's 2008 total" in his state. As I stated, five percent of 3,276,363 is 163,818.

QUESTION; How does a Voter ID Law translate in 163,818 less votes?.

The fact is I already know you can't answer Tyrone. I think you're just smart enough to know that I'm suckering you into putting your foot in your mouth....YET AGAIN! It's all good though Tyrone. Conservatives often say and do things you'll never be able to explain, or understand..

1:18 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home