Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #11
    Senior Member JohnB2012's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    4,168
    [quote=barkway]Yes...it has been answered....in the original link I gave out that apparently you didn't go read.
    ....and neither did you> Do you want me to do it for you?
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnB2012
    Quote Originally Posted by barkway
    Do you really want me to do everything for you? I will if you're really that lazy. This is important. Breezy went and called her own town's registrar and asked....as did I.

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnB2012
    Quote Originally Posted by barkway
    ...the same way those who used it here in the last 2 elections did: You stand at where they check in and ANYONE whose status you choose to challenge gets a provisional ballot. ANYONE. The Republicans here stood at the check in and whenever a Democrat checked in to vote, they challenged the voter's status. You know what people of Mexican/Hispanic/Latino descent look like, yes?

    Quote Originally Posted by "JohnB2012":11ne9u97
    Exactly how are you going to pick who to challenge?
    So your suggestion is to question everyone who is Latino? That will last about 15 minutes..... Let's say you catch....one or two...what is the process? Are there forms you have to fill out? How may are you going to challenge? Do you have enough money for lawyers when you get sued??
    You didn't answer my question.
    [/quote:11ne9u97]
    I don't question that a person's voter status can be challenged. (I did read the link) Like Pine said, it would be racial profiling. I don't think you be challenging too many.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    New Richmond,Wisconsin
    Posts
    609
    If you did this you would have to challenge alot of folks, including non hispanic. In a small town like the one I live in, you can bet the problems would flow out to your car (windshield busted, tires slashed) in the parking lot and to your home.( vandelisum and harrassment) Alot of angery citizens.

    It sounds to me like the safest bet is to have as many canididates as possible challenge and call for recounts.

  3. #13
    breezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    134
    Hi folks,


    Guess I'm causing you to become upset with this "challenging another's legal status......." So please give barkway a little space? Hold on for tomorrow's follow-up answer, as they are going to "work" on finding out just how to go about it, etc. etc. etc. At this point in my questioning, it's permissible.........

    First, I have a question of my own: Why does profiling always have to be the issue at the forefront of everything? I don't mean to be wisecrackin' about this, but if it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, generally it's a duck. Isn't it?

    Anyway .. when speaking with the Supervisor of Elections office here, I was not warned anything about profiling. I was asking a legitimate question. Since this IS a permissible thing to do for registered voters, at least by the sound of answers I got, they are freely looking into this.

    I was told that the "state of Florida" has just begun looking into verification of voters, by checking driver's licenses and social security cards. Now that's a novel idea, isn't it? When I mentioned, yep, and those documents can be fraudulent.... It boiled down to the State of Florida is responsible. Now they aren't profiling squat!

    I posed a sincere question, was polite and not wound up like a cork screw, and the local Supervisor's office staff is going to look into it.
    They might learn something and I might learn something.

    Peace? Okay? Take some deep breaths!

    breezy

  4. #14
    Senior Member Mamie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,587
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnB2012
    The last time I voted they just checked my name on a list, didn't even ask for ID.
    the last time I voted I had to show my ID and then they checked off my name -- these poll watchers were members of my church and I had known them since I was a kid.
    "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it" George Santayana "Deo Vindice"

  5. #15
    Senior Member loservillelabor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Loserville KY
    Posts
    4,799
    Quote Originally Posted by Mamie
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnB2012
    The last time I voted they just checked my name on a list, didn't even ask for ID.
    the last time I voted I had to show my ID and then they checked off my name -- these poll watchers were members of my church and I had known them since I was a kid.
    Same here. I was proud to identify myself as an American citizen. These states that just let people vote because they walked in need to be thrown out of the electoral prcess. The whole thing is set up for one citizen, one vote. If it gets to a point where you can't be assured of a fair election then an alternative means of establishing government needs to be found?
    Unemployment is not working. Deport illegal alien workers now!

  6. #16
    Senior Member artclam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    717

    varies by state

    Of course the laws about voter challenging vary by state. Here in N.J. in order to challenge a voter at the polls the challanger must be a member of the local election board or appointed as a challenger by one of the candidates. Upon being challenged all the voter must do is take an oath that he or she is legally qualified to vote. This makes the subsequent casting of an illegal ballot a higher crime.

    This is easy for the illegal voter to avoid as of about a year ago. All the voter need do is apply for a permanent absentee ballot and avoid the poll altogether.

  7. #17
    breezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    134

    voters by state

    We voted with an absentee ballot and hand delivered them to the Supervisor of Elections, last year here in Florida. They supposedly were locked in a safe until after the voting day ended.

    Then, it seems to have turned out that the "absentee" ballots did not have to be counted, because the electronic vote already had certain candidates way out front and the absentee vote wasn't needed to determine the winners.

    That worked well, didn't it? Or did it?

    As for the loser to challenge the outcome, I suppose that's one avenue. However, it does seem to me that approach is like closing the barn door after the horse got out.

    Isn't that what Al Gore did in the state of Florida here in 2000? We all endured that challenge via televised lawyers and courts and it was a great show, if you like that sort of thing. At that time, I was living in upstate New York. My point in that fiasco is, a lot of good the loser's money (or ours depending upon how it is viewed) challenging the vote did. Oh, the blessed hanging chad experience! Who could forget that!

    Haven't heard from the Supervisor of Elections yet today, when I do, will give you the comments made to me, "straight from the horses mouth."

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    12,855
    GORE
    Actually, he challenged, they counted chads, he didn't like the results and then HE UNCONSTITUTIONALLY brought it to the Fla. Supreme Ct.

    He actually got more than should have been allowed.

    The Fla. Supreme ct. should not have taken the case as per the Constitution. It should have gone directly to Congress. Due to Congess's cowardice.......that's how it eventually wound up in the US Supreme Ct.

    Let's keep our facts straight here.

    HORSE OF A DIFFERENT COLOR..........pissing in the wind.
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  9. #19
    breezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    134
    Gotcha what ya mean 2ndamend...

    I'll leave the facts and horses peeing in the wind up to you with the Gore issue.

    Point was, once there is a loser, it seems a little late.

    I thought the purposes here on the board, was to try to do something legally, to help ourselves and country during this current mess. Beforehand, not afterwards.

    I'll be making a post here in a while. Got to take care of some things away from the keyboard. Just to let you know, Mr. Kurt Browning, nice man, Supervisor of Elections called me himself. We had a most enlightening conversation and most factual.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    12,855
    Quote Originally Posted by breezy
    Gotcha what ya mean 2ndamend...

    I'll leave the facts and horses peeing in the wind up to you with the Gore issue.

    Point was, once there is a loser, it seems a little late.

    I thought the purposes here on the board, was to try to do something legally, to help ourselves and country during this current mess. Beforehand, not afterwards.

    I'll be making a post here in a while. Got to take care of some things away from the keyboard. Just to let you know, Mr. Kurt Browning, nice man, Supervisor of Elections called me himself. We had a most enlightening conversation and most factual.
    Excuse me? You're the one who incorrectly used GORE or better known as the horses pissing in the wind as an analogy. POOR ANALOGY.

    So, you keep the horses and the piss, breezy, as that was your baby.
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •