Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 27, 2014, 08:22:32 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Congressional Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  should Al Franken receive back pay?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Poll
Question: should Al Franken receive back pay?
yes   -19 (44.2%)
no   -24 (55.8%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 43

Author Topic: should Al Franken receive back pay?  (Read 5011 times)
○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32371


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: July 03, 2009, 07:36:37 pm »
Ignore

I never said Coleman was the winner. I would just like all of the ballots to be counted accurately.
Good news! They were!

And unlike critical states in the 1876 and 2000 elections.
Logged
incredibly specific types of post-punk music
BRTD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 72813
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: July 03, 2009, 07:45:08 pm »
Ignore

I never said Coleman was the winner. I would just like all of the ballots to be counted accurately.

And in what way weren't they?

I never said Coleman was the winner. I would just like all of the ballots to be counted accurately.
Good news! They were!

And unlike critical states in the 1876 and 2000 elections.

Please don't bring up that red herring and let them divert from the point.
Logged




01/05/2004-01/10/2014
Rob
Bob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6321
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: July 03, 2009, 09:31:07 pm »
Ignore

there was some voter disenfranchisement.

Since when does this bother Republicans?
Logged

Heres what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins Country First buttons on his man titties and chants U-S-A! U-S-A! at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.
King
intermoderate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26092
United States


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: July 04, 2009, 12:58:13 am »
Ignore

Norm Coleman didn't give a rats ass about voter disenfranchisement until the first recount changed the result and made Franken the winner.

Before that, he thought it would be honorable for Franken to concede a close race and avoid a drawn out legal battle.

So much for that.
Logged

It was either the ham sandwiches or Whataburger today.
Coburn In 2012
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1215


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: July 05, 2009, 12:00:18 am »
Ignore

Selected, not elected.

Now, I disagree with your opinion on the Minnesota Senate election, but do you feel this way about Bush in 2000 as well?

I feel they should have recounted all of the ballots.

But didn't the news agencies do that anyway and showed Bush won?

Yes they did.  Even the leftist domanated media had to admit Bush won fair and square.  Franken however stole this election it is something the democRAT party specialises in.  Nixon won in 1960 but guess what?  old joe kennedy and the mafia got thier boy in chicago to deliver Illinois for the golden boy.  and we got almost a decade of extreme socialism here.  At least johnson had the balls to stand up to the communist slopes.  Kennedy was such a pussy -- just like carter or obama.  He let the reds slaughter freedom fighters on the beaches of Cuba.

Any way the point is...democRATs rarely win elections fairly.  some times they get a stealth third party guy like Perot to run and draw off votes from the Republican candidate.  Or they just pull a stunt like the last election and guilt the public into voting for a leftist.  "Oh no if you vote for Mccain you MUST be a racist and a bigot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Logged

If the Republican Party continues to ignore its conservative base, then the Party is headed to oblivion.

Jerome Corsi
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30220
United States


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: July 05, 2009, 02:46:00 pm »
Ignore

Selected, not elected.

Now, I disagree with your opinion on the Minnesota Senate election, but do you feel this way about Bush in 2000 as well?

I feel they should have recounted all of the ballots.

But didn't the news agencies do that anyway and showed Bush won?

Yes they did.  Even the leftist domanated media had to admit Bush won fair and square.  Franken however stole this election it is something the democRAT party specialises in.  Nixon won in 1960 but guess what?  old joe kennedy and the mafia got thier boy in chicago to deliver Illinois for the golden boy.  and we got almost a decade of extreme socialism here.  At least johnson had the balls to stand up to the communist slopes.  Kennedy was such a pussy -- just like carter or obama.  He let the reds slaughter freedom fighters on the beaches of Cuba.

Any way the point is...democRATs rarely win elections fairly.  some times they get a stealth third party guy like Perot to run and draw off votes from the Republican candidate.  Or they just pull a stunt like the last election and guilt the public into voting for a leftist.  "Oh no if you vote for Mccain you MUST be a racist and a bigot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

In 2000 Nader took votes from Gore. In 2006 Rick Santorum(R) tried to prop up Carl Romenali's independent bid cause he could of siphoned lefties from Casey(D). Both parties do this.

In 1960 even if ILL was "stolen" Nixon still would have lost the electoral college without either Missouri or New Jersey. People often bring up Texas but the margin was far too large.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



pogo stick
JewishConservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3524
United States


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: July 06, 2009, 11:09:07 am »
Ignore

Franken should not get pay for 2009. After wasting so much money on this race neither Norm or Franken deserved to get paid for 2009.
Logged

Economic score: -6.80
Social score: -0.97
I'm a crazy Liberal  Troll. LAWL

ndvc ,b., b


CRAZY GAY TROLL LIBRAL FROM ALABAMAS
Alabama is dum redecks!


Gays and minorites are sexeh
Meeker
meekermariner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14170


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -2.61

View Profile
« Reply #32 on: July 06, 2009, 07:53:41 pm »
Ignore

Franken should not get pay for 2009. After wasting so much money on this race neither Norm or Franken deserved to get paid for 2009.

Al Franken wasn't the one doing the long, drawn-out court challenges.
Logged
aspiderleftalone
Newbie
*
Posts: 13
United States


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: July 07, 2009, 11:31:13 pm »
Ignore

Selected, not elected.

Now, I disagree with your opinion on the Minnesota Senate election, but do you feel this way about Bush in 2000 as well?

I feel they should have recounted all of the ballots.

But didn't the news agencies do that anyway and showed Bush won?

Yes they did.  Even the leftist domanated media had to admit Bush won fair and square.  Franken however stole this election it is something the democRAT party specialises in.  Nixon won in 1960 but guess what?  old joe kennedy and the mafia got thier boy in chicago to deliver Illinois for the golden boy.  and we got almost a decade of extreme socialism here.  At least johnson had the balls to stand up to the communist slopes.  Kennedy was such a pussy -- just like carter or obama.  He let the reds slaughter freedom fighters on the beaches of Cuba.

Any way the point is...democRATs rarely win elections fairly.  some times they get a stealth third party guy like Perot to run and draw off votes from the Republican candidate.  Or they just pull a stunt like the last election and guilt the public into voting for a leftist.  "Oh no if you vote for Mccain you MUST be a racist and a bigot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

See, this is why the far-right is considered a little out of touch.

Back on topic, he should not get back-pay, but he should get seniority if the issue arises.
Logged

Economic score: -4.9
Social score: -5.57
Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34533


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: July 07, 2009, 11:53:11 pm »
Ignore

Selected, not elected.

Now, I disagree with your opinion on the Minnesota Senate election, but do you feel this way about Bush in 2000 as well?

I feel they should have recounted all of the ballots.

But didn't the news agencies do that anyway and showed Bush won?

Yes they did.  Even the leftist domanated media had to admit Bush won fair and square.  Franken however stole this election it is something the democRAT party specialises in.  Nixon won in 1960 but guess what?  old joe kennedy and the mafia got thier boy in chicago to deliver Illinois for the golden boy.  and we got almost a decade of extreme socialism here.  At least johnson had the balls to stand up to the communist slopes.  Kennedy was such a pussy -- just like carter or obama.  He let the reds slaughter freedom fighters on the beaches of Cuba.

Any way the point is...democRATs rarely win elections fairly.  some times they get a stealth third party guy like Perot to run and draw off votes from the Republican candidate.  Or they just pull a stunt like the last election and guilt the public into voting for a leftist.  "Oh no if you vote for Mccain you MUST be a racist and a bigot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Number of Electoral Votes needed to win in 1960: 269
Number of Electoral Votes JFK won in 1960: 303
Number of Electoral Votes in Illinois in 1960: 27

303 - 27 = 276

276 > 269
Logged

Keystone Phil
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 52511


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: July 08, 2009, 12:25:57 am »
Ignore

Selected, not elected.

Now, I disagree with your opinion on the Minnesota Senate election, but do you feel this way about Bush in 2000 as well?

I feel they should have recounted all of the ballots.

But didn't the news agencies do that anyway and showed Bush won?

Yes they did.  Even the leftist domanated media had to admit Bush won fair and square.  Franken however stole this election it is something the democRAT party specialises in.  Nixon won in 1960 but guess what?  old joe kennedy and the mafia got thier boy in chicago to deliver Illinois for the golden boy.  and we got almost a decade of extreme socialism here.  At least johnson had the balls to stand up to the communist slopes.  Kennedy was such a pussy -- just like carter or obama.  He let the reds slaughter freedom fighters on the beaches of Cuba.

Any way the point is...democRATs rarely win elections fairly.  some times they get a stealth third party guy like Perot to run and draw off votes from the Republican candidate.  Or they just pull a stunt like the last election and guilt the public into voting for a leftist.  "Oh no if you vote for Mccain you MUST be a racist and a bigot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Number of Electoral Votes needed to win in 1960: 269
Number of Electoral Votes JFK won in 1960: 303
Number of Electoral Votes in Illinois in 1960: 27

303 - 27 = 276

276 > 269

Many of us also argue that there was some funny business going on in LBJ's Texas also.  Wink

The rabid, talking point hacks only mention Illinois though.
Logged


Never any doubt.
Landslide Lyndon
px75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9358
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -5.22

View Profile
« Reply #36 on: July 08, 2009, 12:29:46 am »
Ignore

Many of us also argue that there was some funny business going on in LBJ's Texas also.  Wink

The rabid, talking point hacks only mention Illinois though.

It's Texas. Funny business is kind of a state tradition.
Logged

Bob Findley: "You're a real dyed-in-the-wool son-of-a-bitch. Anyone ever told you that?"
Steve Everett: "Just close friends and family,"

Clint Eastwood's "True Crime", 1999.
MSG
MSG@LUC
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 58
United States


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: July 08, 2009, 02:06:18 am »
Ignore

The real question to ask about the election in 60 is not who won but would you rather have had Nixon in charge during the Cuban missile crisis? In my opinion none of us would be here to argue over this if Nixon was, Nixon was a lot of things but calm and collective were not one of them. Unlike Kennedy who was able to backdown some of the more militant members of his cabinet Nixon would have let them have there wish. Nixon would most likely had similar militant segments in his cabinet as all presidents do. These generals, in Kennedy's cabinet, wanted a full scale invasion of Cuba which would had lead to WWIII.  Plus, we would not have had Adlai Stevenson IV as UN ambassador.  A truly unsung hero of those chaotic days.  Who stood down the Russians at the one of the most critical of points in our history.

In regards to the Florida debacles it is closed and done and needs only to be brought up as a lesson for all patriotic Americans.  The disenfranchisement of legitimate voters has no place in our republic. Katherine Harris is a deplorable person who got hers in that beat down she received against Bill Nelson.  My advice for what little it is worth is that anyone who fixate on the past is doomed to become obsessed with it. Ultimately, any obsession will destroy you it is better to learn from the past and make sure it does not happen again.

To the question originally posted, no he should not. Let alone the fact that he does not need the money.  However dubious the legal challenge put forth by Coleman's campaign the were within the letter of the law.  Hopefully Coleman pays electorally for the delay of the rightful winner by never being able to hold another public office in Minnesota. Still he was within his rights to put forth the legal challenge. 

Sorry if that too long but as my friends would all tell you i am a long winded person. It can be a good and bad thing.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 02:08:26 am by MSG@LUC »Logged
Badger
badger
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11060
United States


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: July 08, 2009, 02:46:38 pm »
Ignore

The real question to ask about the election in 60 is not who won but would you rather have had Nixon in charge during the Cuban missile crisis? In my opinion none of us would be here to argue over this if Nixon was, Nixon was a lot of things but calm and collective were not one of them. Unlike Kennedy who was able to backdown some of the more militant members of his cabinet Nixon would have let them have there wish. Nixon would most likely had similar militant segments in his cabinet as all presidents do. These generals, in Kennedy's cabinet, wanted a full scale invasion of Cuba which would had lead to WWIII.  Plus, we would not have had Adlai Stevenson IV as UN ambassador.  A truly unsung hero of those chaotic days.  Who stood down the Russians at the one of the most critical of points in our history.

In regards to the Florida debacles it is closed and done and needs only to be brought up as a lesson for all patriotic Americans.  The disenfranchisement of legitimate voters has no place in our republic. Katherine Harris is a deplorable person who got hers in that beat down she received against Bill Nelson.  My advice for what little it is worth is that anyone who fixate on the past is doomed to become obsessed with it. Ultimately, any obsession will destroy you it is better to learn from the past and make sure it does not happen again.

To the question originally posted, no he should not. Let alone the fact that he does not need the money.  However dubious the legal challenge put forth by Coleman's campaign the were within the letter of the law.  Hopefully Coleman pays electorally for the delay of the rightful winner by never being able to hold another public office in Minnesota. Still he was within his rights to put forth the legal challenge. 

Sorry if that too long but as my friends would all tell you i am a long winded person. It can be a good and bad thing.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ all around, especially the first paragraph.

Welcome to the Forum!
Logged

Your self-serving slacktivism is propelling America to new heights.
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58775
India


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: July 08, 2009, 02:51:02 pm »
Ignore

Selected, not elected.

Now, I disagree with your opinion on the Minnesota Senate election, but do you feel this way about Bush in 2000 as well?

I feel they should have recounted all of the ballots.

But didn't the news agencies do that anyway and showed Bush won?
Actually, no, that's not *quite* what they showed.

That's the headline they put on it though, because they felt the country ought to Move On.

EDIT: There were several such studies, and their results vary (another's findings are similar in gist, but with different numbers. In a third, the results are actually reversed - Gore wins only on the strictest standard here). However, these other two appear to be based on samples.)

    * Lenient standard. Gore by 332 votes.

"Lenient" here means any ballot with an obvious mark at just one presidential candidate.

    * Palm Beach standard. Gore by 242 votes.

Under these rules, a not wholly detached but obviously marked chad is counted if the same thing occurs several times on the same ballot.

    * Two-corner standard. Bush by 407 votes.

What the media called "hanging chads". Apparently these came heavily from some strong Bush counties.

    * Strict standard. Bush by 152 votes.

The official result minus counting mistakes, basically. Only chads that fall out counted.

So, basically, as tied as Minnesota.
Of course, taking into account the 10s of thousands of wrongly spoilt Duval and Palm Beach ballots moves Gore's margin of victory to well outside the margin of error.
Ignoring for now the thousands of Palm Beach ballots attributed to the wrong candidate altogether because there's no way of correcting that or knowing how many they were, exactly. And the effects of the fraudulent voter list purge because, again, its effects cannot be quantified with any degree of certainty. And the couple of dozen votes Bush probably lost due to the wrongful early call while polls were still open in the Panhandle.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 03:15:56 pm by Lewis Trondheim, worker cat »Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Badger
badger
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11060
United States


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: July 08, 2009, 03:59:53 pm »
Ignore

Selected, not elected.

Now, I disagree with your opinion on the Minnesota Senate election, but do you feel this way about Bush in 2000 as well?

I feel they should have recounted all of the ballots.

But didn't the news agencies do that anyway and showed Bush won?
Actually, no, that's not *quite* what they showed.

That's the headline they put on it though, because they felt the country ought to Move On.

EDIT: There were several such studies, and their results vary (another's findings are similar in gist, but with different numbers. In a third, the results are actually reversed - Gore wins only on the strictest standard here). However, these other two appear to be based on samples.)

    * Lenient standard. Gore by 332 votes.

"Lenient" here means any ballot with an obvious mark at just one presidential candidate.

    * Palm Beach standard. Gore by 242 votes.

Under these rules, a not wholly detached but obviously marked chad is counted if the same thing occurs several times on the same ballot.

    * Two-corner standard. Bush by 407 votes.

What the media called "hanging chads". Apparently these came heavily from some strong Bush counties.

    * Strict standard. Bush by 152 votes.

The official result minus counting mistakes, basically. Only chads that fall out counted.

So, basically, as tied as Minnesota.
Of course, taking into account the 10s of thousands of wrongly spoilt Duval and Palm Beach ballots moves Gore's margin of victory to well outside the margin of error.
Ignoring for now the thousands of Palm Beach ballots attributed to the wrong candidate altogether because there's no way of correcting that or knowing how many they were, exactly. And the effects of the fraudulent voter list purge because, again, its effects cannot be quantified with any degree of certainty. And the couple of dozen votes Bush probably lost due to the wrongful early call while polls were still open in the Panhandle.

Not to mention the hundreds, of individuals denied voting rights at the polls based on "felony conviction records" which turned out to be 100% erroneous (e.g. a totally different person with the same name as a convicted felon; felony arrest resulted in misdemeanor conviction making them legally eligible to vote under Florida law). The disenfranchised were mostly African-American and lower income voters. Many of these "records of felony convictions were provided by other states to the FL Sec. of State--Katherine Harris, who could forget--before the election. Most were provided by one state in particular--you guessed it: Texas.

There's a special place in hell for Karl Rove.....
Logged

Your self-serving slacktivism is propelling America to new heights.
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35782
United States


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: July 08, 2009, 04:09:17 pm »
Ignore

The real question to ask about the election in 60 is not who won but would you rather have had Nixon in charge during the Cuban missile crisis? In my opinion none of us would be here to argue over this if Nixon was, Nixon was a lot of things but calm and collective were not one of them. Unlike Kennedy who was able to backdown some of the more militant members of his cabinet Nixon would have let them have there wish. Nixon would most likely had similar militant segments in his cabinet as all presidents do. These generals, in Kennedy's cabinet, wanted a full scale invasion of Cuba which would had lead to WWIII.  Plus, we would not have had Adlai Stevenson IV as UN ambassador.  A truly unsung hero of those chaotic days.  Who stood down the Russians at the one of the most critical of points in our history.

In regards to the Florida debacles it is closed and done and needs only to be brought up as a lesson for all patriotic Americans.  The disenfranchisement of legitimate voters has no place in our republic. Katherine Harris is a deplorable person who got hers in that beat down she received against Bill Nelson.  My advice for what little it is worth is that anyone who fixate on the past is doomed to become obsessed with it. Ultimately, any obsession will destroy you it is better to learn from the past and make sure it does not happen again.

To the question originally posted, no he should not. Let alone the fact that he does not need the money.  However dubious the legal challenge put forth by Coleman's campaign the were within the letter of the law.  Hopefully Coleman pays electorally for the delay of the rightful winner by never being able to hold another public office in Minnesota. Still he was within his rights to put forth the legal challenge. 

Sorry if that too long but as my friends would all tell you i am a long winded person. It can be a good and bad thing.

top prospect
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58775
India


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: July 08, 2009, 04:15:04 pm »
Ignore

Quote
And the effects of the fraudulent voter list purge

Not to mention the hundreds, of individuals denied voting rights at the polls based on "felony conviction records" which turned out to be 100% erroneous (e.g. a totally different person with the same name as a convicted felon; felony arrest resulted in misdemeanor conviction making them legally eligible to vote under Florida law). The disenfranchised were mostly African-American and lower income voters. Many of these "records of felony convictions were provided by other states to the FL Sec. of State--Katherine Harris, who could forget--before the election. Most were provided by one state in particular--you guessed it: Texas.

There's a special place in hell for Karl Rove.....
I listed that. See above. Smiley
It's impossible to say how many of these people tried to vote. It's even impossible to say how many were really removed from the voter rolls - the SoS' files were so large and so obviously (to an expert - not that one was at hand in all counties) error-ridden that many counties just refused point-blank to act on them.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28803
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: July 08, 2009, 06:32:14 pm »
Ignore

The real question to ask about the election in 60 is not who won but would you rather have had Nixon in charge during the Cuban missile crisis?

That assumes that with Nixon in charge there would have been a Cuban missile crisis.  Nixon would likely have either never let the Bay of Pigs invasion happen, or if it did let it go forward, he would have gone ahead and given the invaders the overt support they needed.

In the former case, Castro might not have been so worried about a Yankee-backed counter-revolution as to allow Soviet missiles be placed in Cuba, and in the latter case, there most certainly would not have been Soviet missiles in Cuba.
Logged

People find meaning and redemption in the most unusual human connections. Khaled Hosseini
MSG
MSG@LUC
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 58
United States


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: July 08, 2009, 11:21:38 pm »
Ignore

Thanks badger and @bleak. 

Ernest as i am sure you know the smallest of changes in the historical timeline would drastically alter present reality.  So, I am sure you are right had Nixon been elected a lot of different events would have taken place so, who knows whether we would have had the missile crisis. Still, we were far better off with Kennedy's victory over Nixon.  Both of whom proved this point during their times in office.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31302
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 08, 2009, 11:29:40 pm »
Ignore

In regards to the Florida debacles it is closed and done and needs only to be brought up as a lesson for all patriotic Americans.  The disenfranchisement of legitimate voters has no place in our republic.

Proof or just more useless hyperbole?

Want to see some real voter intimidation? Check this out : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4MTQVMatW0

Of course the racist Eric Holder dropped the investigation.

Logged
MSG
MSG@LUC
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 58
United States


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: July 09, 2009, 12:12:15 am »
Ignore

States,

First, did i say anywhere in that statement that democrats are free from the charge of disenfranchisement or voter intimidation.  The Florida case how ever is the most egregious as it changed the course of human events.  Most of the time when this happens there are repercussions in this case it was the deaths of thousands, the destruction of our economy, and the loss individual freedoms. All of which we can never get back, lives cant be replaced and freedoms once lost rarely ever return.  Also in my lifetime the cases of voter intimidation and disenfranchisement are seen more on the right than the left.  This does not excuse any of it for everyone of age should have the right to vote period!!!! Minnesota gets mad respect from me for their walk up registration. A valid id or proof of residency is all that should be required.  This is easy to verify with computers and can easily be done on the spot.

As to you question it takes five seconds to find evidence of it, thus look below for links(I'm sure you wont read them but thats ok.) Also the pastor who was profiled in the movie recount spoke at my school a few years back.  Sadly his name alludes me and my search came up empty.  His story was factual and i believe him a lot more than some random dude on the internet.  The pastor name was the same as a out of state felon thus when the witch from the south purged the voter rolls he was purged as well.  If that isn't disenfranchisement i don't know what is maybe you can explain the word to me for if it is not my poly sci profs must have failed me.

I don't know you or your track record but i have a feeling you will attack my statements, from what little i can detect you seem reactionary so have fun.  I don't really care if you do just try to come up with something more than your guys do it to so its okay we do.  That response is not kosher and is hyperbole in its real definition.

These are just three i have found in a few second of looking that seem to be spot on i am sure if i cared enough i could find hundreds more but either way tag you are it.

Links
www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch9.htm
sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Felon_disenfranchisement
www.thenation.com/doc/20010205/palast
Logged
Badger
badger
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11060
United States


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: July 15, 2009, 11:42:40 am »
Ignore

Quote
And the effects of the fraudulent voter list purge

Not to mention the hundreds, of individuals denied voting rights at the polls based on "felony conviction records" which turned out to be 100% erroneous (e.g. a totally different person with the same name as a convicted felon; felony arrest resulted in misdemeanor conviction making them legally eligible to vote under Florida law). The disenfranchised were mostly African-American and lower income voters. Many of these "records of felony convictions were provided by other states to the FL Sec. of State--Katherine Harris, who could forget--before the election. Most were provided by one state in particular--you guessed it: Texas.

There's a special place in hell for Karl Rove.....
I listed that. See above. Smiley
It's impossible to say how many of these people tried to vote. It's even impossible to say how many were really removed from the voter rolls - the SoS' files were so large and so obviously (to an expert - not that one was at hand in all counties) error-ridden that many counties just refused point-blank to act on them.

Agreed, and much (though hardly all) of the evidence of numbers in anecdotal. Still, FL was so close it's tough to believe it didn't swing the narrow narrow narrow balance of victory.
Logged

Your self-serving slacktivism is propelling America to new heights.
??????????
StatesRights
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31302
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

View Profile
« Reply #48 on: July 15, 2009, 09:10:24 pm »
Ignore

Quote
And the effects of the fraudulent voter list purge

Not to mention the hundreds, of individuals denied voting rights at the polls based on "felony conviction records" which turned out to be 100% erroneous (e.g. a totally different person with the same name as a convicted felon; felony arrest resulted in misdemeanor conviction making them legally eligible to vote under Florida law). The disenfranchised were mostly African-American and lower income voters. Many of these "records of felony convictions were provided by other states to the FL Sec. of State--Katherine Harris, who could forget--before the election. Most were provided by one state in particular--you guessed it: Texas.

There's a special place in hell for Karl Rove.....
I listed that. See above. Smiley
It's impossible to say how many of these people tried to vote. It's even impossible to say how many were really removed from the voter rolls - the SoS' files were so large and so obviously (to an expert - not that one was at hand in all counties) error-ridden that many counties just refused point-blank to act on them.

Agreed, and much (though hardly all) of the evidence of numbers in anecdotal. Still, FL was so close it's tough to believe it didn't swing the narrow narrow narrow balance of victory.

New Mexico was closer.
Logged
Badger
badger
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11060
United States


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: July 16, 2009, 04:55:05 pm »
Ignore

Quote
And the effects of the fraudulent voter list purge

Not to mention the hundreds, of individuals denied voting rights at the polls based on "felony conviction records" which turned out to be 100% erroneous (e.g. a totally different person with the same name as a convicted felon; felony arrest resulted in misdemeanor conviction making them legally eligible to vote under Florida law). The disenfranchised were mostly African-American and lower income voters. Many of these "records of felony convictions were provided by other states to the FL Sec. of State--Katherine Harris, who could forget--before the election. Most were provided by one state in particular--you guessed it: Texas.

There's a special place in hell for Karl Rove.....
I listed that. See above. Smiley
It's impossible to say how many of these people tried to vote. It's even impossible to say how many were really removed from the voter rolls - the SoS' files were so large and so obviously (to an expert - not that one was at hand in all counties) error-ridden that many counties just refused point-blank to act on them.

Agreed, and much (though hardly all) of the evidence of numbers in anecdotal. Still, FL was so close it's tough to believe it didn't swing the narrow narrow narrow balance of victory.

New Mexico was closer.

True, in raw vote totals rather than percentages.

Your point here being.......?
Logged

Your self-serving slacktivism is propelling America to new heights.
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines