Voter Suppression

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1351614749' post='1175615']
I understand EXACTLY what you're saying here... my simple question was if the voting machines were 100% legit, there was no controversy of any sort with regard to suppressing any vote, etc. would you have an issue with requiring a voter to show some form of photo ID to get a ballot? Simple question.

Remove the rest of the bulshit - simple yes or no. This is more of just my own curiosity at this point.
[/quote]

The intent for the use of voting machines was so that the public would more quickly know the results of the election, be cause, well, we are an extremely impatient society. We don't have the time for polling stations to count, recount, and log the results of our votes. This is another example of progress having a negative effect on how we live. Yes, internet voting erases the chance that hanging chads and a voting worker's opinion can be taken out of the equation, but now it starts a whole different problems. Anything on the internet has a chance to be hacked and changed. Many times this machines have messed up across the country and voter stations have used the paper ballots anyway. Another problem is, I have seen several times when people couldn't figure out how to use the new machines and a worker got in the booth with them.

I'm still rather confused as how this could be seen as a way to undermine a specific party or another. All these problems are faults in the election process, not some kind of conspiracy by one of the parties.

[Homer_Rice]

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][quote][color=#000000]The reality was far less interesting.[/color][/font][/size]

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][color=#000000]“They had one particular case I remember very well,” said Douglas Ray, the Harris County assistant attorney who represents the election registrar. “They had identified an address where eight or 10 people were registered to vote. There was no building there.” Mr. Ray found out that the building had been torn down and that the people simply moved.[/color][/quote][/font][/size]

[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/us/politics/groups-like-true-the-vote-are-looking-very-closely-for-voter-fraud.html?pagewanted=all"][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][size=4]Looking, Very Closely, For Voter Fraud.[/size][/font][/url]

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1351614749' post='1175615']
I understand EXACTLY what you're saying here... my simple question was if the voting machines were 100% legit, there was no controversy of any sort with regard to suppressing any vote, etc. would you have an issue with requiring a voter to show some form of photo ID to get a ballot? Simple question.

Remove the rest of the bulshit - simple yes or no. This is more of just my own curiosity at this point.
[/quote]

If there was no "controversy" as you call it regarding election fraud, there would be no need for a Voter ID law, so my answer is no.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1351639909' post='1175751']
If there was no "controversy" as you call it regarding election fraud, there would be no need for a Voter ID law, so my answer is no.
[/quote]

There are hundreds if not thousands of things in the U.S. where you need a picture ID. So out all of those things, why should it not be required to have an ID when voting? Some of us have repeated this over and over and over, but not one single person who has had a good reason against it. Voting in this country is supposed to be one of the greatest things we can do, yet people argue sowing an ID would screw that up. I'm definitely in the camp that say the ID law would stop more voter fraud that it could possibly create.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351640289' post='1175754']
I'm definitely in the camp that say the ID law would stop more voter fraud that it could possibly create.
[/quote]

You are wrong in a very important way, which I have pointed out any number of times in this thread. The push to implement as these so-called ID laws are much more nefarious than that. That is because the ID issue is being used as a cover to also push through all kinds of other nasty stuff. Furthermore, individual voter fraud is a negligible component of the various vectors by which an election can be manipulated. I don't have a problem with ID, in and of itself, as long as this other nastier and more evil crap were dealt with, too. But, if you'll do an honest investigation--as I have suggested a number of times--you'll find that [i]the underlying dynamic is not one that is intended to ensure that every voter who deserves to vote is given the chance to vote; [/i][b]the underlying dynamic is a variety of attempts to suppress the votes of certain demographics which tend to be unfavorable to the Republican party.[/b]

If you deny this, then either you have not reviewed the evidence very much (or well) or you are allowing yourself to be hornswoggled. In either case it makes me wonder just how much a person is really committed to the supposedly sacred idea of casting a ballot. Because, as I said to Vol an few pages back--you take these things as they come. [b]And this is what is happening now. [/b]If this were the 1840s then we'd be talking about the Democratic party cooping votes. If this were other periods in US history then we'd be talking about other means by which elections are gamed.

See the god-damned forest here and stop remaining only focused on the trees.

[|Elflocko|]

Who needs suppression when you can just [url="http://www.globalresearch.ca/why-is-mitt-romney-so-confident-is-the-gop-stealing-the-elections/5310109"]steal the election outright[/url]?

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351647620' post='1175777']
You are wrong in a very important way, which I have pointed out any number of times in this thread. The push to implement as these so-called ID laws are much more nefarious than that. That is because the ID issue is being used as a cover to also push through all kinds of other nasty stuff. Furthermore, individual voter fraud is a negligible component of the various vectors by which an election can be manipulated. I don't have a problem with ID, in and of itself, as long as this other nastier and more evil crap were dealt with, too. But, if you'll do an honest investigation--as I have suggested a number of times--you'll find that [i]the underlying dynamic is not one that is intended to ensure that every voter who deserves to vote is given the chance to vote; [/i][b]the underlying dynamic is a variety of attempts to suppress the votes of certain demographics which tend to be unfavorable to the Republican party.[/b]

If you deny this, then either you have not reviewed the evidence very much (or well) or you are allowing yourself to be hornswoggled. In either case it makes me wonder just how much a person is really committed to the supposedly sacred idea of casting a ballot. Because, as I said to Vol an few pages back--you take these things as they come. [b]And this is what is happening now. [/b]If this were the 1840s then we'd be talking about the Democratic party cooping votes. If this were other periods in US history then we'd be talking about other means by which elections are gamed.

See the god-damned forest here and stop remaining only focused on the trees.
[/quote]

So what you are saying is, its good for the Republicans, and bad for the Democrats, to have rules that someone must prove they are who they say they are, before voting?

Ok I get it.

Your response is the same as Doomsday Preppers, members of the militia, and guys that wear tin foil hats. You believe strongly that by making people show an ID in order to vote will lead to several other things that will cause us citizens to lose our rights. I would probably in the same boat as you, if not such a common practice in society already. If the government wants to track you they can use a hundred different ways to do so. Did you have a Kroger Plus card? Do you have anything similar to that? Not only can you be tracked were you shop, but they can tell you exactly what you buy, how much you buy, and when you normally buy it. You can be tracked by your credit card usage along with many many other things. Parents think that it is a wise idea to implant a small chip in their kids so they can be tracked if they go missing. Well if your child isn't missing you can be tracked with them, not mention the kids grow up into adults. Many believe this is the beginning of the end because this is the so called mark of the devil. Really what it comes down to, making someone show an ID to prove themselves is nothing but an unavoidable future, and it is really not any different the hundreds of rules across the country.

[Jamie_B]

Lew quit being so damned naive


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351656224' post='1175809']
So what you are saying is, its good for the Republicans, and bad for the Democrats, to have rules that someone must prove they are who they say they are, before voting?

Ok I get it.
[/quote]

No, you don't. But that's okay. Plenty enough others do; hopefully it's enough to thwart this concerted attempt by a number of Astroturf groups to prevent legitimate voters from voting.

You're on the wrong side of history, my friend. It's an old playbook.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NLDih_5jAI[/media]

[Vol_Bengal]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1351639909' post='1175751']
If there was no "controversy" as you call it regarding election fraud, there would be no need for a Voter ID law, so my answer is no.
[/quote]

All I needed to know. Thank you for the response. You have much more innate trust in others than I do I suppose.

No, I'm not naive and think that this doesn't happen - it clearly does. I guess I'm a bit more skeptical of BOTH parties in attempts to fabricate votes or suppress votes. Anybody else care to weigh in on a simple yes or no question?

If machines were 100% legit, there wasn't an attempt to suppress votes, etc. (take all the other bullshit shenanigans out of it) do you see an issue with requiring each person that walks to the voting booth to provide some form of photo ID to receive their ballot?

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1351685878' post='1175830']
If machines were 100% legit, there wasn't an attempt to suppress votes, etc. (take all the other bullshit shenanigans out of it) do you see an issue with requiring each person that walks to the voting booth to provide some form of photo ID to receive their ballot?
[/quote]

Not taking into account certain unfortunate events on the "sidelines," do you think that, otherwise, Mrs. Lincoln enjoyed the play?

[Vol_Bengal]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351688439' post='1175855']
Not taking into account certain unfortunate events on the "sidelines," do you think that, otherwise, Mrs. Lincoln enjoyed the play?
[/quote]

I'm just asking you, your personal opinion on whether you think a person showing up at the polls should have to show some form of a photo ID to verify identity. Doesn't seem that difficult - I understand where you're going but all I'm asking is, provided none of that stuff happens do you think that would be necessary...

Don't misconstrue the question - a yes or no is simple enough. I've already said about 15 times that we all know all this other crap happens, not denying it. If you want to dodge it and not answer just say so - don't draw tangents into it.

But, to answer your question, yes. Your turn.

[Homer_Rice]

Actually, I have answered that question. Twice. Guess you are not paying attention.

Next Tuesday, I will walk down to the church where I vote. I'll cast my ballot. I won't be asked for an ID. That's because KY law provides for that under certain conditions--in this case because I am known to the workers at the poll. Otherwise, I might be asked to provide an ID.

But both you and I know that that isn't the real issue here. The real issue is that there one party is trying to prevent some legitimate voters from casting their vote.

So, my question to you is this: Why are you so obsessed with this stupid hypothetical question when there is real injustice to address?

[Vol_Bengal]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351699541' post='1175889']
But both you and I know that that isn't the real issue here. The real issue is that there one party is trying to prevent some legitimate voters from casting their vote.

So, my question to you is this: Why are you so obsessed with this stupid hypothetical question when there is real injustice to address?
[/quote]

As I clearly stated above I agree there are issues... this is simply curiosity as to how folks here feel about this specific issue. And, actually you didn't answer my question.

I'm sorry you feel that me asking where you stand on this specific issue without getting a run around answer is stupid. Not obsessed but it was a simple question - yet there continued to be hem and haw responses.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1351701064' post='1175898']
As I clearly stated above I agree there are issues... this is simply curiosity as to how folks here feel about this specific issue. And, actually you didn't answer my question.

I'm sorry you feel that me asking where you stand on this specific issue without getting a run around answer is stupid. Not obsessed but it was a simple question - yet there continued to be hem and haw responses.
[/quote]

Well, it is a simple question. It's been answered. It is also a question which diverts us from the main issues. Put it this way: If I were to accuse you of supporting latent racism--would you be offended? If I were to accuse you of supporting a political effort which is being muscled forward by the rich against the poor for the most part--would you be offended?

That is what is happening and to be focused on the red herring loss-leader issue of Voter ID is tantamount to being just that kind of a supporter. Certainly that would not be your personal intent, but it would be the practical result.

[Lewdog]

Oh lord have mercy, if in Kentucky it is already in place, why in the wide wide world of sports do you keep interjecting things into the argument that this shouldn't be a country wide law? Now I am starting to believe this is more of a constitutional problem that some states require you to show an ID during elections that have federal candidates, versus states that don't force you to show an ID. Quit contemplating and assuming problems you think could arise out of this situation and look at the for what it is. It's like condemning a person that buys a cigarette lighter will be an arsonist. Things don't always link A to B to C however inconvenient that might be.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351711300' post='1175958']
Oh lord have mercy, if in Kentucky it is already in place, why in the wide wide world of sports do you keep interjecting things into the argument that this shouldn't be a country wide law? Now I am starting to believe this is more of a constitutional problem that some states require you to show an ID during elections that have federal candidates, versus states that don't force you to show an ID. Quit contemplating and assuming problems you think could arise out of this situation and look at the for what it is. It's like condemning a person that buys a cigarette lighter will be an arsonist. Things don't always link A to B to C however inconvenient that might be.
[/quote]
I find your logic compelling. Therefore, I hereby renounce everything I have said in this thread. Clearly, I am mistaken.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351728499' post='1176041']
I find your logic compelling. Therefore, I hereby renounce everything I have said in this thread. Clearly, I am mistaken.
[/quote]

You don't wear sarcasm very well. I don't know what is more of a surprise, that you live in a state (Commonwealth, whatever) that has a voter ID law in place, yet you have problems with other states adopting the same law. I think the largest problem is, this law is left for the states to adopt and not a federal law. So you end up with a splattering of states across the country with different voter laws in place.

Next thing you know, people will have to say the pledge of allegiance in English in order to vote.

You asked me to see the forest past the trees...well what's the point of looking at the forest full of trees if they are all supposed to be treated equally?

[Homer_Rice]

You pose a very interesting question here.

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351729305' post='1176043']
You don't wear sarcasm very well. I don't know what is more of a surprise, that you live in a state (Commonwealth, whatever) that has a voter ID law in place, yet you have problems with other states adopting the same law. I think the largest problem is, this law is left for the states to adopt and not a federal law. So you end up with a splattering of states across the country with different voter laws in place.

Next thing you know, people will have to say the pledge of allegiance in English in order to vote.

You asked me to see the forest past the trees...well what's the point of looking at the forest full of trees if they are all supposed to be treated equally?
[/quote]

I'm thinking that if you can't beat 'em, hell, join 'em. So, If Polk hadn't poked Mexico in 1846, then it's quite likely that Lincoln would not have been defeated subsequently in the House of Reps. That being the case, the Civil War might never have been fought, thus this whole issue of equal people would still be an issue--except for the negro people who would still be slaves. Unless they were freed by some other means. They would be unequal. Unless they were freed by some other means.

Now, look at the implications of this. I assert that such a series of events would have pushed back the moon landing, possibly creating a Constitutional Crisis when Neil Armstrong, et al... would have found it very difficult to vote in the elections. And besides, even if they had absentee ballots, how would they be able to mail them back to be counted. Clearly unfair and against the laws of nature. Which would be moving slowly anyhow. Because--and we've all heard the phrase "like a slow boat to China"--well, it would take even longer than that for the pigeon wearing a gas mask to fly back from the moon with their votes. As a result, the trees in the forest would start a War on Terror against the Dirt Liberation Army.

I hope I've made my point clear. Be happy to answer any questions.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351731566' post='1176055']
You pose a very interesting question here.



I'm thinking that if you can't beat 'em, hell, join 'em. So, If Polk hadn't poked Mexico in 1846, then it's quite likely that Lincoln would not have been defeated subsequently in the House of Reps. That being the case, the Civil War might never have been fought, thus this whole issue of equal people would still be an issue--except for the negro people who would still be slaves. Unless they were freed by some other means. They would be unequal. Unless they were freed by some other means.

Now, look at the implications of this. I assert that such a series of events would have pushed back the moon landing, possibly creating a Constitutional Crisis when Neil Armstrong, et al... would have found it very difficult to vote in the elections. And besides, even if they had absentee ballots, how would they be able to mail them back to be counted. Clearly unfair and against the laws of nature. Which would be moving slowly anyhow. Because--and we've all heard the phrase "like a slow boat to China"--well, it would take even longer than that for the pigeon wearing a gas mask to fly back from the moon with their votes. As a result, the trees in the forest would start a War on Terror against the Dirt Liberation Army.

I hope I've made my point clear. Be happy to answer any questions.
[/quote]

What's to answer? You just took one event and created an entire negative argument that led back to a situation in your favor. The world isn't run on past events that didn't happen. Pretty much any of us can go back to a point in our life that a different decision could put us in a totally different position than we are today. Just to amuse you, you do realize slavery wasn't the main reason for the Civil War? It was about state rights and that states could have their own set of laws, and these laws could not be trumped by federal laws. This meant that if states made slavery legal, Lincoln and the guys in Washington could not make slavery illegal across the nation, those disregarding the states law. Slavery just happened to be the most controversial law to date. So to think if someone else was President other than Lincoln, the Civil War still could have happened.

We aren't playing a game of "what if." You can't see the future 10, 20, or 30 years down the road when things are changing from day to day, especially in politics.

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351731566' post='1176055']
You pose a very interesting question here.



I'm thinking that if you can't beat 'em, hell, join 'em. So, If Polk hadn't poked Mexico in 1846, then it's quite likely that Lincoln would not have been defeated subsequently in the House of Reps. That being the case, the Civil War might never have been fought, thus this whole issue of equal people would still be an issue--except for the negro people who would still be slaves. Unless they were freed by some other means. They would be unequal. Unless they were freed by some other means.

Now, look at the implications of this. I assert that such a series of events would have pushed back the moon landing, possibly creating a Constitutional Crisis when Neil Armstrong, et al... would have found it very difficult to vote in the elections. And besides, even if they had absentee ballots, how would they be able to mail them back to be counted. Clearly unfair and against the laws of nature. Which would be moving slowly anyhow. Because--and we've all heard the phrase "like a slow boat to China"--well, it would take even longer than that for the pigeon wearing a gas mask to fly back from the moon with their votes. As a result, the trees in the forest would start a War on Terror against the Dirt Liberation Army.

I hope I've made my point clear. Be happy to answer any questions.
[/quote]

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1351731566' post='1176055']
You pose a very interesting question here.



I'm thinking that if you can't beat 'em, hell, join 'em. So, If Polk hadn't poked Mexico in 1846, then it's quite likely that Lincoln would not have been defeated subsequently in the House of Reps. That being the case, the Civil War might never have been fought, thus this whole issue of equal people would still be an issue--except for the negro people who would still be slaves. Unless they were freed by some other means. They would be unequal. Unless they were freed by some other means.

Now, look at the implications of this. I assert that such a series of events would have pushed back the moon landing, possibly creating a Constitutional Crisis when Neil Armstrong, et al... would have found it very difficult to vote in the elections. And besides, even if they had absentee ballots, how would they be able to mail them back to be counted. Clearly unfair and against the laws of nature. Which would be moving slowly anyhow. Because--and we've all heard the phrase "like a slow boat to China"--well, it would take even longer than that for the pigeon wearing a gas mask to fly back from the moon with their votes. As a result, the trees in the forest would start a War on Terror against the Dirt Liberation Army.

I hope I've made my point clear. Be happy to answer any questions.
[/quote]


[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351732610' post='1176065']
What's to answer? You just took one event and created an entire negative argument that led back to a situation in your favor. The world isn't run on past events that didn't happen. Pretty much any of us can go back to a point in our life that a different decision could put us in a totally different position than we are today. Just to amuse you, you do realize slavery wasn't the main reason for the Civil War? It was about state rights and that states could have their own set of laws, and these laws could not be trumped by federal laws. This meant that if states made slavery legal, Lincoln and the guys in Washington could not make slavery illegal across the nation, those disregarding the states law. Slavery just happened to be the most controversial law to date. So to think if someone else was President other than Lincoln, the Civil War still could have happened.

We aren't playing a game of "what if." You can't see the future 10, 20, or 30 years down the road when things are changing from day to day, especially in politics.
[/quote]

This is quite possibly the single most awesome exchange I have ever read on these forums..

Bravo! Homer, well done!

[T-Dub]

[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain![/size][/font][/color]


[b] Search For Mythical Voter Fraud Leads To False Sighting In Ohio[/b]

[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
Right-wing activists bent on exposing the alleged epidemic of in-person voter fraud suffered a major misfire over the weekend when anonymous pollwatchers set off alarms over groups of Somalis getting rides to a central Ohio early voting center.[/size][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
Many members of the large Somali community in and around Columbus are U.S. citizens and therefore have the constitutional right to vote. But that didn't stop the conservative Human Events website from warning of "troubling and questionable activities" -- or the Drudge Report getting its readers exercised about "Vanloads of Somalians driven to the polls in Ohio."[/size][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
The [url="http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/26/is-voter-fraud-being-committed-in-ohio/"]Human Events story[/url] quoted two anonymous pollwatchers complaining of "Somalis who cannot speak English" arriving in groups, being given a slate card by Democratic party workers outside the polling place, then coming in and being instructed by Somali interpreters on how to vote. The article also raised the question of "whether a non-English speaking person is an American citizen."[/size][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
One regular contributor to the right-wing [url="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/are_somali_pirates_voting_in_ohio.html"]American Thinker[/url] website likened the voters to "Somali pirates" being used by Ohio Democrats to "hijack the election."[/size][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
Somali leaders in central Ohio said the charges in the article were upsetting as well as unfounded.[/size][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
"They shouldn't single out the Somalis," said Hassan Omar, head of the Somali Community Association in Ohio. "That's the American dream; exercising the freedom of voting."[/size][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
Omar said that only those Somalis who are citizens register to vote. "There's no cheating. [b]This is scare tactics[/b], to be honest with you," he said. ([i]emphasis added[/i])[/size][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]
[url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/voter-fraud-false-sighting-ohio_n_2050768.html?utm_hp_ref=tw"]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/voter-fraud-false-sighting-ohio_n_2050768.html?utm_hp_ref=tw[/url][/size][/font][/color]

[Lewdog]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1351801713' post='1176264']

[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain![/size][/font][/color]


[b] Search For Mythical Voter Fraud Leads To False Sighting In Ohio[/b]


[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]Right-wing activists bent on exposing the alleged epidemic of in-person voter fraud suffered a major misfire over the weekend when anonymous pollwatchers set off alarms over groups of Somalis getting rides to a central Ohio early voting center.[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]Many members of the large Somali community in and around Columbus are U.S. citizens and therefore have the constitutional right to vote. But that didn't stop the conservative Human Events website from warning of "troubling and questionable activities" -- or the Drudge Report getting its readers exercised about "Vanloads of Somalians driven to the polls in Ohio."[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]The [url="http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/26/is-voter-fraud-being-committed-in-ohio/"]Human Events story[/url] quoted two anonymous pollwatchers complaining of "Somalis who cannot speak English" arriving in groups, being given a slate card by Democratic party workers outside the polling place, then coming in and being instructed by Somali interpreters on how to vote. The article also raised the question of "whether a non-English speaking person is an American citizen."[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]One regular contributor to the right-wing [url="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/are_somali_pirates_voting_in_ohio.html"]American Thinker[/url] website likened the voters to "Somali pirates" being used by Ohio Democrats to "hijack the election."[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]Somali leaders in central Ohio said the charges in the article were upsetting as well as unfounded.[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]"They shouldn't single out the Somalis," said Hassan Omar, head of the Somali Community Association in Ohio. "That's the American dream; exercising the freedom of voting."[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4]Omar said that only those Somalis who are citizens register to vote. "There's no cheating. [b]This is scare tactics[/b], to be honest with you," he said. ([i]emphasis added[/i])[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif][size=4][url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/voter-fraud-false-sighting-ohio_n_2050768.html?utm_hp_ref=tw"]http://www.huffingto...l?utm_hp_ref=tw[/url][/size][/font][/color]
[/quote]

Something similar to this happened in Kentucky. A friend of one of the candidates on the ticket, was driving to nursing homes and taking them to polling sites. They found it to be illegal because the transportation was provided by someone that had a vested interest in the election. It was ruled that transportation to the polling site equated to buying votes. So if either party can find that the person driving the bus is linked to any certain party it could be against the law.

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1351802193' post='1176269']
Something similar to this happened in Kentucky. A friend of one of the candidates on the ticket, was driving to nursing homes and taking them to polling sites. They found it to be illegal because the transportation was provided by someone that had a vested interest in the election. It was ruled that transportation to the polling site equated to buying votes. So if either party can find that the person driving the bus is linked to any certain party it could be against the law.
[/quote]

I don't think that's illegal but hey, whatever keeps people from asking awkward questions about who owns the voting machines. There are people who speak other languages better than english casting votes!