Nightmare scenario?

by Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ Posted 2012/10/02 00:24:59

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes. This is dangerous.	82 votes	52%
	No. Nothing to see here. Move on.	60 votes	38%
	Hey--you never know.	17 votes	11%

More polls by Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆

Dwight 2012/10/16 15:05:55

No. Nothing to see here. Move on.

1; Just because there are dead people on the voter roles does not mean they actually vote. In fact there is no indication that they did. It is a red herring.

2; There is no proof that voter fraud has ever happened in any significant numbers.

3; The Executive order is the same one that is signed by every President. It just explains the "chain-of-command". I freaked out when Bush signed one just like it.

reply
S. Gompers 2012/10/03 17:01:01

Yes. This is dangerous.

+1
The dead shall rise again!!!

reply
dr blais 2012/10/03 04:20:08
Næthan Æterna 2012/10/02 21:30:24

Hey--you never know.

+1
IF I were a betting man, I'd bet that more fraud goes on than what is being recorded.

reply
CHUCK 2012/10/02 20:55:57 (edited)

Yes. This is dangerous.

+2

reply
dr blais to CHUCK 2012/10/03 04:24:56
CHUCK to dr blais 2012/10/04 00:20:33

+1
I LIKED SARAH NO GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE ON A NATIONAL LEVEL,,LOOK AT ALL THE ONES THAT DO
ANY WOMAN THAT CAN PUT DINNER ON THE TABLE WITH A RIFLE CAN T BE ALL THAT BAD....ROMNEY WONT LISTEN TO COMMON FOLK..

reply
mk, Smartass Oracle 2012/10/02 19:10:01

Yes. This is dangerous.

+1
One party rule

reply
dr blais to mk, Sma... 2012/10/03 04:21:01
dr blais to dr blais 2012/10/03 04:21:46
sbtbill 2012/10/02 19:03:45

Hey--you never know.

+1
I'm sure there is some from both sides. My guess is it is a lot less of a problem then dishonest county clerks

reply
Magus BN-0 2012/10/02 18:50:02

No. Nothing to see here. Move on.

+1
The issue it's "dead people on the voter rolls", but the fact that Republicans are falsely claiming that many people are dead in order to remove actual voters from the rolls. And no, voter fraud is not happening. Republicans are lying about voter fraud to aid in their voter suppression effort.

reply
Næthan ... to Magus BN-0 2012/10/02 20:45:02 (edited)

+1
Wait, you just said that voter fraud is not happening, yet Republicans are lying to purposely remove actual voters and using other voter suppression tactics? Um, this is pretty obvious, but that sounds like voter fraud.

It is a real thing, look into Acorn more.

reply
mich52 to Næthan ... 2012/10/02 21:24:14

+1
ACORN was Voter Registration Fraud, they are different actual in-person voter fraud is miniscule..

reply
Næthan ... to mich52 2012/10/02 21:28:12 (edited)

+1
Ah, yes, still fraud, but yes. What I find interesting, and this is just my thought here, people will commit any crime: I saw someone steal a shoelace once, for no reason. They did it just to do it. What is stopping the Human Race from committing more fraud, on any account, than what is actually recorded?

You know, like the amount of rapes claimed vs. the amount of rapes actually committed--sort of like that. I don't believe there's a huge amount of voter (in general) fraud, but I don't think there's only been 10 cases in the last however many years.

reply
mich52 to Næthan ... 2012/10/02 22:08:33

I don't know the exact amount Brennen Center is the number one source on fraud.. One there is no reason for these laws other then to disenfranchise voters.. So you want pro-active laws? Lets make a law then wait for the reason for them..

reply
Næthan ... to mich52 2012/10/02 22:16:03

Whatever the case, fraud reduction or vote suppression, I certainly DON'T want another Government Agency birthed to create and enforce these supposed voter I.D. cards.

reply
Temlako... to Næthan ... 2012/10/02 22:18:13

No need for that. The Division of Elections would handle it.

reply
Magus BN-0 to Næthan ... 2012/10/03 00:14:11

Voter suppression is completely different from voter fraud. Voter fraud means creating fake votes to be counted. Voter suppression means preventing people who wouldn't vote for you from voting at all.

reply
Næthan ... to Magus BN-0 2012/10/07 18:37:17

+1
I know the difference. I was only saying that I want neither and I certainly don't think another Government Beuracracy is the answer...

reply
Lanikai 2012/10/02 17:49:57

Yes. This is dangerous.

+1
Anyone not bright enough to SEE clearly that this man is a dictator WAITING to seize power is a moron.

reply
Indigo Minded 2012/10/02 16:59:01

Hey--you never know.

+2

and we think the dead have no say in this election. You people are necrophobes...

reply
SimpleAmerican BN-0 2012/10/02 15:42:58

Yes. This is dangerous.

+3
Years ago, I was an election official (election judge) and during a break for coffee and elderly lady approached me and told me to look outside at a table set up by Acorn, in violation of precinct and polling center rules not allowing any partisan activity within site of the polling station. When I approached them, they had pieces of mail on the table and when I asked them what they were for they began packing up. The elderly lady said they were handing out pieces of mail for people to use to "prove" their identity and address inside the poll center. It occurred to me the mail I saw were utility and phone bills, which at the time could be used, but your name still had to be on our list as registered. Well if people have mail from the precinct that the person who rightfully owned the mail was registered, the person with the illegal mail could vote. In the same day, several hours later a person appeared only with a piece of mail, the name on the utility bill did not show up on the voter list. However, my democratic counterpart, against the law, asked the person who they were going to vote for. When the person replied the Dem ticket, he said I can register you right here. I had to object and we had to call in the party attorneys, I also called the Sheriffs office. The man in question fled, but several others were taken to jail for having "stolen" US mail in their possession. So this happens all of the time!

reply
iamco2000 2012/10/02 15:35:31

Hey--you never know.

+1
EO 11051 was actually signed: September 27, 1962 by JFK and is actually no longer even in effect:

Executive Order 11051
Prescribing responsibilities of the Office of Emergency Planning in the Executive Office of the President

Signed: September 27, 1962
Federal Register page and date: 27 FR 9683; October 2, 1962
Amends: Proc. 3279, March 10, 1959; EO 10242, May 8, 1951; EO 10260, June 27, 1951; EO 10296, October 2, 1951; EO 10312, December 10, 1951; EO 10346, April 17, 1952; EO 10421, December 31, 1952; EO 10427, January 16, 1953; EO 10480, August 14, 1953; EO 10494, October 14, 1953; EO 10529, April 22, 1954; EO 10582, December 17, 1954; EO 10601, March 21, 1955; EO 10634, August 25, 1955; EO 10660, February 15, 1956; EO 10705, April 17, 1957; EO 10737, October 29, 1957; EO 10789, November 14, 1958; EO 10900, January 5, 1961; EO 10952, July 20, 1961; EO 10958, August 14, 1961
Revokes: EO 9981, July 26, 1948; EO 10219, February 28, 1951; EO 10269, July 6, 1951; EO 10438, March 13, 1953; EO 10461, June 17, 1953; EO 10524, March 31, 1954; EO 10539, June 22, 1954; EO 10638, October 10, 1955; EO 10773, July 1, 1958; EO 10782, September 6, 1958; EO 10902, January 9, 1961
Amended by: EO 11075, January 15, 1963; EO 11556, September 4, 1970; EO 12046, March 27, 1978
...

EO 11051 was actually signed: September 27, 1962 by JFK and is actually no longer even in effect:

Executive Order 11051
Prescribing responsibilities of the Office of Emergency Planning in the Executive Office of the President

Signed: September 27, 1962
Federal Register page and date: 27 FR 9683; October 2, 1962
Amends: Proc. 3279, March 10, 1959; EO 10242, May 8, 1951; EO 10260, June 27, 1951; EO 10296, October 2, 1951; EO 10312, December 10, 1951; EO 10346, April 17, 1952; EO 10421, December 31, 1952; EO 10427, January 16, 1953; EO 10480, August 14, 1953; EO 10494, October 14, 1953; EO 10529, April 22, 1954; EO 10582, December 17, 1954; EO 10601, March 21, 1955; EO 10634, August 25, 1955; EO 10660, February 15, 1956; EO 10705, April 17, 1957; EO 10737, October 29, 1957; EO 10789, November 14, 1958; EO 10900, January 5, 1961; EO 10952, July 20, 1961; EO 10958, August 14, 1961
Revokes: EO 9981, July 26, 1948; EO 10219, February 28, 1951; EO 10269, July 6, 1951; EO 10438, March 13, 1953; EO 10461, June 17, 1953; EO 10524, March 31, 1954; EO 10539, June 22, 1954; EO 10638, October 10, 1955; EO 10773, July 1, 1958; EO 10782, September 6, 1958; EO 10902, January 9, 1961
Amended by: EO 11075, January 15, 1963; EO 11556, September 4, 1970; EO 12046, March 27, 1978
Revoked in part by: EO 11725, June 27, 1973
Revoked by: EO 12148, July 20, 1979
See: EO 10995, February 16, 1962; EO 11030, June 19, 1962; Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1958; Memorandum of February 9, 1962; EO 11610, July 22, 1971; EO 11725, June 27, 1973
NOTE: See Public Law 94-412 (90 Stat. 1255; 50 U.S.C. 1601), which terminates, effective September 14, 1978, all powers and authorities, except those expressly cited, possessed by the President and/or other Federal officials as a result of any declaration of a national emergency in effect on September 14, 1976

http://www.archives.gov/feder...

Grace to you, Glory to God!
(more)

reply
ZenerSix 2012/10/02 15:18:54 (edited)

Yes. This is dangerous.

+4
The most important powers have already been seized. This plot isn't a secret but a fabulous cause called government and it goes all the way back to the copyright clause of the US constitution. It has since been gradually progressing with the passage of the Income Tax and Federal Reserve Acts of 1913, the 16th amendment, the New Deal programs of the 1930's, and the recent Patriot Act.

Some people are comforted by the peace and order that the centralization of power brings. But history shows that governments never have enough power. They just keep taking it until there's nothing left.

reply
Carol 2012/10/02 15:12:56

No. Nothing to see here. Move on.

+2
Even if you tell a lie often, it still does not make it. True.

reply
mich52 2012/10/02 14:56:36 (edited)

No. Nothing to see here. Move on.

+3
In-person voting is virtually non-existant.. Dead people don't go to the voting booths.. But hey keep pushing this lie sooner or later the majority will buy it...

You're pretty naive..

http://www.washingtonmonthly....

By Steve Benen

December 07, 2011 10:00 AM Conviction in GOP voter-suppression scheme

Last November, there was a fairly competitive gubernatorial race in Maryland. Late on Election Day, robocalls targeted more than 100,000 Democratic households, telling voters to “relax” and not bother voting because Dems were going to win. It was one of the most blatant examples of GOP voter-suppression tactics in a long while.
Fortunately, those responsible got caught. Yesterday, a jury convicted the Republican ringleader.

Former Thaddeus McCotter staffer pleads no contest in petition fraud ... Sep 19, 2012 ... One of four former staffers to U.S. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter charged in the
petition fraud scandal that drove him into early retirement pleaded no ...

Michigan House Speaker Faces Election Fraud Allegation « CBS ... Aug 28, 2012 ... A Lansing judge has been appointed as a one-person grand jury to investigate
allegations of election fraud against Bolger and the state ...

reply
Picasso's Cat 2012/10/02 14:39:59

No. Nothing to see here. Move on.

+2
First of all, dead people have never elected anyone to any office.
Second, there is no plot, if there were we would still have the same president we had in 1970. What we do have is manipulation of the issues and illusions for voters to be amazed at.
You know why there is little being done to take dead people off the voter registration rolls ???????
Becaues that's what they want you looking in too!!!
And why you are spending your time doing that, they know you will be keeping your nose out of the real issues that affect America, like both democrat and republican parties being corrupt and an independent candidate being needed to restore America back to her roots.
Manufactured problems for stupid people to investigate, while the two party logic put's yet another dumbass in office.

reply
Freedom... to Picasso... 2012/10/02 15:47:01

+1

reply
dispatcher 2012/10/02 14:29:35

Yes. This is dangerous.

+4
Voter FRAUD IT'S THE LIBERAL THING TO DO.

reply
mich52 to dispatcher 2012/10/02 15:04:17

+2
You're pretty naive..

http://www.washingtonmonthly....

By Steve Benen

December 07, 2011 10:00 AM Conviction in GOP voter-suppression scheme

Last November, there was a fairly competitive gubernatorial race in Maryland. Late on Election Day, robocalls targeted more than 100,000 Democratic households, telling voters to “relax” and not bother voting because Dems were going to win. It was one of the most blatant examples of GOP voter-suppression tactics in a long while.
Fortunately, those responsible got caught. Yesterday, a jury convicted the Republican ringleader.

Former Thaddeus McCotter staffer pleads no contest in petition fraud ... Sep 19, 2012 ... One of four former staffers to U.S. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter charged in the
petition fraud scandal that drove him into early retirement pleaded no ...

Michigan House Speaker Faces Election Fraud Allegation « CBS ... Aug 28, 2012 ... A Lansing judge has been appointed as a one-person grand jury to investigate
allegations of election fraud against Bolger and the state ...

reply
dispatcher to mich52 2012/10/02 15:16:05

+4

reply
mich52 to dispatcher 2012/10/02 15:31:34

+1
Voter registration fraud is not voter fraud..
Damn you just learned something today..

reply
Magus BN-0 to mich52 2012/10/02 18:51:28

+1
They're not naive at all. They're just lying.

reply
mich52 to Magus BN-0 2012/10/02 21:21:09

+1
I'd have to agree with you..

reply
Yo'Adrienne..AFCL 2012/10/02 13:36:15

Yes. This is dangerous.

+5
This aspect of the election is the one that scares me the most.......bundled with the fact that the votes are going to be counted in SPAIN....and the ARMED FORCES aren't getting their Absentee ballots in time..........This voter fraud thing is BIG!!!!!! and it's the ONLY way that Ovomit might win!

reply
WGN 2012/10/02 13:18:41
Angel 2012/10/02 13:07:28

Yes. This is dangerous.

+5
NC alone had 35,000 dead voters still voting...

reply
Dwight to Angel 2012/10/02 13:39:35

what if the link to that story?

reply
Lanikai to Dwight 2012/10/02 17:52:19

+1
http://www.charlotteobserver....

From the Charlotte Observer.

reply