 |
Re: Undocumented Democrats Log New Mileage
Author: Nemesis of "El Trollio"
Date: 01-25-2024 - 14:07
>>> Alleged smoke for a non-existent fire. The only way they can become voters, GOPlican't or Dem, is by becoming citizens, which is a long, drawn out process that takes years once you're granted residency in the US.
>> They're heavily into stealing the identities of other people and then it's easy to get ballots sent to them.
>And they're hiding under your bed, waiting for you to go to sleep, at which time they're going crawl out and do nasty things to you.
Okay, wise ass. Maybe one day one of your family members will be killed by an illegal alien drunk driver who's been deported eight times. Maybe your wife or daughter will be raped or murdered by one. Have you noticed that the biased, left-leaning, corrupt Main Stream Media is as much in favor of illegal immigration as you are? Libs who love illegal immigration treat "Angel Moms" like excrement. You're in favor of illegal immigration so I'm sure you wouldn't give an "Angel Mom" the time of day.
[www.angelfamilies.org]
[www.opentohope.com]
Take one to lunch sometime and maybe you'll have a different perspective. Maybe your cocky attitude will change. But I doubt it.
> Why is it that Barry Soetoro deported more of these individuals in each of his terms than President Trump did in his one term? Oh wait a minute, President Trump needed cheap domestics and grounds keepers for Mar-a-Lardo, not to mention the Poles he used to build one of his highrises in NYC (and failed to pay them).
Let's see some sources for these allegations. CNN and MSDNC don't count.
>>>> This explains why the Democrat party insists that voters don't have to show photo I.D.
>>> Phooey.t
>> Okay, wise ass, explain to us why the Democrat party works so hard at making sure voters don't have to show photo I.D. This oughtta be good. Let me get some popcorn and pull up a chair.
> You have to show proof of citizenship (and residence) in order to register to vote. Once this is done, you appear on the voter rolls. What you GOPlican'ts want is to make this necessary for each and every election, which is voter suppression.
That keeps the voter rolls cleaner. Registering to vote is not a big deal. Showing a photo I.D. at the voting center shouldn't be a big deal, but the Dems want to make it that way. I now have to show a photo I.D. at the doctors office. Why? Because there are too many people swapping around health insurance cards. You have to show a photo I.D. when you take a SAT or bar exam. Why? Because there's too many people showing up taking tests on behalf of other people.
>>> and that they can ask for a "provisional ballot"
>> Not unless they're citizens.
How do you know? Let's see a source for your assertions. You're so naive you probably think that no one has ever cheated on the DMV drivers license test.
>>> It should be offered only to military personnel, those who are laid up in hospitals and a few other selected applications.
>> So people like me who had jobs which spent time out of town on an unpredictable basis should be denied an absentee ballot? Talk about ballot rigging . . .
When I said "a few other selected applications" that would involve someone in your situation.
> If it turned out that I was home on election day, I would walk to the poling place up the street and insert my ballot in the same dropbox where the ballots cast at the polling place were collected. The precinct workers always politely declined to do this on my behalf. My name no longer appeared on the list of those eligible to vote at this polling place.
We should go back to voting the way we voted back in the 1960s or 1970s. It wasn't until the Dems started changing all the specifics of how we vote that things started getting _ ucked up.
>> The easier you make it for people to vote,
> The easier it is for people to vote against you, which is really what you're worried about.
You need to watch this YouTube video
[youtu.be]
where you can see Democrats moaning and b i t c h i n g as much as Republicans about _ucked up elections.
>>>> voting-by-ballot harvester
>>>> Which is illegal.
>> Wrong. It's done in California and several other states --- all blue of course.
>Are you accusing the USPS of ballot harvesting?
No dipwad. It's 100% legal in California and it doesn't involve the USPS. Do some research.
>>>> voting-by-dropbox.
>>> Which is not much different than voting by absentee ballot. In fact, you can deposit an absentee ballot in a drop box.
>> Very susceptable to fraud, and that's why Democrats love it so much.
> Voting by drop box is no different that mail in voting, which by your twisted logic is the USPS engaging in ballot harvesting.
B u l l s h i t. We won't have honest elections until we go back to the way we voted 40 or 50 years ago. Explain to me why all the changes were made. Convenience? _uck convenience. Honest elections are more important.
>>>> The Democrats want to make it as easy as possible for anyone to vote who wants to and if anyone starts questioning the eligibility of a voter, that is viewed as "voter suppression".
>>> GOPlican voting shenanigans are voter suppression.
>> You're pivoting. Another lame-ass response. If anyone's good at "voting shenanigans", it's the Dems.
> Then why all the GOPlican shenanigans with reapportionment and what-not?
So the GOP has reapportionment and the Dems have dead people, ficticious people and illegal aliens vote.
[www.chron.com]
>>>> The cheating tactics worked like a charm four years ago.
>>> Some sixty court rulings disagree with you.
>> The courts ran away from the issue -- like they'll probably do again.
>You're just sore that they didn't rule the way you wanted them to. Courts can be funny in this respect.
[twitter.com]
>>>> The Republicans will have to hold some more hearings
>>> In order to find some paltry excuse to impeach Biden.
>> Tit for tat, if nothing else. How about money laundering with the Chinese?
>Are you referring to President Trump and his son in law?
Joe and Hunter Biden's problems are increasing and President Trump's problems are decreasing. Fani Willis' case is so problem and scandal-plagued that it will probably be tossed completely any day now.
>> How about allowing the country to be invaded by MILLIONS of people?
> Hasn't happened, although I sure you'll swear up and down on a stack of bibles that it has.
It has. Now that brain-damaged John Fetterman is recovering from all of his medical problems, he's turning into a conservative. That's probably giving you a petic ulcer.
[vod.foxnews.com]
>> How about defying SCOTUS rulings?
> Much as you'd like to think they do, the Dems don't defy judges like President Trump does.
Wrong again.
[www.washingtonexaminer.com]
Just watch the YouTube one of the crybaby Democrats. Can you do THAT much?
[youtu.be]
This topic sure got you off your ass and prompted you to write more than "Yadda Yadda Yadda." Like John Fetterman, it blows me away that you're in favor of illegal immigration.
>> They're heavily into stealing the identities of other people and then it's easy to get ballots sent to them.
>And they're hiding under your bed, waiting for you to go to sleep, at which time they're going crawl out and do nasty things to you.
Okay, wise ass. Maybe one day one of your family members will be killed by an illegal alien drunk driver who's been deported eight times. Maybe your wife or daughter will be raped or murdered by one. Have you noticed that the biased, left-leaning, corrupt Main Stream Media is as much in favor of illegal immigration as you are? Libs who love illegal immigration treat "Angel Moms" like excrement. You're in favor of illegal immigration so I'm sure you wouldn't give an "Angel Mom" the time of day.
[www.angelfamilies.org]
[www.opentohope.com]
Take one to lunch sometime and maybe you'll have a different perspective. Maybe your cocky attitude will change. But I doubt it.
> Why is it that Barry Soetoro deported more of these individuals in each of his terms than President Trump did in his one term? Oh wait a minute, President Trump needed cheap domestics and grounds keepers for Mar-a-Lardo, not to mention the Poles he used to build one of his highrises in NYC (and failed to pay them).
Let's see some sources for these allegations. CNN and MSDNC don't count.
>>>> This explains why the Democrat party insists that voters don't have to show photo I.D.
>>> Phooey.t
>> Okay, wise ass, explain to us why the Democrat party works so hard at making sure voters don't have to show photo I.D. This oughtta be good. Let me get some popcorn and pull up a chair.
> You have to show proof of citizenship (and residence) in order to register to vote. Once this is done, you appear on the voter rolls. What you GOPlican'ts want is to make this necessary for each and every election, which is voter suppression.
That keeps the voter rolls cleaner. Registering to vote is not a big deal. Showing a photo I.D. at the voting center shouldn't be a big deal, but the Dems want to make it that way. I now have to show a photo I.D. at the doctors office. Why? Because there are too many people swapping around health insurance cards. You have to show a photo I.D. when you take a SAT or bar exam. Why? Because there's too many people showing up taking tests on behalf of other people.
>>> and that they can ask for a "provisional ballot"
>> Not unless they're citizens.
How do you know? Let's see a source for your assertions. You're so naive you probably think that no one has ever cheated on the DMV drivers license test.
>>> It should be offered only to military personnel, those who are laid up in hospitals and a few other selected applications.
>> So people like me who had jobs which spent time out of town on an unpredictable basis should be denied an absentee ballot? Talk about ballot rigging . . .
When I said "a few other selected applications" that would involve someone in your situation.
> If it turned out that I was home on election day, I would walk to the poling place up the street and insert my ballot in the same dropbox where the ballots cast at the polling place were collected. The precinct workers always politely declined to do this on my behalf. My name no longer appeared on the list of those eligible to vote at this polling place.
We should go back to voting the way we voted back in the 1960s or 1970s. It wasn't until the Dems started changing all the specifics of how we vote that things started getting _ ucked up.
>> The easier you make it for people to vote,
> The easier it is for people to vote against you, which is really what you're worried about.
You need to watch this YouTube video
[youtu.be]
where you can see Democrats moaning and b i t c h i n g as much as Republicans about _ucked up elections.
>>>> voting-by-ballot harvester
>>>> Which is illegal.
>> Wrong. It's done in California and several other states --- all blue of course.
>Are you accusing the USPS of ballot harvesting?
No dipwad. It's 100% legal in California and it doesn't involve the USPS. Do some research.
>>>> voting-by-dropbox.
>>> Which is not much different than voting by absentee ballot. In fact, you can deposit an absentee ballot in a drop box.
>> Very susceptable to fraud, and that's why Democrats love it so much.
> Voting by drop box is no different that mail in voting, which by your twisted logic is the USPS engaging in ballot harvesting.
B u l l s h i t. We won't have honest elections until we go back to the way we voted 40 or 50 years ago. Explain to me why all the changes were made. Convenience? _uck convenience. Honest elections are more important.
>>>> The Democrats want to make it as easy as possible for anyone to vote who wants to and if anyone starts questioning the eligibility of a voter, that is viewed as "voter suppression".
>>> GOPlican voting shenanigans are voter suppression.
>> You're pivoting. Another lame-ass response. If anyone's good at "voting shenanigans", it's the Dems.
> Then why all the GOPlican shenanigans with reapportionment and what-not?
So the GOP has reapportionment and the Dems have dead people, ficticious people and illegal aliens vote.
[www.chron.com]
>>>> The cheating tactics worked like a charm four years ago.
>>> Some sixty court rulings disagree with you.
>> The courts ran away from the issue -- like they'll probably do again.
>You're just sore that they didn't rule the way you wanted them to. Courts can be funny in this respect.
[twitter.com]
>>>> The Republicans will have to hold some more hearings
>>> In order to find some paltry excuse to impeach Biden.
>> Tit for tat, if nothing else. How about money laundering with the Chinese?
>Are you referring to President Trump and his son in law?
Joe and Hunter Biden's problems are increasing and President Trump's problems are decreasing. Fani Willis' case is so problem and scandal-plagued that it will probably be tossed completely any day now.
>> How about allowing the country to be invaded by MILLIONS of people?
> Hasn't happened, although I sure you'll swear up and down on a stack of bibles that it has.
It has. Now that brain-damaged John Fetterman is recovering from all of his medical problems, he's turning into a conservative. That's probably giving you a petic ulcer.
[vod.foxnews.com]
>> How about defying SCOTUS rulings?
> Much as you'd like to think they do, the Dems don't defy judges like President Trump does.
Wrong again.
[www.washingtonexaminer.com]
Just watch the YouTube one of the crybaby Democrats. Can you do THAT much?
[youtu.be]
This topic sure got you off your ass and prompted you to write more than "Yadda Yadda Yadda." Like John Fetterman, it blows me away that you're in favor of illegal immigration.
