It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Judge rejects Jill Stein's request for hand recount in Wisconsin

page: 2
29
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: jonnywhite
a reply to: MotherMayEye
What do you say regarding this:
www.snopes.com - FALSE: California Passed a Law Allowing Undocumented Immigrants to Vote in Federal Elections...

Can't have it both ways.


Uh, yeah. You can.

That Snopes story is in reference to an automatic voter registration law that's carried out through the DMV.

Per the usual, Snopes set up a strawman argument that people who don't do any bit of their own research *thinks* means that California has every sort of safety net in place to keep ineligible people from voting.

Go back and read what I wrote. I was very specific in saying that an ineligible person would need to chose to REGISTER TO VOTE BY MAIL.

The Snopes story sets up the strawman claim that "California passed a law to allow undocumented immigrants to vote."

No. They haven't done that. But what I described is how an undocumented immigrant COULD easily register to vote FRAUDULENTLY and vote FRAUDULENTLY without raising any red flags in the system due to weak, exploitable federal and state voting laws.

Snopes? Please. What a joke they are.
edit on 30-11-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Exactly. Snopes' style tends to be to present the claim in such a way that it can be easily labeled "false." In fact, many of the claims labelled false have some basis in truth, and would be more correctly categorized as "exaggerated" or "partially true."
Politically, they have a noticeable leftward bias. This was very obvious back in the Bill Clinton days.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Yes. As if anyone is really concerned that "California passed a law to allow undocumented immigrants to vote."

Note their 'example' of the claim:


EXAMPLE: [Collected via Email, February 2016]

I seen several articles on FaceBook stating California passed laws allowing illegals to vote in elections including federal elections. Is this true?


I bet they made that up entirely to avoid the real claim which they cannot debunk: Federal and state voter registration and voter ID laws are too weak and easily exploited -- California included.


("I seen..." God, they even made their made up 'example' sound especially stupid, too.)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
They should also use the method in Iraq that was dipping of the finger in ink so they couldn't go elsewhere and vote. That would at minimum stop multiple voting and out of state voting.

But yea, this is ridiculous as it is so obvious that there is no reason for Jill Stein to request recounts. She wasn't even close to being a contender. It is an obvious scam ot the libs using her because HILLARY is so damaged that the country would laugh.
edit on Wed Nov 30 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I live in Orange County California. I was NOT asked for ID or ANY form of ID on voting day. Goes for everyone I know...My wife, daughter, three employees and in-laws. My wife kept saying "make sure you have your license" and I told her, nope won't need it...sure enough.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: odd1out

That's pretty bad. The words of O. echo through time - "There's no voter fraud."

Snopes needs to be "fact-checked" on everything and MME did a good job today.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: odd1out
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I live in Orange County California. I was NOT asked for ID or ANY form of ID on voting day. Goes for everyone I know...My wife, daughter, three employees and in-laws. My wife kept saying "make sure you have your license" and I told her, nope won't need it...sure enough.


Yep. That's right. If you already provided ID when you register to vote, in California, you do not need ID when you vote.

The scenario I laid out, however, applies when ID is not provided when registering to vote by mail. In such a case, the person would need to provide an ID before or when they go vote. And, as I wrote, they could use their voter notification card, at that point, without ever having been verified.

California has very lax voter ID laws.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: gmoneystunt

Well, that was an easy answer. Now Democrats can move on and deal with the Trump Administration. Interesting to learn that you don't have to present ID to vote in California. In Washington, everyone has to vote by mail and that means they need to both be mailed a voting form and sign the returned envelope.
edit on 30pmWed, 30 Nov 2016 18:44:17 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 10:33 PM
link   
lol



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
December 1, 2016

The WISCONSIN recount process started today. MOST counties are doing a BY HAND recount, and working double shifts, in order to finish before the December 12th deadline.

Story: www.foxnews.com...

I wonder if we'll learn of any results as the recount progresses?



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


Although it was extremely early, in some of the smaller areas where the recounts happened faster, Donald Trump had actually gained a couple of votes in the first few hours of the Wisconsin recount.


source



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 1   >>

log in

join