Democrat wins Senate election after investigation reveals ‘phantom ballots’ for GOP opponent did not exist

After mystery swirled around a contested southern Maine Senate district election for weeks, Catherine Breen — who saw Election Day victory slip from her grasp after an initial recount — is headed to the Senate after all....










As usual, for all the GOP bluster about election fraud, the only real election fraud is orchestrated by them.

(12-10-2014 12:56 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  As usual, for all the GOP bluster about election fraud, the only real election fraud is orchestrated by them.

Per the rules of the forum, you need to back that up

(12-10-2014 12:56 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Democrat wins Senate election after investigation reveals ‘phantom ballots’ for GOP opponent did not exist

After mystery swirled around a contested southern Maine Senate district election for weeks, Catherine Breen — who saw Election Day victory slip from her grasp after an initial recount — is headed to the Senate after all....










As usual, for all the GOP bluster about election fraud, the only real election fraud is orchestrated by them.

Lol, I can't find anything after February 2013... Nice try, dbag

Edit: Anything dealing with voter fraud in the state of Maine.

(12-10-2014 01:14 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 12:56 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Democrat wins Senate election after investigation reveals ‘phantom ballots’ for GOP opponent did not exist

After mystery swirled around a contested southern Maine Senate district election for weeks, Catherine Breen — who saw Election Day victory slip from her grasp after an initial recount — is headed to the Senate after all....










As usual, for all the GOP bluster about election fraud, the only real election fraud is orchestrated by them.

Lol, I can't find anything after February 2013... Nice try, dbag

Edit: Anything dealing with voter fraud in the state of Maine.

No fraud is being reported. Just a miscount.

http://cathybreenforstatesenate.com/

seems dbj is caught in another lie (or perhaps my source is suspect )

So who is the hypocrite? The party that knows there is potential for fraud/error and is seeking ways to end it, or the one who claims it doesn't exist, until it appears to exist for the 'other team'?

It seems to me that the LEFT was the ones claiming that only they would be hurt by voter ID, and the Dems have nobody but themselves to blame for this happening. Had they not worked so hard to stop voter ID, this never could have happened.

I'd ask the leftists... Here we have what appears to be an obvious case of voter fraud, no? That fraud/error changed the outcome of an election, right? So who is being prosecuted for it? Isn't that always the 'burden' your side places on proof of voter fraud?

If you had 1,000 IDs checked and 1200 votes, you'd know something was amiss.

GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

(12-11-2014 04:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

Inglés es difícil

(12-11-2014 04:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

Weren't you one of the guys who said it didn't exist AT ALL?

I'm asking seriously. It may not have been you, but NUMEROUS leftists have claimed this.

I didn't read the whole thread, but I can't imagine anyone has said that this wasn't the correct outcome.


Have they.

Lets use this as Exhibit #A in the case for voter ID and checking their validity.

Fine with me, if it saves just ONE election, right?

(12-11-2014 05:43 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Lets use this as Exhibit #A in the case for voter ID and checking their validity.

Fine with me, if it saves just ONE election, right?

Yes, a photo ID should be required. And with so many reports of Dems voting early and often, maybe we should have our thumbs dipped in ink like they do in the Middle East.

(12-10-2014 12:56 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Democrat wins Senate election after investigation reveals ‘phantom ballots’ for GOP opponent did not exist

After mystery swirled around a contested southern Maine Senate district election for weeks, Catherine Breen — who saw Election Day victory slip from her grasp after an initial recount — is headed to the Senate after all....










As usual, for all the GOP bluster about election fraud, the only real election fraud is orchestrated by them.

show us proof....diamondbackjack.

(12-11-2014 05:40 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 04:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

Weren't you one of the guys who said it didn't exist AT ALL?

I'm asking seriously. It may not have been you, but NUMEROUS leftists have claimed this.

I didn't read the whole thread, but I can't imagine anyone has said that this wasn't the correct outcome.


Have they.

I've never said that. I have always said that the law would effect more people than prevent fraud. I was right.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(12-11-2014 07:59 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 05:40 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 04:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

Weren't you one of the guys who said it didn't exist AT ALL?

I'm asking seriously. It may not have been you, but NUMEROUS leftists have claimed this.

I didn't read the whole thread, but I can't imagine anyone has said that this wasn't the correct outcome.


Have they.

I've never said that. I have always said that the law would effect more people than prevent fraud. I was right.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

No you weren't. At all.

(12-11-2014 08:48 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 07:59 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 05:40 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 04:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

Weren't you one of the guys who said it didn't exist AT ALL?

I'm asking seriously. It may not have been you, but NUMEROUS leftists have claimed this.

I didn't read the whole thread, but I can't imagine anyone has said that this wasn't the correct outcome.


Have they.

I've never said that. I have always said that the law would effect more people than prevent fraud. I was right.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

No you weren't. At all.

Care to elaborate?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(12-11-2014 11:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 08:48 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 07:59 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 05:40 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 04:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

Weren't you one of the guys who said it didn't exist AT ALL?

I'm asking seriously. It may not have been you, but NUMEROUS leftists have claimed this.

I didn't read the whole thread, but I can't imagine anyone has said that this wasn't the correct outcome.


Have they.

I've never said that. I have always said that the law would effect more people than prevent fraud. I was right.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

No you weren't. At all.

Care to elaborate?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

First, I'll apologize for mischaracterizing your position.

Second, how are you right? Who has the law affected? The few examples put forth thus far are generally of people who moved too close to the election date to meet the deadlines... and laws dealing with that sort of issue have been on the books for decades with no claims of disenfranchisement... because just like before, they could vote in their old district if they didn't have time to get the new ID. Statistical analysis is a tool for the liars. If there were significant numbers of people, you should be able to produce significant numbers of people... and not merely a small handful with 'dubious' claims of how hard it is to get a license in places like Texas.

Don't bother to answer... this debate has gone on far too long. We have required physical proof that people have only voted once in every country where we have 'installed democracy' except our own. Sorry, but you guys have no reason to keep up this fight, but you do anyway.

It's embarrassing that we forced Iraqis to risk their lives by dying their thumbs... but Americans can't be asked for an ID.

It's a silly argument.

If this had been actual fraud rather than a miscount, it wouldn't have merely affected the 21 voters, but the 100,000 or so people who were being represented by someone in error.

The fact remains that Republicans benefit when less people vote. You would have to be delusional to believe that this wasn't a factor when they started changing these laws in republican states soon after the election of our first black president.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

We've been asking for Voter ID law for Decades. I still recall voter fraud during the JFK election from Illinois in 1960 and I was only 9 then. It always has been the Dems that never wanted it because They almost always win elections in areas it isn't used.

(12-11-2014 05:40 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 04:56 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  GOP voter fraud? Say it ain't so.

Weren't you one of the guys who said it didn't exist AT ALL?

I'm asking seriously. It may not have been you, but NUMEROUS leftists have claimed this.

I didn't read the whole thread, but I can't imagine anyone has said that this wasn't the correct outcome.


Have they.

Democrats are all for it. After all, we have to remember that they say voter ID is racist and oppressive.

(12-12-2014 12:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The fact remains that Republicans benefit when less people vote. You would have to be delusional to believe that this wasn't a factor when they started changing these laws in republican states soon after the election of our first black president.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

So your vaunted 120 IQ doesn't seem to allow you to discuss this w/ rigorous logic. And you bring in some historical errors, despite proclaiming you're a teacher of history.

Why is that? Language too hard? Or you just angling to get more relatives over the border?

Finally, per the AUP, do address the currently unsupported claims of GOP ballot box stuffing, since you indicated you believed it to be true in Post #6.

(12-12-2014 12:38 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The fact remains that Republicans benefit when less people vote. You would have to be delusional to believe that this wasn't a factor when they started changing these laws in republican states soon after the election of our first black president.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Yet despite the inference you make here... you can't demonstrate how black people are more likely to be disenfranchised by these rules... you can't produce a PERSON for whom race was an issue in complying with the new rules.

The only 'evidence' I've seen is people who moved and then had trouble finding/getting their documents from their previous states. The one I saw was someone from DC to Texas. Texas was all ready for them... It would have taken a few hours at any DMV... but they somehow couldn't get their marriage license from hard-left DC in 60 days. Shockingly, having a DC drivers license with a DC address implies that you should be voting in DC for issues on a DC ballot, not in Texas. I guess that just makes too much sense for the left.

Best I know, black people aren't being forced to move from DC to Texas.


As to the claim that Republicans do better when fewer people vote... Republicans did pretty well in 2012. Prior to that, they did better when more people voted... because Bush got elected, and then Democrats took the mid-term... doing better when fewer people voted It was true again under Clinton, but the reverse was again true under Reagan.

In other words, it's an obvious cycle... with the only difference being that THIS time the elected President is black. When the first woman is elected (or first Mormon or Atheist or Gay or red head or any other description) gets elected, you could probably see a similar pattern