ADVERTISEMENT

Arizona admits that nearly 100,000 non-citizen 'voters' wrongly listed on voter rolls amid lawsuit

And these were people who got their ID before 1996. But you acknowledge why it's biased to used the term in your second sentence. You know they're probably not all illegals, but you called them that anyway.
It's not bias, it was an assumption based on the gaping hole that our southern border has been.
 
Weird way to try to justify to yourself that this was still Democrats' fault. I wasn't trying to make any claim of judgement, just stating the facts that more of those affected are registered Republican than are registered Democratic. But make up whatever nonsense about those Republican voters actually being Democrats trying to sabotage the primary all you want, I suppose, so that you can go on pretending this is some Democratic plot to allow illegal Venezuelans from insane asylums to vote.
What's weird about it? It's pretty straight forward. One party is trying to secure elections. The other isn't.
And the reason they haven't been required to retroactive prove citizenship is that this glitch was only recently discovered, and it would be an undue burden to require it now, this close to the election.
Would it? How do we know that they ever did prove citizenship? It's not like illegal immigration is a new thing.
Also, given what you said earlier about the federal election being the "main concern," all of these people were could've voted in those races even if the court ruled that their status had to be changed, so, if it were a Democratic plot to steal, they still would've been able to do it.
The point I was making about that was that IF they were illegal immigrants, they shouldn't be able to vote at all. I thought that was a pretty clear point when I made it.
 
It's not bias, it was an assumption based on the gaping hole that our southern border has been.
You just keep telling yourself that, but there was never any evidence that this particular group of people were "illegals," and you went ther anyway. And I'm pretty sure whatever thing you would "assume," (ie, believe to be true before investigation) represents your bias.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Boilermaker03
What's weird about it? It's pretty straight forward. One party is trying to secure elections. The other isn't.
Seems an oversimplification, but even if true, don't you see how that has no relevance to this particular news story? What was weird is that you felt compelled to come up with some scenario (voting in the other party's primary) whereby you could say "no, it was Democrats, actually" when informed that more of the affected voters are Republicans than Democrats.
Would it? How do we know that they ever did prove citizenship? It's not like illegal immigration is a new thing.
We actually do know, from reading, that they never did prove their citizenship because the computer glitch in question mistakenly tagged them (or whatever) has having done so when they hadn't. So, your "how to we know..." question is a pretty dumb one. But that fact, and the fact that illegal immigration isn't new, has nothing to do with whether requiring them to do it now, before the 2024 election, is an undue burden. It's a non-sequitur.
The point I was making about that was that IF they were illegal immigrants, they shouldn't be able to vote at all. I thought that was a pretty clear point when I made it.
It wasn't clear, because that's not what you said. You said "I think we can all agree that Federal elections are the main concern here and all of those "voters" could vote in Federal elections." As you're now well aware, all of these people were going to be able to vote in the Federal Election no matter what.

Anyway, I'm pretty much done with this particular "evidence of voter fraud" that turned out to be a complete nothing-burger with regards to said voter fraud narrative.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Boilermaker03
Anyway, I'm pretty much done with this particular "evidence of voter fraud" that turned out to be a complete nothing-burger with regards to said voter fraud narrative.
The dems are so skilled at election fraud, they would never do anything this obvious, right KatJM23?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
The dems are so skilled at election fraud, they would never do anything this obvious, right KatJM23?
been swamped and will be out for a while, but thought some might find this interesting if it hasn't already been posted. Now it doesn't mention the 325,000 children missing or the fentanyl deaths and is only up to 7 million, but NONE of these should be here

 
Last edited:
been swamped and will be out for a while, but thought some might find this interesting if it hasn't already been posted. Now it doesn't mention the 325,000 children missing or the fentanyl deaths and is only up to 7 mission, but NONE of these should be here

How can that be? The border has not been open according to the dem libs on this forum.
 
It appears an additional 120,000 voters in Arizona may have been affected by a database error that didn’t confirm their citizenship status, the state Secretary of State’s Office said on Monday.

Fontes said documentation for proof of citizenship is “an extreme law.”

ehhhh...apparently not with these "processes".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boilermaker03
I believe the AZ supreme court just let them back in to vote for Nat election only. Can't vote for state & local though as the court said it is against AZ State law for unverified perhaps likely noncitizens to vote
Make that make sense lol. Democrats will do literally anything. Including flooding the country with illegals and giving them the rights they shouldn't have.
 
Everyone knows illegals have been voting for years in federal elections. Everyone knows the border was opened specifically for that. Don't be so naive.
I think the border was opened primarily to provide free or cheap labor to the donor-lobbyist class that controls the dems and many repubs. The voting angle is more of a long-term dem plan.

The voting angle is how they sold it to dems who were temporarily troubled by all the damage to the nation from an open border.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bank Shot Podcast
I think the border was opened primarily to provide free or cheap labor to the donor-lobbyist class that controls the dems and many repubs. The voting angle is more of a long-term dem plan.

The voting angle is how they sold it to dems who were temporarily troubled by all the damage to the nation from an open border.
It's always funny how Dems scream about workers rights, slavery and blah blah blah... But then as soon as you bring up not wanting illegals in the country, they cry about having to pay Americans more for the job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riveting
I think the border was opened primarily to provide free or cheap labor to the donor-lobbyist class that controls the dems and many repubs. The voting angle is more of a long-term dem plan.

The voting angle is how they sold it to dems who were temporarily troubled by all the damage to the nation from an open border.
Everyone knows that isn't true.

Everyone.

Moreover, people have been telling me that you made up the information in your post. People have been telling me that's your angle.
 
In your case, it sounds stupid.
Everyone knows that people are telling me that you are the one that sounds stupid.
Moreover, people are telling me that everyone knows your angle.
Finally, everyone knows that a witness saw people saying that everyone knows your angle.
 
Everyone knows that isn't true.

Everyone.

Moreover, people have been telling me that you made up the information in your post. People have been telling me that's your angle.
You're spending far too much time watching for trans people hanging out at gas stations and libraries, obviously.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT