Broward Misses Recount Deadline by 2 Minutes…An “Oops” or Was It Intentional?

snipes-600a-li

FoxNews.com reports that

A Broward election official said late Thursday that the county had uploaded the results of its recount two minutes after the state’s 3 p.m. deadline – making its machine recount tally void. Instead, the county’s results from last Tuesday’s election will stand until manual recount totals in the state’s closely contested Senate race come in Sunday at noon.

In another direct accusation of deliberate misconduct by Florida election officials, GOP Senate candidate Rick Scott’s campaign accused embattled Broward County Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes of intentionally submitting late results to invalidate them. In the recount, Scott’s Democratic opponent, incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson, lost more votes than Scott — a net gain of 779 for Scott.

The news of the bungled ballot count comes after Snipes boasted about never missing a deadline.

“We are excited to be at this point,” she said Thursday afternoon.

Later, Snipes acknowledged that “the results were in progress when I came out and made” that statement.

“An election like the one we just finished almost has so many moving parts and so many components,” Snipes said. “I’m pleased that we were able to accomplish what we did accomplish in the period of time that was available.”

Meanwhile, in the Florida governor’s race, Republican candidate Ron DeSantis holds a sizable 33,683-vote lead over Democrat Andrew Gillum following the machine recount, a margin high enough under state law to avoid a mandatory manual recount. Gillum, who gained only 1 vote on DeSantis in the recount, still has not conceded in the race.

As of the 3 p.m. deadline for a machine recount of three close statewide contests, nearly all of Florida’s 67 counties —except Palm Beach and Hillsborough counties — had reported updated results.

“Basically, I just worked my ass off for nothing,” said Joseph D’Alessandro, Broward County’s election planning and development director.

D’Alessandro said he had a hard time uploading the results because he wasn’t familiar with the website used to send them to the secretary of state.

“We uploaded to the state two minutes late so the state has chosen not to use our machine recount results,” D’Alessandro said in the surprise announcement. “They are going to use our first unofficial results as our second unofficial results.”

Broward has been under the microscope since the recount was ordered Saturday, and Thursday’s mistake is just the latest in a series of missteps for the largely Democratic county. Last week, a judge sided with Scott’s campaign in a lawsuit in which he alleged Snipes had violated state public records law and the Florida Constitution by withholding critical ballot information.

Earlier this year, a judge found that Snipes had illegally destroyed ballots in a 2016 congressional contest, leading the secretary of state’s office to assign election monitors to supervise her office.

“It would have been both surprising and shocking if they had actually started [the recount] on time and completed it on time,” Cathy Lerman, principal of the Lerman Law Firm in Florida, told Fox News.

…Since the recall was officially ordered on Saturday, Broward elections staff have had to sort through more than 3.5 million pages of ballots before they actually started to count votes. Several counties, like Miami-Dade, planned ahead and finished much faster than Broward.

…Now that the machine recount deadline has passed, counties will have until noon on Sunday Nov. 18 to submit results from a manual recount in the Senate race between Nelson and Scott.

“We have been the laughingstock of the world, election after election,” Judge Mark E. Walker, the Obama-appointed chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, said Thursday. “Yet we still chose not to fix it.”

There is a reason for that, Judge.

The Democrats do not want it fixed.

They are masters at “winning elections” by “any means necessary”.

Case in point, the 1991 Mayoral Election in my hometown of Memphis, TN

Willie Herenton is elected mayor – the first African-American elected mayor in Memphis history. Herenton upsets incumbent Dick Hackett by 142 votes, the closest margin in a mayor’s race under the mayor-council form of government, but not the closest in the much-longer history of Memphis mayoral elections under various forms of municipal government.

The election also sees the election of an African-American majority to the 13-member Memphis City Council. It is a tumultuous election night in which the vote count goes past midnight. The Shelby County Election Commission before and after this election had always released absentee votes first. In this case, the absentee vote totals are not added until the election day totals had been tabulated. The delay prompts several hundred Herenton supporters gathered at The Peabody to come to the Downtown offices of the election commission. They follow U.S. Rep. Harold Ford Sr., with a Hackett team of advisers arriving as well to oversee the absentee vote count. Herenton went on to become the longest-serving Memphis mayor, resigning July 30, 2009.

…with the FBI in the middle of a huge graft and corruption investigation of the Mayor and his Administration.

Under Herenton, the Memphis Municipal Government grew faster than Rosie O’Donnell at an all-you-can-eat buffet.

And, my hometown has never recovered.

The bad thing is…Dr. W.W. Herenton has announced that he plans to run for mayor again in the next election.

Do you see a pattern here, gentle readers?

Do you remember the word that Democrats have loved to use for decades now, “disenfranchised”?

Democrats use it to describe a group of American citizens whom they feel they are being left out of the mainstream or have had their rights violated, on purpose, usually by the big bad Republicans.

In the case of extending elections past Election Day, the Democrats use the word “disenfranchised” in order to make sure that every vote counts, even if they have to manufacture them.

The fact of the matter is that what the Democrats are doing by extending these elections and discovering new votes, does not make all voters equal, it gives the Democrats an unfair advantage.

The Democrats are actually disenfranchising those American citizens who have voted legally by showing up to the polls on Election Day or voting early.

Not that they care, of course.

Just as they did during the Kavanaugh Hearings, the Democratic Party, whether their actions in Florida Georgia, and Arizona are actually all part of a dry run to prepare for the 2020 Presidential Election or not, are showing Americans who they really are.

Democrats are not the party of the Middle Class anymore. Not by a long shot.

They are a political party of Far Left Socialists who believe in the words of the Russian Tyrant Joseph Stalin, who said,

“It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

And that, gentle readers is the difference between Socialism and a Constitutional Republic. Under Marxism, those in power decide. Under our form of government, WE DECIDE.

Or, at least we are supposed to.

Until He Comes,

KJ

“In Hillary, We Don’t Trust”

untitled (25)Of course you’ve heard about the fact that Hillary won six coin flips in a row?  You know what the odds of that are? It’s 1.7%.  It doesn’t happen.  Anyway, I watched television coverage of Mrs. Clinton’s acceptance last night and there’s this guy that ends up being over her right shoulder as you’re looking at the picture, and he’s got two stickers on each cheek right below each eye, and he’s making weird, odd faces.  It turns out this guy has become a hero of the Internet today because people are replaying this and sending it, tweeting it, Facebooking it all over the place. It’s a comedy piece.  Some guy stands there with Hillary stem-winder serious and telling everybody what she’s gonna do. She’s doing the Hillary screech, the voice that reminds you of your first two ex-wives.  This guy’s back there with these stickers on his face laughing and making faces, totally distracting everybody, and then if you notice Bill Clinton behind her.  And that was… What’s the word?  I was gonna say “scary,” but, no, it was shocking the way Bill Clinton looked last night.  It’s clearly not the 1990s, and there aren’t a bunch of bikini-clad babes running…

Well, there might still be that.  With Bill Clinton, you never know. – Rush Limbaugh, 2/2/2016

The Des Moines Register reported that

It’s Iowa’s nightmare scenario revisited: An extraordinarily close count in the Iowa caucuses — and reports of chaos in precincts, website glitches and coin flips to decide county delegates — are raising questions about accuracy of the count and winner.

This time it’s the Democrats, not the Republicans.

Even as Hillary Clinton trumpeted her Iowa win in New Hampshire on Tuesday, aides for Bernie Sanders said the eyelash-thin margin raised questions and called for a review. The chairwoman of the Iowa Democratic Party rejected that notion, saying the results are final.

The situation echoes the events on the Republican side in the 2012 caucuses, when one winner (Mitt Romney, by eight votes) was named on caucus night, but a closer examination of the paperwork that reflected the head counts showed someone else pulled in more votes (Rick Santorum, by 34 votes). But some precincts were still missing entirely.

Like Republican Party officials in 2012, Democratic Party officials worked into the early morning on caucus night trying to account for results from a handful of tardy precincts.

At 2:30 a.m. Tuesday, Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Andy McGuire announced that Clinton had eked out a slim victory, based on results from 1,682 of 1,683 precincts.

Voters from the final missing Democratic precinct tracked down party officials Tuesday morning to report their results. Sanders won that precinct, Des Moines precinct No. 42, by two delegate equivalents over Clinton.

The Iowa Democratic Party said the updated final tally of delegate equivalents for all the precincts statewide was:

Clinton: 700.59

Sanders: 696.82.

That’s a 3.77-count margin between Clinton, the powerful establishment favorite who early on in the Democratic race was expected to win in a virtual coronation, and Sanders, a democratic socialist who few in Iowa knew much about a year ago.

Sanders campaign aides told the Register they’ve found some discrepancies between tallies at the precinct level and numbers that were reported to the state party. The Iowa Democratic Party determines its winner based not on a head count, like in the Republican caucuses, but on state delegate equivalents, tied to a math formula. And there was enough confusion, and untrained volunteers on Monday night, that errors may have been made.

Team Sanders had its own app that allowed supporters and volunteers to send precinct-level results directly to the campaign. At the same time, caucus chairs sent their official results to the state party, either over a specially built Microsoft app or via phone. Sanders aides asked to sit down with the state party to review the paperwork from the precinct chairs, Batrice said.

“We just want to work with the party and get the questions that are unanswered answered,” she said.

McGuire, in an interview with the Register, said no.

“The answer is that we had all three camps in the tabulation room last night to address any grievances brought forward, and we went over any discrepancies. These are the final results,” she said.

Clinton deemed victor at 2:30 a.m. Tuesday

McGuire in her 2:30 a.m. statement said: “Hillary Clinton has been awarded 699.57 state delegate equivalents, Bernie Sanders has been awarded 695.49 state delegate equivalents, Martin O’Malley has been awarded 7.68 state delegate equivalents and uncommitted has been awarded .46 state delegate equivalents. We still have outstanding results in one precinct — Des Moines 42 — which is worth 2.28 state delegate equivalents. We will report that final precinct when we have confirmed those results with the chair.”

Team Clinton quickly embraced that news, and flatly stated that nothing could change it.

Clinton’s Iowa campaign director, Matt Paul, said in a statement at 2:35 a.m.: “Hillary Clinton has won the Iowa caucus. After thorough reporting — and analysis — of results, there is no uncertainty and Secretary Clinton has clearly won the most national and state delegates. Statistically, there is no outstanding information that could change the results and no way that Senator Sanders can overcome Secretary Clinton’s advantage.”

McGuire repeated that Tuesday afternoon, saying the reporting app had a built-in fail-safe to prevent volunteers from reporting more delegates than were assigned to each precinct.

Clinton, who saw her expected Iowa win slip away in 2008, grasped the prize Tuesday.

“I can tell you, I’ve won and I’ve lost there, and it’s a lot better to win,” she said at a rally in New Hampshire, the state that votes next on the presidential nominating calendar.

But that didn’t quell doubts back in Iowa.

“Politics is a contact sport with few referees, so torturing your opponents with questions about the transparency of an election can be very harmful and damaging,” said Steffen Schmidt, a longtime political observer and professor at Iowa State University in Ames.

Discrepancies can occur in official elections, and caucuses are not even official election events run by the secretary of state’s office, noted Dennis Goldford, a Drake University professor who closely studies the Iowa caucuses.

“The caucus system isn’t built to bear the weight placed on it,” he said. “There aren’t even paper ballots (in the Democratic caucuses) to use for a recount in case something doesn’t add up.”

Democrats have never released actual head counts, and McGuire said they would not be released this time, either. Determining a winner based on state delegate equivalents rather than head count is a key distinction between how the Democrats conduct their caucuses versus conducting a primary, she said. New Hampshire and Iowa are generally careful to maintain such distinctions as part of their effort to preserve their status as the first caucus state and first primary state.

Results for final precinct reported on Tuesday

Reports of disorganization and lack of volunteers also emerged Monday evening. Party officials reported a turnout of 171,109, far less than the record of 240,000 seen in 2008.

Democratic voters reported long lines, too few volunteers, a lack of leadership and confusing signage. In some cases, people waited for an hour in one line, only to learn their precinct was in a different area of the same building. The proceedings were to begin at 7 p.m. but started late in many cases.

The scene at precinct No. 42, the one with the final missing votes, was “chaos” Monday night, said Jill Joseph, a rank-and-file Democratic voter who backed Sanders in the caucuses.

None of the 400-plus Democrats wanted to be in charge of the caucus, so a man who had shown up just to vote reluctantly stepped forward. As Joseph was leaving with the untrained caucus chairman, who is one of her neighbors, “I looked at him and said, ‘Who called in the results of our caucus?’ And we didn’t know.”

The impromptu chairman hand-delivered the results to Polk County Democratic Party Chairman Tom Henderson Tuesday. Sanders won seven county delegates, Clinton won five.

Long lines, confusion reported at many sites
Ames precinct 1-3 started caucusing two hours late, at 9 p.m., because the crowd was so big and the check-in line so slow, said Peter D. Myers, a finance major and member of the student government at Iowa State University, who caucused for the first time.

“There wasn’t a clear person in charge,” Myers said.

Capacity at the caucus site, Heartland Senior Center, was 115, but 300 people turned out, Myers said. At one point, caucusgoers considered moving to the parking lot of the Hy-Vee grocery store.

Myers said he registered to vote in August but “was alarmed to find out I wasn’t on the list, so I had to go to the back of the line. The gentleman in front of me had caucused the past three cycles and he wasn’t on the list, either.”

No one was there to lead the caucus, so “a pregnant lady took charge and counted the Bernie supporters, and a Hillary captain took the small group to a corner and counted the supporters,” he said.

Sanders ended up with four delegates and Clinton one, he said.

A C-SPAN video was circulated widely on Facebook and Twitter with claims it was evidence of fraud. In truth, it was an example of the mayhem at some of the most crowded caucus sites, when nose counts differed between rounds of voting because some people left or the initial count was wrong. In this case, precinct No. 43 in Des Moines, a majority of voters, including Sanders backers, voted against a recount.

An Indianola precinct that gathered in Hubbell Hall at Simpson College had a discrepancy between the number who checked in, and people counted in the first vote.

“The chair and secretary knew the count was off but proceeded anyway,” said Paige Godden, a reporter for the Indianola Record-Herald. “We did the final count at least three times. People were very frustrated by the end.”

New voters made up nearly 40 percent of the caucusgoers — 207 of 521 — at Democratic precinct No. 59 at Des Moines Central Campus, organizers said. The precinct ran out of voter registration forms and had to print more.

When the caucus began, the one-by-one head count discovered 58 more people voting than had checked in. Organizers asked anyone who had not signed in to do so, and then recounted. Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a Clinton supporter who lives in the precinct, stepped in to help with the recount.

The precinct’s caucus chair, Mark Challis, wasn’t sure if the counts were accurate, but changes wouldn’t have affected the final vote tally, which had Sanders substantially ahead.

Democrat Mary Ann Dorsett of Des Moines told the Register 492 voters turned out in her precinct, but there were only a handful of people assigned to check people in.

“It was a very large room so clearly they expected a large turnout,” Dorsett said. “The lines snaked through the corridor and out the door. It took over an hour to check in. Republicans in the same precinct were seated long before this, and already listening to speeches.”

Dorsett thinks the one-by-one head-counting system is “a real head-scratcher in terms of the possibility of inaccuracy as well as time wasted.”

“If all the smart phones were eliminated, it could have been 1820, and we were re-enacting the roles of a bunch of farmers sitting in a church hall, counting heads. Is this the 21st century?” she said. “This may well be my last caucus unless the Democratic Party cleans up its act.”

GOP is checking results on app vs. paper forms

Meanwhile, Republican Party of Iowa officials are doing a review, comparing the app results for each candidate with what the precinct chairs jotted down on their “e-forms” on caucus night.

“When you’re counting thousands of votes, you’ve always got to be careful,” Iowa GOP spokesman Charlie Szold said.

Microsoft, one of the premiere tech companies in the world, had developed websites to deliver results in real time. But both the Democratic website, idpcaucuses.com, and GOP website, iagopcaucuses.com, struggled intermittently throughout the night, crashing for periods of time and locking out the public from access to the results.

McGuire said the app system the volunteers in the precincts used to file their numbers was never down. “They (Microsoft) had plenty of capacity for our results,” she said.

Microsoft spokeswoman Angela Swanson-Henry said: “National interest in the Iowa caucuses was high, and some who attempted to access websites may have experienced delays which were quickly addressed.”

To quote Elmer Fudd,

Sumpin’ awfuwwy scwewy is goin’ on awound heah.

Was the Political Game of Voter Fraud being perpetrated in Iowa on Tuesday Night, by the Hillary Camp?

Is Michael Moore banned from buffets from coast-to-coast?

Remember the allegations of Democrat Voter Fraud, after the 2012 Presidential Election?

No? Please allow me to remind you, courtesy of, believe it or not, ABC News.

  1. The chairman of the Republican Party for the state of Maine suspected voter fraud in his state after he heard reports that African Americans were turning out at the polls in rural counties.”In some parts of rural Maine, there were dozens, dozens of black people who came in and voted on Election Day. Everybody has a right to vote, but nobody in town knows anyone who’s black,” Webster said. “How did that happen? I don’t know. We’re going to find out.” Census data shows Americans who identify as black or African American made up 1.6 percent of the population in Maine in 2010. It’s tied with North Dakota and Utah for fifth smallest percentage of blacks in the U.S.
  2. …in 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.In the entire county, Romney scored less than 100,000 votes, putting him at a measly 14 percent. Republicans in the state tried to use this as evidence of a need for the voter ID laws hotly debated in the state this election season, the Inquirer reported. But ID or no, anyone with unfettered access to a ballot could choose to vote Republican. More than 500 Pennsylvania voters registered complaints about election procedure to the state this election, according to Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele.
  3. In St. Lucie County, Fla., about 175,500 residents were registered to vote on Election Day. But when results came in that night, officials counted more than 247,383 votes. Voter turnout was a whopping 140.92 percent.Where did all the extra votes come from? It turned out some voters had submitted their long ballots on two separate voting cards. Each card had been counted once, meaning many of the votes were double counted. The Examiner reported the real turnout total was closer to 70 percent, a number that conservative outlet suggested was still worthy of investigation for potential voter fraud.
  4. The week of the election, Fox News reported that 200 fake voter application cards had been sent to Hamilton County in Ohio, including one with the name “Adolf Hitler.”  Fox reported the D.C.-based company, Fieldworks, was at fault for submitting the fraudulent registration cards. 

Given the documented track record of the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton’s own personal record of being dishonest and untrustworthy, I would say that you can bet the house on it.

That is, if under 7 years of Barack Hussein Obama’s failed Economic Policies, you still have one.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Hillary Goes on the Warpath Against Voter ID. Dead Voter Bloc Applauds.

th (13)Well, the “Queen of Mean” Hillary Rodham Clinton has taken up the fight against requiring proper identification at America’s Voting Places, and, the Republicans are fighting back…finally.

Breitbart.com reports that

Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union,” former Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) reacted to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton accusing Republicans of intentionally attempting to disenfranchise voters based on race, age and poverty level and said she insulted the people of Texas who overwhelmingly supported the law.

Perry said, “Well, I think it’s way outside the norm of ridiculous, if you want to know the truth of the matter, to call out the people of the state of Texas, that’s what she did, I just happened to be the governor that signed that legislation and support it, and the vast majority of the people of Texas support it, and what Secretary Clinton did was saying the state of Texas didn’t.”

He continued, “Why would you say that you need a photo id to get a library book or to get on an airplane? This is a state issue, and this is an issue that the people that the state of Texas overwhelmingly support. so you know, I don’t know who she is playing to, but she is not playing to the people of Texas and I don’t think she is playing to the Americans that believe that the sanctity of the vote is really important and you need to have a photo id to go and vote. And the people of Texas wanted it, and whichever state Hillary Clinton considers to be her home state, she goes home and argues there to not to have it.”

“I think we make it pretty easy in the state of Texas for people to vote. again, I don’t know what her beef is with the people of the state of Texas about voter id but I think she is on the wrong side of the issue,” he added.

In a related story…

Newsmax.com reports that

Ohio Gov. John Kasich accused Hillary Clinton of “demagoguery” Friday over a lawsuit filed against his state’s voting rules, saying she should pick on another state, such as her own, where voters have far fewer days to cast a ballot.

“If she wants to sue somebody, let them sue New York,” Kasich told Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom” program. “We have 27 days of voting. In New York, the only voting that occurs is on Election Day. What is she talking about?”

On Thursday in Houston, Clinton accused potential Republican presidential rivals Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Chris Christie and Rick Perry of being governors in states that have passed laws making it more difficult for Americans to vote.

She called them members of a GOP group that have cut the numbers of days set aside for early voting and have demanded voter ID laws.

Kasich’s state of Ohio, meanwhile, was named along with Walker’s Wisconsin by Democrats in a legal challenge over voting changes. While Clinton’s campaign is not officially involved in the lawsuits, one of the attorneys involved is Marc Elias, her campaign’s general counsel.

Kasich said Friday that he likes Clinton personally, as she has been kind to him, “but the idea that we are going to divide Americans and use demagoguery, I don’t like it.”

He further called the idea of coming into Ohio and saying the state is trying to suppress the vote “silliness.”

“Don’t be running around the country dividing Americans,” said Kasich. “Don’t come in and say we are trying to keep people from voting when her own state has less opportunity for voting. She is going to sue my state? That’s just silly.”

Ohio has multiple days for voting, Kasich again pointed out, adding: “In New York, where she is from, they have one day. Why don’t you take care of business at home before you run around the country using these demagogic statement that we don’t want people to vote?”

Let’s talk about “disenfranchisement”

There was a big stink about in a few years back, in my hometown of Memphis, TN.

In fact, the Black Democrat Mayor of the city got personally involved on the side of the “disenfranchised”

However, things did not go exactly the way that the Mayor planned, as the Commercial Appeal reported on October 17, 2013…

The Tennessee Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the state law requiring photo identification to vote, ruling against the City of Memphis’ efforts to overturn the law and to require election officials to accept photo IDs issued by the public library for voting purposes.Unless the city or the two Memphis residents who joined the city’s lawsuit take their challenge into federal court, the unanimous ruling ends the city’s efforts to allow the library-issued cards to qualify for voting. The Memphis Public Library created the cards at the request of Mayor A C Wharton in early 2012 because he was concerned that the state’s Voter Identification Act of 2011 would block citizens from voting for lack of driver’s licenses or other acceptable forms of photo ID required by the act.

Memphis registered voters Daphne Turner-Golden and Sullistine Bell, neither of whom had driver’s licenses at the time, attempted to vote in the August 2012 primary using their new library-issued photo ID cards but were turned away by election officials.

Before the November general election, the city and the two residents filed suit, arguing that the photo ID requirement by the state violated state constitutional protections and that the library cards were valid identification because the original 2011 law permitted photo IDs “issued by an entity of the state.” But the state attorney general’s office argued that “entity of the state” meant a state agency, not a local agency.

The trial court in Nashville rejected the city’s claims but the state Court of Appeals affirmed part of the city’s case, holding that the library cards were acceptable identification under the act, but also concluding that the photographic identification requirement was constitutional. Because early voting for the 2012 general election was under way, the Court of Appeals ordered election officials to accept cards from the Memphis Public Library. The Supreme Court granted review in November of 2012 and ordered election officials to continue to accept cards from the Memphis Public Library during the general election.

On April 23 of this year (2013), the state legislature changed the 2011 law to specifically exclude cards issued by municipal libraries.

Because of the 2013 amendments, the Supreme Court first ruled that all issues pertaining to the validity of the Memphis Public Library cards were moot. In addition, the Court ruled that the individual plaintiffs, Turner-Golden and Bell, had legal standing to challenge the law but the City of Memphis, which did not have a vote, did not.

The Court held that the version of the law in effect at the time of the 2012 primary election met constitutional standards, concluding that the legislature has the prerogative to enact laws guarding against the potential risk of voter fraud and determining that the additional requirements placed on voters were not so severe as to violate protections set out in the Tennessee Constitution.

Race has. unfortunately, always been a divisive issue, used by Democrats as a way to energize Voting Blocs.

Unfortunately, for the Democrats, in this case, their cries of “disenfranchisement” makes their leading Presidential Candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, look as if she is grasping for straws.

All of the protestations from Democrats, alleging some sort of prejudice in the requirement of proper personal identification, in order to exercise the right and privilege of voting, are simply a vehicle by which to continue the voter fraud, which they have been so famous for in the past.

 I understand, that by requiring voters to have appropriate identification, authorities are “disenfranchising” the “Dead Voter Bloc”. However, that’s the whole idea of it.

If, as is the case in Tennessee, proper identification is free of charge, why are Hillary and the rest of Democrats, making such a big deal out of it?

Gosh, Hillary and her fellow Democrats aren’t advocating for Voter Fraud on purpose, are they?

Does Bill like girls in blue dresses?

Until He Comes,

KJ