Why standing up for the Constitution is important

[Orion]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Nice deflection!
.......we're still waiting for your examples of voter fraud...

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

[coolyourjets]

Originally Posted by Orion

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

Please quote reliable and unbiased news sources. Sourcing the likes of The Heritage Foundation and OANN, which are right of Brietbart and Sean Hannity would be like quoting NYT or the Guardian on the left. Both have an agenda to spin. Dare I say, a lot of Fake News. Quote the facts of a more moderate and fact-based news organization. Someone earlier mentioned the WSJ..even NPR. Damn, even Fox News is more moderate that these organizations.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I guess we process posts on this forum differently.

My post stayed in your memory for seven years!

Your posts leave my brain in less that seven minutes.

Slo-Joe commiserates.

Originally Posted by coolyourjets

Please quote reliable and unbiased news sources. Sourcing the likes of The Heritage Foundation and OANN, which are right of Brietbart and Sean Hannity would be like quoting NYT or the Guardian on the left. Both have an agenda to spin. Dare I say, a lot of Fake News. Quote the facts of a more moderate and fact-based news organization. Someone earlier mentioned the WSJ..even NPR. Damn, even Fox News is more moderate that these organizations.

How about the US Supreme Court?

https://youtu.be/sz4UBWbD4P8

[coolyourjets]

Originally Posted by ApS

Slo-Joe commiserates.

How about the US Supreme Court?

https://youtu.be/sz4UBWbD4P8

I’m not sure I understand your point. The Supreme Court didn’t do a study on voter fraud nor did they confirm its existence. What they did was to uphold a law, which exists in the State of Arizona, among others. As previously mentioned, each states voter laws are different and the Supreme Court upholding a law that gives the states rights to enforce their own laws has nothing to do with proving that something is a rampant problem


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[ApS]

Originally Posted by coolyourjets

I’m not sure I understand your point. The Supreme Court didn’t do a study on voter fraud nor did they confirm its existence. What they did was to uphold a law, which exists in the State of Arizona, among others. As previously mentioned, each states voter laws are different and the Supreme Court upholding a law that gives the states rights to enforce their own laws has nothing to do with proving that something is a rampant problem

Arizona eliminated rampant ballot-harvesting, and inserted the much narrower "family" type collecting. Still, the SCOTUS had to pass judgment.

California, which borders Arizona, doesn't think voter-fraud is a problem.

Has there ever been a "close" election that went "R"?

Wisconsin "finds" ballots after the election:
https://conservativemedia.com/news/w...arys-campaign/

[Newbiesaukee]

2000 presidential election. Close election went R.

[Seaplane Pilot]

This speaks volumes on the importance of upholding the Constitution. The Attorney General has started to take notice of violations, especially toward religious groups.