Posted on 12/15/2017 10:03:16 AM PST by Kaslin
What makes you think 6 women would not have been found to claim Luther Strange had molested them? The Democrats were dragging $750,000 through every “trailer park” they could find to get Moore, they could just as easily have bought some women or boys for a campaign against Strange with that money.
It’s not as if the had to be real, only the accusation is needed.
>>>What we want is all electronic records to be retained.
First of all, not all of the machines were programmed to capture the images. Second, what do you think the digital images of the paper ballots will show that the actual paper ballots will not show?
+1
I'm so sick and tired about hearing the wails of "VOTER FRAUD!!!" in regards to Alabama.
Roy Moore was a lousy candidate with a losing electoral track record who had no business running for senate.
The lesson here needs to be there is no seat safe enough to allow us the luxury of running fringe nutjob candidates.
And now Roy Moore gallops off into the sunset to join Sharron Angle, Todd Akin, Richard Murdock, and Christine O'Donnell in the "WTF were we thinking?" club. Hopefully membership is now maxed out.
Is it not possible to have digital images that don’t correspond with real paper ones?
This is only one of many ways to cheat.
Maybe we should just lie down, close our eyes and let the leftist cheaters keep on doing what they do.
Nothing. For all I know, they would have just like they did with Trump. But Trump was able to come out early, forcefully and convincingly and put the accusations to rest. And he did it with his chief accuser right there next to him on stage. Moore couldn't do that. He went on Hannity and gave a rambling lawyerly answer, that I think cost him the election, when a simple "Hell No!" would have knocked it out of the park. By the end of the show, he almost had Hannity calling for him to step down.
Cheating is losing.
Maybe we shouldn't nominate fringe nutjobs for Senate? And when we do, at least show up to vote for them.
I have not seen any convincing evidence that the Democrats cheated in Alabama.
What I did see was first, they nominated someone who wasn't repulsive. Second, they flooded his campaign with money, worked the phones, canvassed the neighborhoods, contacted every possible Democratic voter and got their asses to the polling place on time.
That's not cheating.
650,000 Trump voters chose to stay home. That's not cheating either.
Our system is broken in very big ways, and in very small ways.
Rampant voter fraud is very big.
Running a weak candidate is very small.
Whenever you observe the democrat party, you are seeing evidence of cheating.
You really think of pro-abortion candidates as not repulsive?
Clearly, the issue wasn't a deal breaker for a majority of Alabama voters (and the half of Trump voters who stayed home).
Well, then what do you propose to do about it?
Alabama voter ID laws are a conservative wish list come true. Additionally, every machination of state government is controlled by conservative Republicans.
Yet still, you and others cry, "THEY CHEATED!!!" when our lousy, repulsive candidate loses.
Here's what happened. Democrats worked their asses off getting their people to the polls. We've been served notice that this is what they can accomplish.
That's what needs to be the lesson learned here.
Of course they're repulsive. Doug Jones and the Democrat Party did a masterful job of keeping all of this out of the public eye.
Look what happened in this election:
1. The Democrats defined their candidate.
2. Roy Moore allowed the opposition to define HIM, too.
Of course Moore was going to lose this race. He never ran to win it. He thought his principles and conservative credentials would carry the day, and practically vanished from the campaign trail in the closing weeks of the campaign.
What can we really know about what happened in the election with the way elections are run?
Can we trust the numbers?
Why?
“every machination of state government is controlled by conservative Republicans”
Except the elaborate democrat systems of cheating.
Here was his astonishing rationale, in an interview with Sean Hannity:
"We’ve refused to debate them because of their very liberal stance on transgenderism and transgenderism in the military and in bathrooms. They are desperate."
That was 'effing pathetic. What the hell kind of a candidate would ever do such a thing?
This guy had LOSER written all over him, and an awful lot of people in Alabama could see that from a mile away.
I’m not arguing against those points.
I’m only pointing out that democrat cheating represents a massive breakdown of the system while weaker candidates running is a very limited problem.
And the state of our media is a major segment of democrat cheating.
If you have any evidence of “Democrat cheating” in this case, please present them here. Otherwise, you’re making FreeRepublic sound like the Sore Loserman Post-Election Campaign of 2000.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.