1 posted on
07/19/2006 10:01:37 AM PDT by
300magnum
To: 300magnum
Geez, I'm getting all twitchy just thinking that McKinney might get the boot!
2 posted on
07/19/2006 10:05:31 AM PDT by
FixitGuy
To: 300magnum
I wonder how McKinney will do in the run-off.
I'm split about this. Part of me thinks that a good chunk of her supporters won't bother to show up in the run-off and the other part thinks that a great many of her supporters are black racists and assorted nutters who religiously follow McKinney anywhere.
3 posted on
07/19/2006 10:06:14 AM PDT by
MplsSteve
To: 300magnum
McKinney's website is claiming that the Diebold voting machines changed votes for her, into votes for her opponent. According to the AJC, her lawyers are already taking depositions from people who claim their votes were swapped.
I strongly suspect Cynthia McKinney (democrat, of course) of deliberately promoting voter fraud theories to explain her defeat in the democrat GA primary yesterday.
So, her official web site is claiming that MIDWAY THROUGH THE VOTING DAY, that votes for McKinney were being recorded for her opponent.
If her claims were true, shouldn't McKinney herself be able to explain how precinct workers in her own primary were able to determine how many votes were being cast FOR her, and how many were being cast FOR her opponent when your ballot boxes and ballot machines were sealed during the day? As I understand the process, no total nor any "running tally" of votes actually cast is generated, printed, displayed, or accessible during the times the polls are actually open.
Totals are available only to precinct workers (who we hope are honest) after all machines are totaled at the end of the day. So, if McKinney is claiming that hour-by-hour votes are going to her opponent, isn't that itself immediate evidence that the precinct workers (and precinct judges) ARE displaying and manipulating the machine totals? If her (democrat) precinct workers or election judges were NOT viewing and totalling votes as they occurred - then specifically ASKING the voters who had just voted who they "intended" to vote for, how else could they claim to know votes were swapped?
4 posted on
07/19/2006 10:09:33 AM PDT by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: 300magnum
"The battle's engaged and I intend to win," said McKinney early Wednesday. Did she have puppet strings attached and a voice coming from behind the curtain while mouthing that line? She's not nearly articulate enough to come up with it on her own.
5 posted on
07/19/2006 10:10:14 AM PDT by
JustaCowgirl
(Liberals aren't having so much fun now that the rabbit has the gun. --Ann Coulter)
To: 300magnum
I am going to send Hank Johnson some money today AND I might even go over there an campaign for him.
8 posted on
07/19/2006 10:37:48 AM PDT by
msnimje
(There is no way we can lose if we stay in Iraq and no way we can win if we cut and run.)
To: 300magnum
An upbeat Reed told a crowd of a few dozen cheering supporters that, although his candidacy had ended, his conservative message will live on.His message being, "Those are my principles! And if you don't them, well, I've got others."
10 posted on
07/19/2006 11:03:53 AM PDT by
mikeus_maximus
(Hey George! Read OUR lips: Build the wall!)
To: 300magnum
Luther Strange - Sounds like he needs to tryout for the villain role in the next Superman movie.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson