Posted on 10/29/2002 2:32:19 PM PST by Dan from Michigan
At the Grandstand/Gore rally, I found this.
------------------------------
NEED CAMPAIGN WALKERS
SATURDAY - NOV2nd
10:30am-5:30PM
ALL DAY - $50
L TUESDAY - NOV 5th
10:00AM - 6:00PM
ALL DAY - $65
Interested - Contact Mary at 517-485-1119
Paid for by Michigan House Democratic Fund.
The only way to prove me wrong is to videotape one of these Wayne County precincts on November 5, 2002 and compare the bodies on the tape with the reported vote totals.
And you can't do that, because that act is a federal felony, "voter intimidation". Are you willing to commit a felony to prove me wrong, or are you just full of hot air, defending a Democrat lie?
I'll bet money we won't be seeing any November 5 home movies from you, so I guess my Wayne County posts stand as is. ;-)
Imagine, someone on the Free Republic who takes a Democrat precinct worker at their word! I hear the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale, and there's good land in South Florida fer cheap.
Rube.
I notice that you don't appear bold enough to deal with the problem at the source. No videotapey, hey? You're content to yap at me on the Internet, and allow the snickering Democrat precinct workers to work their illegal lists in the back room in Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, New York and all the other Democrat plantations.
It's all about money, rube, and just because you've drunk a gallon or two of liquid naive doesn't make it go away. ;-)
Precinct 4-6: Gore 495 Bush 0
Precinct 5-25: Gore 326 Bush 0
Precinct 9-28 Gore 140 Bush 0
Precinct 8-10 Gore 408 Bush 1
Etc.,etc., the breakdown is a real eye-opener.
It can be accessed at http://miboecfr.nicusa.com/cgi-bin/cfr/precinct_srch_res.cgi
And BTW, no one in their right mind will believe your false premise that a partisan vote for Bush has NO relationship to a partisan vote for a nonpartisan judge.
Also, your novel theory that voting for a non-partisan judge revolves around incumbency status is a real laugher. This theory presupposes that all judges are incumbent since birth, for how else could they be elected when running against an incumbent? ;-)
I don't think he really wants to go there, though, seeing how he is "just another guy on the Internet that has got all the answers" already.
I remember going around with another guy on FR one time who knew more about American History than a PhD in American History. This Angelito appears to be cut from the same cloth. He already knows it all, and numbers and facts don't mean squat to him.
I was suitably impressed (not). ;-)
You seem determined to maintain that it is my only fact in the presentation.
You continue to deliberately overlook other facts that I have presented. For example, the fact that it is a felony to go and watch these 400-0 votes in the Wayne County precincts.
You look great in those Nike shoes and the purple mustache, Bopp-boy.
Quit trying to extend your theory without backing it up with numbers, little Angel.
I have heard this to. The polls have Perry up by 12-15 points, but it will be much closer than that.
I said nothing about incumbency - you were the one who wanted to introduce that red herring. Incumbency has nothing to do with the central question: Why didn't all these "dedicated and responsible" citizens bother to be dedicated and responsible in the judicial races, unless perhaps some of them weren't actually there at the polls? ;-)
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.