DescentBB

A Grand Prairie woman who is not an American citizen was arrested Friday on charges she voted illegally in Dallas County, prosecutors said...

...Dallas County Elections Administrator Toni Pippins-Poole said records showed that Ortega had voted a total of five times.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Woman- ... 58051.html

if not a citizen, how is she passing the double check on the voter rolls? In other words, some entity had to put her on the books, and issue her a voting card. They would seem to be the ones who should be arrested, not her.

callmeslick wrote:They would seem to be the ones who should be arrested, not her.

Oh of course NOT HER... She's only the one that voted FIVE TIMES.

I guess she kept going back to vote by accident.

Well slick, seems like you finally got your proof. I'm just surprised she was caught at all.

er, Woody, I've always claimed a proven incidence of .08%, which is not significant. You want to write rules because they found one person in Texas. How many registered voters in that state?

And how many are never caught because ID's are not required.

a total of 0.08% by all expert analysis.

And how do you expertly analyze it if there is no data.

no data? On election voting? Are you kidding? Voting data, and voter rolls are public domain items, Woody. You can analyze any race, after the fact for suspicious outcomes, and trace back to voting rolls. As I noted, how did this woman get registered? There would be the fraud. She is apparently presenting as someone on the list, and it sounds like she wasn't accused of presenting a false identification.

next shoe to drop, the overturn of gerrymandered districts driven by racial politics:
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politi ... 80647.html

Yea, you better watch out for that one, considering how many times it was used to put minorities in office over the years.

sure, because it happened in Reconstruction, there is some lingering effect?

The democrats flout the rule of law in yet another brazen attempt to seize power:

Clinton campaign enlists undocumented 'Dreamers' for voter registration drive

Hillary Clinton is enlisting undocumented “Dreamers” into a new voter registration drive aimed at signing up sympathetic voters with warnings that Donald Trump’s immigration plans could result in their deportation – though the Dreamers themselves cannot legally vote.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08 ... drive.html

what is wrong with HIRING kids to do a drive? Since when are anyone's citizenship docs requested for such civic work? At no point was it shown that undocumented aliens are being REGISTERED.Geez, paranoid much?

callmeslick wrote:what is wrong with HIRING kids to do a drive? Since when are anyone's citizenship docs requested for such civic work? At no point was it shown that undocumented aliens are being REGISTERED.Geez, paranoid much?

It's clear that you don't care about national sovereignty...neither does any other democrat.

Anything for power.

what the feck does hiring VOLUNTEERS for a registration drive, which, by definition can ONLY register eligible voters(ie-citizens) have in the LEAST to do with 'national sovereignity'?? What does treating immigrants who come here and work and contribute and pay taxes like such crap that you dismiss their kids who have become Americans for all intents and purposes have to do with 'national sovereignity'. No, to my mind, the nation is as strong as the moral fiber that nation displays. You show NONE. ZERO. NADA. ZILCH. The nation would be better off if you left, frankly.

callmeslick wrote:what the feck does hiring VOLUNTEERS...

Really ? You have to ask ?

Grendel wrote:

callmeslick wrote:what the feck does hiring VOLUNTEERS...

Really ? You have to ask ?

yes, please enlighten me as to how hiring residents of the US in ANY WAY affects our national sovereignity, which relates to how we interact with other nations.

here's the definiton of what we're discussing:
National sovereignty is the idea that independent nations, which have declared their independence, have an organized government and are self-contained, have a right to exist without other nations interfering. It is essentially the unspoken rule of a nation's right to exist.


what other nation is interfering, here?

compare and contrast(as they used to say in college exams):

which is more a challenge to national sovereignity? High school kids registering legal voters or this:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnbcA1

callmeslick wrote:
yes, please enlighten me as to how hiring residents of the US in ANY WAY affects our national sovereignity, which relates to how we interact with other nations.

Except they are not legal residents:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton's campaign is launching a new effort to tap into the political power of young, undocumented immigrants, hoping to capitalize on Donald Trump's promises to make deporting them a top priority of his presidency.

Yes, lets use people that are criminals to help her campaign. Typical lefty loony idea.

woodchip wrote:[except they are not legal residents:

they are young people here because of decisions made by the parents. Only an ★■◆● would suggest that they are criminals or some such.

Yes, lets use people that are criminals to help her campaign. Typical lefty loony idea.

I see where you fall.

so, we've had one utter failure, who didn't even address how national sovereignity comes into play. Apparently, Grendel, this is more confusing than either of us feel it is......

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:[except they are not legal residents:

they are young people here because of decisions made by the parents. Only an ★■◆● would suggest that they are criminals or some such.

Only dimwits would see them as legal citizens. Nice to see you care not for the rule of law. I bet you are all for the rioters in Milwaukee.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Yes, lets use people that are criminals to help her campaign. Typical lefty loony idea..

I see where you fall.

How observant.

Hm, my response got lost. Let me try to recreate it.

callmeslick wrote:

Grendel wrote:

callmeslick wrote:what the feck does hiring VOLUNTEERS...

Really ? You have to ask ?

yes, please enlighten me as to how hiring residents of the US in ANY WAY affects our national sovereignity, which relates to how we interact with other nations.

Doesn't directly. It's ethically questionable since said residents are in legal limbo. What stood out to me was your choice of words -- "hiring VOLUNTEERS". Very high risk that these "volunteers" are SOL if they ever try to cash in their side of the bargain.

Grendel wrote: Doesn't directly.

thank you for that......I think you now see why I easily was able to ask what I did.

It's ethically questionable since said residents are in legal limbo.

why? They are resident here....have been since early childhood by the definition of 'dreamer'. They know no other nation, in many cases have no close family any other place. What is ethically questionable about enlisting them to sign up as many sympatico LEGAL voters? I don't see it.

What stood out to me was your choice of words -- "hiring VOLUNTEERS". Very high risk that these "volunteers" are SOL if they ever try to cash in their side of the bargain.

you may need to clarify what you're getting at. By my reading and understanding, their 'side of the bargain' is that they help elect someone who can actually get meaningful immigration reform done, and given that public support for making 'dreamers' legal is at least 80%, I don't see that as a bad premise to work for. Perhaps, you were referring to something utterly different. If so, fire away.

callmeslick wrote:

It's ethically questionable since said residents are in legal limbo.

why? They are resident here....have been since early childhood by the definition of 'dreamer'. They know no other nation, in many cases have no close family any other place. What is ethically questionable about enlisting them to sign up as many sympatico LEGAL voters? I don't see it.

If they decide to help on their own, more power to them. Enlisting them by spreading fear is ethically questionable to me. Besides that, I don't get the program -- "Dreamers" are undocumented because their parents are. Who are they supposed to influence ? The program is obviously targeted at spanish speaking voters, I seriously doubt that any them will vote for Trump anyways.

callmeslick wrote:

What stood out to me was your choice of words -- "hiring VOLUNTEERS". Very high risk that these "volunteers" are SOL if they ever try to cash in their side of the bargain.

you may need to clarify what you're getting at. By my reading and understanding, their 'side of the bargain' is that they help elect someone who can actually get meaningful immigration reform done, and given that public support for making 'dreamers' legal is at least 80%, I don't see that as a bad premise to work for. Perhaps, you were referring to something utterly different. If so, fire away.

"hire -- payment for labor or personal services" and "volunteer -- freely offer to do something".

Getting meaningful reforms done is not exactly this country's strong side...

Grendel wrote: Who are they supposed to influence ? The program is obviously targeted at spanish speaking voters, I seriously doubt that any them will vote for Trump anyways.

they are merely providing Spanish speaking community outreach to sign up voters. You don't do a registration drive without VERY STRICT instructions not to talk up or down ANY party or candidate. That's against the law, at least in every state I ever worked drives in.

"hire -- payment for labor or personal services" and "volunteer -- freely offer to do something".

OK, I almost went back into edit to tinker with that wording. I guess I should have said 'signed up' volunteers.

Getting meaningful reforms done is not exactly this country's strong side...

how long have you been here? I ask that, seriously, because some of us are old enough to remember when such was not the case.

Yea, using the children of illegal immigrants to manipulate the political system, I don’t see how there can be anything wrong with that.

I must be a very unique person...because I can smell the ★■◆● from both sides.

Spidey wrote:Yea, using the children of illegal immigrants to manipulate the political system, I don’t see how there can be anything wrong with that.

there isn't, whatsoever, as long as you accept that registering legal voters isn't 'manipulating' the system. Most of us grasp that.

I must be a very unique person...because I can smell the ★■◆● from both sides.

may be a ventilation issue.

callmeslick wrote:

Grendel wrote: Who are they supposed to influence ? The program is obviously targeted at spanish speaking voters, I seriously doubt that any them will vote for Trump anyways.

they are merely providing Spanish speaking community outreach to sign up voters. You don't do a registration drive without VERY STRICT instructions not to talk up or down ANY party or candidate. That's against the law, at least in every state I ever worked drives in.

Like I said (or implied), legally this whole thing appears to be a grey area painted in a very dark shade of grey...

callmeslick wrote:

Getting meaningful reforms done is not exactly this country's strong side...

how long have you been here? I ask that, seriously, because some of us are old enough to remember when such was not the case.

About 17yrs. Trend during that time certainly doesn't look like it's improving.

definitely, Grendel, based on your time here, your jaded view is QUITE valid. Prior to 2000, we actually got some things accomplished, pretty regularly. Was every effort, every law, effective in addressing the problems? No, but at least they were legitimate efforts to do so. When you actually try, you risk not succeeding.

another example?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnb7Kz