3Rivers Archery Supply
1,101,178 Voters: 1,115,664 Votes
Community
Contributors to this thread:
NvaGvUp 28-Aug-17
NvaGvUp 28-Aug-17
Rhody 28-Aug-17
Two Feathers 28-Aug-17
NvaGvUp 28-Aug-17
Anony Mouse 28-Aug-17
Rhody 28-Aug-17
Coyote 65 28-Aug-17
Coyote 65 28-Aug-17
Coyote 65 28-Aug-17
Spike Bull 31-Aug-17
Pete In Fairbanks 31-Aug-17
bad karma 31-Aug-17
NvaGvUp 31-Aug-17
Thumper 01-Sep-17
elkmtngear 04-Sep-17
MK111 04-Sep-17
JTV 05-Sep-17
DL 05-Sep-17
HA/KS 05-Sep-17
Anony Mouse 07-Sep-17
JTV 07-Sep-17
WDP 09-Sep-17
Spike Bull 09-Sep-17
Coyote 65 09-Sep-17
From: NvaGvUp
28-Aug-17
Welcome to Chicago, where 14,000 more votes were cast in 2016 than there were voters.

Voter fraud, anyone?

From TAS:

"August 28, 2017

Chicago had 14,000 more votes than voters in 2016 general election

By Thomas Lifson

President Trump continues to receive scorn over his assertion last year that vote fraud accounted for Hillary Clinton’s raw vote majority. Democrats and their shills are unanimous in denouncing the “false claims” (The Amazon Washington Post recently called it a “zombie claim.”) When the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity was announced, it was denounced as a waste, an attempt to intimidate minorities, and a scheme to violate privacy, which has caused states to refuse to release public data requested by the commission. Its investigator, J. Christian Adams, is being vilified. Even Republicans expressed reluctance to Politico over the investigation.

Senator Chuck Schumer bizarrely linked vote fraud to Charlottesville.

In the wake of the confrontation in Charlottesville, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) called for President Trump to disband the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity on Aug. 24. In a Medium post, Schumer said the actions of the commission were “wolves in sheep’s clothing” and a “ruse” designed to “revive the old playbook and disenfranchise minority voters.”

They really, really don’t want anyone looking closely at vote fraud. They claim there is none of any significance.

That must be why this report from Chicago City Wire has been so thoroughly ignored by the mainstream media:

More than 14,000 votes were cast in Chicago during the 2016 general election than there were voters to cast them, based on separate figures released by the Chicago Board of Elections, the chairman of the Chicago Republican Party has reported.

Chris Cleveland told the Chicago Wire that "on a whim," he filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the board, which provided him with a list of 1,101,178 people who voted in the general election. An earlier post on the board's website said that 1,115,664 votes had been cast.

“There should be never be more votes than voters,” Cleveland said. “Every ballot cast should be recorded against a registered voter.”

The party did a breakdown of voting by precinct, and Cleveland said it found an uneven distribution of discrepancies. Fifteen precincts had 100 more ballots cast than voters, while others had fewer votes than voters."

From: NvaGvUp
28-Aug-17
You don't need to collect names to simply look at the number of people who voted and the number of votes cast.

From: Rhody
28-Aug-17
Caps close <\b>

From: Two Feathers
28-Aug-17
Gee, those numbers don't add up.

From: NvaGvUp
28-Aug-17
Rhody,

It's not caps that need closing. It's 'bold!'

From: Anony Mouse
28-Aug-17
I fixed it.

From: Rhody
28-Aug-17
I claim... senior moment... ;o)

From: Coyote 65
28-Aug-17
Nerd is not really a good one, can't close his html. Wonder what else is wrong with him?

Terry

From: Coyote 65
28-Aug-17
Maybe some of those dead people forgot they voted the first time and then voted again. understand that memory is one of the first things that goes after death.

Terry

From: Coyote 65
28-Aug-17
Maybe some of those dead people forgot they voted the first time and then voted again. understand that memory is one of the first things that goes after death.

Terry

31-Aug-17
HahababaaAAaaa! You should do stand-up, nerd!

31-Aug-17
Nerd doesn't have time for "stand up," Spike.

He obviously spends most of his time doing "bend over...."

From: bad karma
31-Aug-17
Information collected by court order is often limited in purpose and distribution. For example, we may have confidential business agreements that can only be viewed by counsel and their experts, or the professionals and the parties, and not to be discussed or disseminated outside the case. That is commonly done. And commonly not violated. I've done this several times over the years.

But if you're an idiotic leftist, you ignore how things are actually done. Actually, I should take back this comment, as it is insulting to idiots to lump Nerd of the Herd in that group.

Another common example is psychological test results in domestic cases, which are given just to the professionals. The parties don't get to see it, so they can't go running around showing the reports to people to make their spouse look bad. Or, even worse, showing it or reading it to their kids.

From: NvaGvUp
31-Aug-17

NvaGvUp's embedded Photo
NvaGvUp's embedded Photo

From: Thumper
01-Sep-17
That's a very significant 7% margin of error.

From: elkmtngear
04-Sep-17

elkmtngear's embedded Photo
elkmtngear's embedded Photo
When "Science" doesn't pan out (well, simple math)...deflect !

From: MK111
04-Sep-17
I have no fears of the government checking on me as they already know I'm here. Trump should be very concerned as need of these extra votes were for him. That's the reason the Democrats see no reason for a investigation.

My friend just advise me his uncle passed away before the election. He always vote a straight Republican ticket but since he passed away he voted a straight Democrat ticket. Strange how he switched parties after passing away.

From: JTV
05-Sep-17

JTV's Link
OH noooooo, thousands of extra votes in Chitcago over those that were registered on the voter roll's..... yea, there isnt any election fraud .... smh...

From: DL
05-Sep-17
Only 55-65% of registered voters actually vote so the fake voting is really higher.

From: HA/KS
05-Sep-17
All voting on paper, in person, on election day. Dip your finger in indelible ink. Problem mostly solved.

From: Anony Mouse
07-Sep-17
EXCLUSIVE – KOBACH: IT APPEARS THAT OUT-OF-STATE VOTERS CHANGED THE OUTCOME OF THE NEW HAMPSHIRE U.S. SENATE RACE

For years, the mainstream media has ignored the problem of voter fraud and belittled those of us who are trying to do something about it. And when secretaries of state like me identify cases of fraud, we are told that the number of incidents of voter fraud is too insignificant to matter.

Now, however, facts have come to light that indicate that a pivotal, close election was likely changed through voter fraud on November 8, 2016: New Hampshire’s U.S. Senate Seat, and perhaps also New Hampshire’s four electoral college votes in the presidential election.

New Hampshire is one of fifteen states that allow same-day voter registration. The benefit of same-day registration is that it allows a person who has procrastinated or has forgotten to register to nonetheless cast a ballot on election day. The downside of same-day registration is that it does not allow the state time to assess the eligibility of the voter. A volunteer poll worker simply accepts a modicum of identification and takes the voter at his word that he’s a U.S. citizen resident of the state who is eligible to vote.

New Hampshire is also a battleground state. Unlike neighboring Massachusetts and Vermont, which reliably vote for the Democrat in presidential elections, New Hampshire can swing either way. It has long been reported, anecdotally, that out-of-staters take advantage of New Hampshire’s same-day registration and head to the Granite State to cast fraudulent votes.

Now there’s proof.

According to statistics released by the Speaker of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, on the date of the general election in November 2016, there were 6,540 same-day registrants who registered to vote in New Hampshire using an out-of-state driver’s license to prove their identity. In and of itself, that doesn’t prove that any fraud occurred – theoretically, each of those individuals could have been someone who recently moved to the State and had not yet had time to get a New Hampshire driver’s license. According to New Hampshire law, a new resident has 60 days to obtain a New Hampshire driver’s license.

So if those 6,540 voters were bona fide New Hampshire residents, they would get their driver’s license no later than January 7, 2017. However, the numbers tell a very different story. It turns out that, as of August 30, 2017 – nearly ten months after the election – only 1,014 of the 6,540 same-day registrants who registered with an out-of-state license had obtained a New Hampshire driver’s license. The other 5,526 individuals never obtained a New Hampshire driver’s license. And, of those 5,526, only 213 registered a vehicle in New Hampshire.

So 5,313 of those voters neither obtained a New Hampshire driver’s license nor registered a vehicle in New Hampshire. They have not followed the legal requirements for residents regarding driver’s licenses, and it appears that they are not actually residing in New Hampshire. It seems that they never were bona fide residents of the State.

5,513 is a big number – more than enough to swing two very important elections. The closest major election was the contest between incumbent Republican U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte and challenger Maggie Hassan (D). Hassan won the election by a razor-thin margin of 1,017 votes. Those 5,313 fraudulent votes were more than enough to swing the election. If 59.2 percent or more of them went for Hassan, then the election was stolen through voter fraud. That’s likely, since the surrounding states are Democrat strongholds.

It’s also possible that New Hampshire’s four electoral college votes were swung to Hillary Clinton through illegal voting by nonresidents. Clinton won New Hampshire by only 2,732 votes. If 74.8 percent of the 5,513 fraudulent votes were cast for Clinton, then the presidential election in New Hampshire was tipped as well.

If the presidential contest had been closer and had come down to a margin of three or four electoral college votes, then this voter fraud might have had extraordinary consequences. Regardless, in the Senate contest, it is highly likely that voting by nonresidents changed the result.

And that is already having consequences for the nation. If the 52-48 Republican-Democrat balance in the Senate were 53-47, it could change the balance in any number of votes – not the least of which would be the effort to repeal Obamacare.

But the mainstream media will tell us, “Move along, there’s nothing to see here.” Voter fraud virtually never occurs.

From: JTV
07-Sep-17
Democrats rely on voter fraud, with out it they'd lose in a lot more elections ... the above is proof ^^^ ... even the resident dems/libs/#neverTrumps and a few others will claim its no big deal .... smh

From: WDP
09-Sep-17
Isn't that where the phrase "Vote early and vote often" came from?

09-Sep-17
Exactly correct, JTV. Demons rely on lies of every sort and KNOW it.

From: Coyote 65
09-Sep-17
I like the find an ballot box in the car trunk trick when you need a couple hundred more votes, aka Sen Frankin.

Terry

  • Sitka Gear