Is it bad that I hope Romney wins?

[_Chap]

... the Brits invaded America ...

I'm sorry - we seem to have fallen through into an alternative reality here. I don't remember that in the Book of Mormon at all.

[_Hoops]

She says crazy stuff.

Like that reckless, self-serving claim that the HPV vaccine has "very serious side effects" like autism or mental retardation. WTF? She was just mad because Rick Perry stole her thunder after the Iowa straw poll.

You are really a "strong" supporter of this nutcase?

Well, put her next to Gingrich, Santroum, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, or Cain... wow, what a crop of losers. Eat humble pie, Teavangelicals!! You are stuck with Mormon Mitt Romney for president. LOL

What an inspiring, eloquent, and cogent political argument.

[_Yoda]

liz. I'm shell shocked.

She was the nadir of American politics and that's saying a lot. A LOT.

It sounds like I don't know as much about her as I should. But I won't apologize for liking her stances on the issues I outlined above in this thread.

[_Yoda]

Google 'Santorum' and you'll quickly be intrigued by his dirty little secrets.

Was wanting to get on his website to see his stated stances on the issues but all leads to a donation slip at this time which is what he needs most right now if he wants to capitalize on Iowa.

Are you a Santorum supporter? I thought you were in the Romney camp. Now that Bachman is out, that is where I am.(supporting Romney)

[_Jonah]

I'm pulling for Romney.

Once word gets out that he believes there are three indians that have been wandering around helping stranded motorists, getting cats out of trees, helping old ladies cross the street, etc. since the days of Christ, there will be a media frenzy to find them.

That could be fun.

[_BartBurk]

I like Romney. I like Santorum. I don't think the LDS Church will be affected negatively if Romney wins the nomination. All things being equal I think a conservative Catholic has a better chance of winning than a Mormon simply because there are so many more Catholics than Mormons. All things aren't equal because Romney has money and Santorum doesn't. I think either of them would do well against Obama assuming an honest election, but it's clear that Democrats are making sure we don't have an honest election by trying to overturn voter I. D. laws. The Chicago politicians will have to have lots of graveyard votes and undocumented workers votes to win. It's the Chicago way.

[_EAllusion]

Under Wisconsin's old ID requirements for voting, there was less than a dozen cases of established voter fraud a year. There was absolutely no reason to think this was a pervasive problem. There is, however, every reason to think that the new voter ID law passed under the Walker administration was a calculated attempted at voter suppression. It's not just that people least likely to have ID's or most likely to change addresses lean heavily Democrat. It's not just that this has been a widely discussed tactic in Republican election strategy. We also know Walker tried closing down a bunch of DMV's - you know, where people get ID's - in traditionally Democratic voting areas and "compensate" by offering to open new ones in traditionally Republican voting areas. For the budget. That one was so brazen, they had to back down at the last minute. Since ID's cost money, forcing people to buy them looks like a backdoor poll tax that would not pass constitutional muster. So the law had a clause that the DMV would have to offer them for free. So the Walker administration sent an internal memo to DMV's to not post information about free ID's and to never give a free ID unless it is explicitly asked for. Otherwise, charge. Why would that be the case? Oh, I don't know.

[_BartBurk]

I don't have any knowledge of Wisconsin, but I used to work the polls in Indiana. All a person had to do was show up and claim they were a certain person, sign the rolls and vote. I had two or three children who were still on the rolls even though they no longer lived in Indiana -- it would have been easy for someone to just say, "That's me"" and vote. I'm glad they now have the requirement for a photo ID in Indiana and the state actively encourages people to go get the free ID at the BMV offices. We all know what the situation has always been in Cook County -- vote early and vote often.

Under Wisconsin's old ID requirements for voting, there was less than a dozen cases of established voter fraud a year. There was absolutely no reason to think this was a pervasive problem. There is, however, every reason to think that the new voter ID law passed under the Walker administration was a calculated attempted at voter suppression. It's not just that people least likely to have ID's or most likely to change addresses lean heavily Democrat. It's not just that this has been a widely discussed tactic in Republican election strategy. We also know Walker tried closing down a bunch of DMV's - you know, where people get ID's - in traditionally Democratic voting areas and "compensate" by offering to open new ones in traditionally Republican voting areas. For the budget. That one was so brazen, they had to back down at the last minute. Since ID's cost money, forcing people to buy them looks like a backdoor poll tax that would not pass constitutional muster. So the law had a clause that the DMV would have to offer them for free. So the Walker administration sent an internal memo to DMV's to not post information about free ID's and to never give a free ID unless it is explicitly asked for. Otherwise, charge. Why would that be the case? Oh, I don't know.

[_richardMdBorn]

Under Wisconsin's old ID requirements for voting, there was less than a dozen cases of established voter fraud a year. There was absolutely no reason to think this was a pervasive problem.

That's a weak argument. Voting fraud in Chicago is pervasive. My wife's job in 2006 was to study it and it was worse than you can imagine. Making the inference that few established cases of voting fraud means that it is rare is ridiculous. It pervasive in Chicago but is rarely prosecuted or proven.

[_richardMdBorn]

There is just something extraordinarily humiliating to a nation when the world finds out that your leader likes to dress up like a baker and exchange secret handshakes with old men behind curtains, just because he thinks it will get him into heaven.

Many Presidents have been masons but it hasn't been an issue since the scandals of the 1820s-1830s.