DeschutesAg said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

And let's be honest, this isn't about legitimate voters for democrats.

---

Actually it is.

---

Aggies don't lie cheat or steal, not tolerate those who do. If it were about legitimate voters, they would have no problems purging the roles of the illegitimate ones. But they fight that tooth and nail because it is an existential fight for them.

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

Libs are so good at trying to conflate legal and illegal [insert topic].

DeschutesAg said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

And let's be honest, this isn't about legitimate voters for democrats.

---

Actually it is.

---

False.

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

---

The "millions of illegals vote" is a myth.

txags92 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

---

The "millions of illegals vote" is a myth.

---

Ok good. Prove it. There should be no problem letting us look through the voter rolls and requiring ID to vote. Continuing to fight against suggests that you know what you are saying is not true.

---

You're arguing against yourself.

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

---

The "millions of illegals vote" is a myth.

---

That illegals don't vote is the myth...
Have you seen California's voting laws? It would be dang near impossible to prove if they did vote. Why won't the DEMs in California let election officials ask for Photo ID when people vote? In Arizona, they only fully audit a very very small percentage of the ballots from Pima or Maricopa county after each Federal election, like maybe 500 ballots. and then say there was no fraud based on their very limited check...

With current laws you can't be required to show documented proof of citizenship in any state to vote.

All you have to do is check a box on the ballot to attest you're a citizen, so where do these states get "accurate" statistics on how many illegals voted? If an illegal checks the box that they are a Citizen, do you really think anyone is following up and researching if they are a citizen out of hundreds of thousands of ballots?

Tell us how many of them vote.

txags92 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

---

The "millions of illegals vote" is a myth.

---

Ok good. Prove it. There should be no problem letting us look through the voter rolls and requiring ID to vote. Continuing to fight against suggests that you know what you are saying is not true.

---

You're arguing against yourself.

---

I am saying that if it is such a myth, then doing something simple like asking for ID and cleaning the voter rolls of ineligible voters should have no impact at all. So why not go ahead and do it? You are the one arguing against that. Because you KNOW it will have an impact and hurt your team…

---

No, I didn't argue against cleaning up voter rolls or requiring photo ID to register to vote.

There is no millions of illegals voting.

DeschutesAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

---

The "millions of illegals vote" is a myth.

---

Ok good. Prove it. There should be no problem letting us look through the voter rolls and requiring ID to vote. Continuing to fight against suggests that you know what you are saying is not true.

---

You're arguing against yourself.

---

I am saying that if it is such a myth, then doing something simple like asking for ID and cleaning the voter rolls of ineligible voters should have no impact at all. So why not go ahead and do it? You are the one arguing against that. Because you KNOW it will have an impact and hurt your team…

---

No, I didn't argue against cleaning up voter rolls or requiring photo ID to register to vote.

There is no millions of illegals voting.

---

So you agree that we should pass the SAVE act?

DeschutesAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

---

The "millions of illegals vote" is a myth.

---

Ok good. Prove it. There should be no problem letting us look through the voter rolls and requiring ID to vote. Continuing to fight against suggests that you know what you are saying is not true.

---

You're arguing against yourself.

---

I am saying that if it is such a myth, then doing something simple like asking for ID and cleaning the voter rolls of ineligible voters should have no impact at all. So why not go ahead and do it? You are the one arguing against that. Because you KNOW it will have an impact and hurt your team…

---

No, I didn't argue against cleaning up voter rolls or requiring photo ID to register to vote.

There is no millions of illegals voting.

---

You mean states that makes it possible to allow illegals to vote are going to actually investigate it? The states that are fighting tooth and nail to hand over voter registration rolls?

How do you know millions of illegals don't vote? What proof do you offer?
If somebody had told you millions of illegals are taking advantage of Medicare/medicaid I'm sure you would say millions of illegals don't take advantage of Medicare/Medicaid cause that's not legal. Except it has happened. Billions of tax dollars for illegal immigrants for Medicare/medicaid.

You would also probably say NGOs don't use tax payer dollars to defend defamation cases for fraudulent Medicare/medicaid costs for illegals. You'd be wrong again. They use our tax dollars like it's their money.

I want that number to be zero. And so should you.

Quote:

---

So you agree that we should pass the SAVE act?

---

In its current form? No, it should not be passed. It needs some major revisions.

Quote:

---

You mean states that make it possible to allow illegals to vote are going to actually investigate it?

---

Most states already investigate and limit it. We already know the extent of the problem. It is tiny in most states. The three states where it is most prevalent are three deep red states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

You mean states that make it possible to allow illegals to vote are going to actually investigate it?

---

Most states already investigate and limit it. We already know the extent of the problem. It is tiny in most states. The three states where it is most prevalent are three deep red states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida.

---

New York, California, Washington, Oregon, and other marxist states facilitate it and steal representation from American citizens with illegal aliens. But you know that.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

So you agree that we should pass the SAVE act?

---

In its current form? No, it should not be passed. It needs some major revisions.

---

What major revisions?

If someone like Musk uses lax voting laws to turn blue states into red states, Dems will be fervent proponents of voter ID laws.

Remember, a person only has to be living in a state for 30 days to qualify to vote. Just hire 100,000 "right-wing workers" to live in a state like Colorado for 60 days prior to the election, and vote for Republicans.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

So you agree that we should pass the SAVE act?

---

In its current form? No, it should not be passed. It needs some major revisions.

---

Vague comment is vague.

Let us know your proposed "major revisions".

VaultingChemist said:

---

If someone like Musk uses lax voting laws to turn blue states into red states, Dems will be fervent proponents of voter ID laws.

Remember, a person only has to be living in a state for 30 days to qualify to vote. Just hire 100,000 "right-wing workers" to live in a state like Colorado for 60 days prior to the election, and vote for Republicans.

---

They would deport Musk and revoke his citizenship and confiscate all his assets an nationalize SpaceX to provide free internet to their cartel friends, Hamas, and others.

flown-the-coop said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

So you agree that we should pass the SAVE act?

---

In its current form? No, it should not be passed. It needs some major revisions.

---

Vague comment is vague.

Let us know your proposed "major revisions".

---

I'm sure whatever revisions that poster thinks they should make would render the bill to being pretty much useless in stopping election fraud. They would be based on "concerns" in the guise of states rights or some other BS.

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

And let's be honest, this isn't about legitimate voters for democrats.

---

Actually it is.

---

If it were, then they would be all for voter ID laws.

---

If the DNC was data-oriented and logical, yes, they would support voter ID. But the Democratic Party has idiotic myths it believes in, just like the Republicans have many idiotic false myths they treat as dogma and believe in.

---

They use it as figleaf to mask their naked power grab by flooding the elections with uninformed voters that are dependent on democratic policies and theft.

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

I will give you an example of a naked power grab.

In 1960, the Democratic party stuffed the ballot box in Chicago with a ton of fake ballots. This cheating was enough to put Illinois in JFK's pocket, and gave him the presidency. This was not getting voted into office. This was a naked power grab. Historians don't even attempt to refute that this is what happened.

I am not aware of a GOP president having ever done anything similar. Do you have an example?

They will probably talk about farmers, meat processors, landscapers, and others cannot locate a nearby Kinkos so will not be able to vote.

Makes total sense. Just ask Kamala.

DeschutesAg said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

The Ds do try to get voters to vote for their party's candidates. The Rs do the exact same thing. I have never seen it described as a "naked power grab" since that is how democratic elections have been done in the U.S. for at least 225 years. Hamilton and Madison had some very spirited written discussions on that topic. Ben Franklin, John Adams and Jefferson had views on it, too. We Americans today still discuss and debate it.

---

There's a difference between changing voting laws to allow ineligible voters to vote and importing millions of illegals into the country and get out the vote of actual legal voters.

---

The "millions of illegals vote" is a myth.

---

The "illegals don't vote, or impact elections" is a myth.

The "voter ID is about racism, not stopping cheating" is a myth.

The open borders policy NOT being about illegal voting is a myth.

It doesn't matter if there are literally more than 2,000,001 illegal alien voters or not, there are enough to sway elections, and Democrats want that, and that is why the oppose the FACE act.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

So you agree that we should pass the SAVE act?

---

In its current form? No, it should not be passed. It needs some major revisions.

---

Exactly what revision?

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

So you agree that we should pass the SAVE act?

---

In its current form? No, it should not be passed. It needs some major revisions.

---

I heard the same thing from the soy boys and blue haired women about our immigration laws… prior to 2025 that is…

We need to be patient whilst Reddit is reloading…

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

You mean states that make it possible to allow illegals to vote are going to actually investigate it?

---

Most states already investigate and limit it. We already know the extent of the problem. It is tiny in most states. The three states where it is most prevalent are three deep red states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida.

---

Baseless claim.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

You mean states that make it possible to allow illegals to vote are going to actually investigate it?

---

Most states already investigate and limit it. We already know the extent of the problem. It is tiny in most states. The three states where it is most prevalent are three deep red states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida.

---

Many states have laws in place that purposefully make it impossible to investigate.

In CA, you don't have to be a citizen to get a drivers license, and, if you have a drivers license, you can vote. Period. There is no further check.

How in the world would one catch an illegal alien voting in CA?

It isn't illegals voting.

It is disinterested or politically inactive citizens being registred without their own knowledge or consent and then having mail in ballots cast in their name by others, OR simple ballot counting and handling games that find ways to overcount or over tally one party's vote while somehow losing votes from the opposing party.


The illegals are all about distorting apportionment to get extra house districts for Democrat heavy states, and creating a beholden group of first generation citizens over the next decade or two whose older relatives serve as a vote extortion platform. Ie vote Dem or your parents could be deported.

Logos Stick said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

Quote:

---

You mean states that make it possible to allow illegals to vote are going to actually investigate it?

---

Most states already investigate and limit it. We already know the extent of the problem. It is tiny in most states. The three states where it is most prevalent are three deep red states: Texas, Louisiana, Florida.

---

Baseless claim.

---

3 states with voter ID show issues. But we don't need voter ID cause it doesn't happen. Lib logic on full display folks.