Posted on 11/27/2012 8:39:53 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
Two former top Florida Republicans say a new law that shortened the early voting period in the state was designed by the GOP to suppress the Democratic vote, not to curb voter fraud, according to a report Monday from the Palm Beach Post.
The Palm Beach Post quoted Former Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer and former Gov. Charlie Crist, neither of whom is still a party member, and a handful of other party operatives, who said claims the law was designed to curb voter fraud in the state were merely a marketing ploy to provide cover for the party’s voter suppression efforts.
“The Republican Party, the strategists, the consultants, they firmly believe that early voting is bad for Republican Party candidates,” Greer told The Post. “It’s done for one reason and one reason only. … We’ve got to cut down on early voting because early voting is not good for us."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Look for an onslaught from the sycophantic Obama worshiping Florida media.
Florida news....Crist is back again. Gag.
Tell us again how former GOP members = Top Florida Republicans.
Greer is going to jail for corruption. He was very close with Crist.
Crist isn’t a republican anymore.
The Hill, blatantly lying again.
Liars.....
Grifters .....
Some element of truth in that title, I suppose. The election law was intentionally designed to suppress voter fraud. Since the Democrats live on voter fraud, it was intentionally designed to suppress Democrat votes.
I guess the GOP doing everything it can to suppress the Conservative vote isn’t news...
“Voter suppression” is code word for “stop Democrats from voting more than once.”
By the election results, It appears the Republican party didn't even manage to get that right...
“Top Republicans?”
These people are no longer Republicans. The headline for this article is simply a lie. They are now Democrats, and Democrats lie all the time.
“Isn’t Greer under investigation for corruption? “
Someone may have offered a deal to get out of those charges, and that’s what we saw on CNN.
That’s not in the constitution, it’s in the US Code.
Emphasis on “former”.
These are not clear representatives of the Republican party of Florida, which has gone through a fundamentally deep restructuring.
Maybe not enough, yet, but still a work in progress.
So 0 was elected by fraud! Ho hum. The media will never cover it.
Early voting is not good for the GOP because of the increased voter fraud.
And just a reminder, the GOPe backed the fake-Republican Crist ahead of the upstart Rubio. Now of course Rubio’s a GOPe guy, but still, it’s the tea party that got him in office.
Now suffrage was supposed to be controlled by each State, Article I, Sec. 2, of the Federal Constitution. Can anyone conceive of any reason why we--as decent, concerned Americans--forget Party identification;--any reason why any, decent, loyal & concerned American, would want to see a heavier vote from a poorly informed, controlled electorate? Moreover, an electorate increasingly being bribed by an ever expanded Welfare system--an obvious conflict of interest?
We need to stop apologizing from taking a stand that the Founding Fathers would have taken to a man! We need to demand that any voter be acting clearly on his or her own volition; his or her own, personally responsible, motivation; and not being bribed by demagogues & their followers.
William Flax
It is not just voting because it is easy. It is voting as someone with the time to herd you to the polls, instructs you how to vote. Multiple days to vote, multiplies how much herding the Acorn type of "Community Organizer," can do by the same multiple.
We have to draw a line in the sand and start to fight back against those who reject the very concept of the individual responsibility that made America all that it once was.
William Flax
However, federal law does specify that all electors must be selected on the same day, which is “the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November,” i.e. a Tuesday no earlier than November 2 and no later than November 8.
I know a 60 year old drug addict who voted for the first time this year.
He recently moved into low income housing and a social worker went door to door signing people up to vote with the veiled threat that not voting might lead to the loss of benefits. Sure enough, they were back to knocking on doors on election day and giving people rides to the polls.
In my opinion, even registering to vote should be for those ambitious enough to actively go and register at the secretary of state office. In fact I think we should have to re-register every 4 years or so.
“Can anyone conceive of any reason why ... any, decent, loyal & concerned American, would want to see a heavier vote from a poorly informed, controlled electorate?”
No, but I can see why a Democrat would want it.
Exactly.
Similarly, “swiftboating” is code for...”telling the truth”
Plenty of FReepers were all for it because they believed that they were winning.
Democrats do “rally voting”
The NEED sunday voting in order to use the churches to “escort” parishoners to the voting booths, absentee ballots, and generally “help” them vote the right way.
The democrats also use homeless shelters, nursing homes, and assisted living facilities to vote for those people via absentee.
If republicans want to seriously stop vote fraud they have to start NOW.
Proof-positive that the Republican party has been infiltrated by Dims long ago - RINOS are the least of our problems.
Yep - the Founders had it right when they only allowed men who were productive property owners to vote. If it was still that way, we would be a much more conservative and God-fearing Nation with our Freedoms intact. No offense to all those who get to vote due to Women's Suffrage, but let's face it, the really conservative women are much fewer and further between than ever before and it's mainly because of the "liberal" policies and movements that heralded the female vote and other "empowerment". I truly love and appreciate all the conservative women of the world and I hope you do not take offense. If you do take offense, take it up with my wife - she won't let me fight with girls because that's a woman's job...
Crist was never a republican, and neither are most of the GOPe.
How can a county that has a district with only 7 registered voters & turns in 900 votes on Nov 6th possibly claim ‘voter suppression”?????
FReepers were all for voting early and often? For making fraud easy? For same-day voter registration? For motor-voter? For illegals and felons voting?
My memory is drawing a blank. Exactly what were plenty of Freepers “all for” because they thought they were winning?
I always thought the other side had the lock on the brain-dead vote, and I haven’t seen many contrary opinions here.
Go back and read what I said and try again.
I’m not going to respond to childish strawmen.
I agree with your comments. God bless the conservative women out there, but we have to acknowledge that God did design us differently (praise the Lord). All equal before God regarding salvation and as His children, but despite what the caterwauling media and society wants to tell us - we are different. Women tend to excel in nurturing and appreciate those attributes. Makes them excellent mothers and keepers of the household, but this attribute gives them the inclination to vote for socialists and to swallow the lies and promises of the politicians.
OK, minus the sarcasm, I’m really confused by your post.
I quoted this:
“Can anyone conceive of any reason why ... any, decent, loyal & concerned American, would want to see a heavier vote from a poorly informed, controlled electorate?”
Then I made this comment:
No, but I can see why a Democrat would want it.
You replied to that comment with this:
Plenty of FReepers were all for it because they believed that they were winning.
What is your “it” that Freepers were all for. In context, it should mean “a heavier vote from a poorly informed, controlled electorate?” If that is your intention, I disagree unless you have a pretty good explanation. I just don’t see it. If that wasn’t your intention, I badly misunderstood (and I’m still in the dark.)
Is it possible you meant to reply to someone else?
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.