If there is over 100% voter participation in a dem controlled district which repubs have no control that’s a good indication of dem voter fraud because repubs don’t have any control they don’t have the ability to commit voter fraud.
OK? You follow this so far?
When dems claim voter fraud because somehow repubs have taken control of a dem controlled district without anyone knowing it and rigged the vote, it’s bunk or the dems rigged the vote themselves.
Did you bother to notice it was the Clintons that started the “Bush stole the election” in 2000 and it was also Bill Clinton that got sued for “voter disenfranchisement” while he was Gov. of Arkansas?
In other words the 2 people, 1 of which was known for voter disenfranchisement, that had what was called a “20 year plan”, meaning BC would be president 8 years, 4 years for another president, then HC would be president 8 years (8+4+8=20) had to come up with a plan not only to make sure Gore didn’t get elected but a plan to bring down a sitting president and keep him at one term.
You think it’s possible if there was in fact voter fraud in dem controlled districts in the 2000 election it might have come from the 2 people already associated with voter fraud and also had a vested interest in making sure Gore didn’t get elected?
Did you also bother to notice after the 2004 election bin Laden put out a tape in which the objective of the 9/11 attack was to bring down a sitting president?
I got an idea, maybe bin Laden was so in touch with the news he just picked up on the Clintons 20 year plan from the news and “spontaneously” planned the 9/11 attack to help Hillary get into the WH.
Well if its a liberal district (like Baltimore city) then it doesn't matter if 150% vote, its not making a difference.
Unlike Romney, Obama campaign worked on getting Dems to vote in swing states.
One of the facts that really poo-pooed the “Romney really won” claims is when GOP governors won their states that Romney lost, on the same ballos.