- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,609
- Reaction score
- 552
- Country
What would be your penalty for a spoiled paper?
That would mean knowing what the person voted.
What would be your penalty for a spoiled paper?
Voter fraud is rife. Just look at the good old USA
Jeb BushIt's actually much less common than you imagine.
never seen 1 of them from him yet.I don't need pointers, a direct answer would be good. For once...
Did you see the date of that article?Suppose the massive grooming cover up in the north is also just my prejudice.
Your agenda is to cover all of this up.
"They include Birmingham, the centre of vote-rigging scandal in 2004, which a judge described as worse than a banana republic."
Probe Into South Asian Vote-Rigging Claims
The Electoral Commission warns "cultural approaches to democratic participation" are not an excuse for ballot-fixing.news.sky.com
Even Trump couldn't prove that, and we all know he tried. Sort of backfired on him, and his supportersVoter fraud is rife. Just look at the good old USA
I didn’t mention or mean Trump.Even Trump couldn't prove that, and we all know he tried. Sort of backfired on him, and his supporters
Are you referring to all the grooming gangs that have been jailed over these last few years? Well blow me down...Suppose the massive grooming cover up in the north is also just my prejudice
So far ZERO evidence has been presented to the courts in the USA, that would alter the path of any of the elections. Most were laughed out of the courts whilst those that brought the frivilous cases have been fined, disbarred or reprimanded.Voter fraud is rife. Just look at the good old USA
Lol. I think Rudy tried your approach and got himself disbarred. Fox News attempted to convince gammon right wing morons the same and ended up paying out 3/4 of a BILLION dollars.
Did you see the date of that article?
And the date of the information I posted?
Look again at the article I posted then.Poor swerve attempt. One other thing the article I linked to shows is just how long it's been going on.
The article's date is immaterial. You said I'm prejudiced. I posted an article that backs up what I said and showed I wasn't prejudiced. But it gets even better because the article mentions cultural approaches to voter participation - which is exactly what I'm highlighting. Whenever it's evil or fraudlent goings on, their hands are all over it. Time and time again - and your blinkered approach will never demonstrate otherwise.
Look again at the article I posted then.
It looks like your article has been investigated and found little to no fraud.
Unless you have something better to back up your claim, it is all it is, a prejudiced claim.