Originally Posted by sob

I'm not new to TFP, and I found his post extremely relevant. Democrats have tried to win the last two elections with lawyers, not votes, and when the lawyers fail, they attack the physical means of voting. Those are two reasons we have a "rift in the nation."

His article also points out voter fraud much larger than the "massive, nearly unimaginable scale" mentioned in this thread. Can you dispute any of the accusations it brings up?

This attempt to dismiss any voter fraud that works in accordance with your political preference is gross hypocrisy. Thank you for going public with it.



By your "logic," you have just ruled out the use of any statements by Bill Clinton or Dan Rather, because in addition to being "controversial," they are documented liars. Clinton gets extra credit for lying under oath.

By the way, what does being a "failed candidate for the U.S. senate" have to do with a person's credibility? In addition to writing off "failed candidates," can we discredit "impeached presidents?"

Please look up "poisoning the well." You'll find it's a logical fallacy.

Lastly, this isn't the first time I've noticed that you seem to think starting a thread allows you to dictate what's said in it. I can't find that in the "Rules of Tilted Politics" sticky.

But I'm sure Tarl Cabot will thank you for granting him permission to post!