September 3, 2012

37.6% call themselves Republicans now, and only 33.3% say they are Democrats.

Other Rasmussen polling shows a record high percentage of Americans identify themselves as Republicans — record high, meaning since 2002. The percentage is 37.6%. How many Americans call themselves Democrats? 33.3%. (This was a poll of adults, not likely voters. I suspect Republicans are more likely to be likely voters, don't you?)

78 comments:

Bob_R said...

Yeah, but the Democrats are more likely to vote multiple times.

Mogget said...

I wonder how much of the "Republican" is simply "Not Obama" rather than ideological shift.

America's Politico said...

As SOMEONE was a proud-democrat till Thursday, I am confident that this is not an incorrect data. The Chicago HQ has a Statistic Team that counts each voter. You have no idea about the model they are operating with, such as early-voter, women voters, etc.

If Romney wins, he will be considered a God. The first day I was in HQ, there were over 300 people working on two floors on every aspect of re-election.

You have no idea what is happening in 4 states that I was responsible for - CO, IA, NC, and VA.

What about other 46? There were others who focused on these. Each person had 4 states.

America's Politico said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Indigo Red said...

A Jan 2012 Gallop poll shows 40% of Americans self-describe as Conservative regardless of party affiliation. With party affiliation 20% of Democrats say they conservative or very conservative.

My feeling is it's the name and assigned baggage of "Republican" rather than actual philosophy.

dustbunny said...

When the emphasis is economic conservatism many more will identify as R. When they push the social conservative issues, not so much.

Lem said...

Obama Job Approval Drops to 43 Empty Chairs #EmptyChairDay

EDH said...

"We're commin' out! ...Guns blazin'!"

dreams said...

The polls that say the race is close or Obama is leading are not reliable polls because they over sample the Dems and they are doing it for a reason. These polls are being used by the liberal media to advance the view that Obama is unbeatable so as to induce the undecided voters out there that they should get on the bandwagon and vote for him too.

Tim said...

If true, Obama is dead affirmative action hire walking.

The reason for the qualifier is, one can (I don't have time enough, or care enough) to actually go to each state's Secretary of State (or the equivalent office) and compile the actual breakdown of voter registration (although, to be fair, most state's haven't closed voter registration yet [for the upcoming election - one can always register, but if one does so after the deadline, one will have to wait for the following election to vote, that is, if voter fraud is discounted]).

It would be interesting to test the "actuals" against the polled numbers.

rhhardin said...

We're crossing the Republicon.

dreams said...

Most people are conservative but those that are not news junkies absorb the omnipresent liberal spin and vote for candidates who won't represent their true values.

Lindsey Meadows said...

I'm pretty motivated to vote democratic even if I have to crawl so I'm motived - particularly by the prospect of Mitten become president.

And the %'s may change significantly if the various states that are trying to surpress the vote are blocked from doing so.

shiloh said...

Althouse Rasmussen fetish marches on ...

Bless her little heart!

The Drill SGT said...

let's count the ways:

- R+4
- GOP enthusiasm very high, Dem much lower than 08
- independents +16
- undecideds break to the challenger late
- some number of Bradley wilder factor Dem voters who will pull the Romney lever
- Romney outraising the Won
- Rpmney with lots more cash down the stretch since only as of Friday could he spend it
- Obama negative ad blitz bombed.

all chicago has is racism and prayers

Chip Ahoy said...

all chicago has is racism and prayers

Classism, sexism, sexual preferenceism, Ageism

garage mahal said...

all chicago has is racism and prayers

And a decided advantage in the state polls ie electoral college. R's seem to be bailing on PA already, and Romney has to win Ohio to have any shot. R's are pulling resources to help in the ND senate fight.

Relaaaaaax!

Rabel said...

Rasmussen has it at 37-R and 33-D.
ABC-WashPost has it 22-R and 31-D.

Ras has Romney up 4.
ABC has Romney up 1.

This does not compute.

ricpic said...

I wonder what percentage of the 33% who call themselves Democrats are aware that the party they identify with was captured by the relentlessly anti-white, anti-traditional values, anti-middle class hard left at the convention that nominated George McGovern for president in 1972. That's right, the Democratic Party has been wholly owned by the hard left since 1972. And yet I would hazard a guess that a significant percentage of the 33% don't know that, don't know what they're voting for. And I'm not saying they're stupid. They're just not political wonks or junkies and therefore they imbibe the MSM daily lie that the Democrats are "mainstream," just like the, ha ha, MSM and anyone to the right of McGovern/Ted Kennedy/Nancy Pelosi/Obama is "extreme" and wants to kill granny. Which is to say the entire Republican Party wants to kill granny and who wants to go there? So perfectly decent traditionalists go on voting in large numbers for their deadly enemy.

edutcher said...

This has been the trend since the runup to the '10 elections, although Mogget's point is worth pondering.

Althouse Rasmussen fetish marches on ...

And Gallup has Zero's approval at 43 (and, IIRC, agrees with Ras on the party breakdown).

It's just that the little animal is clinging to his Nate silver fetish.

john said...

It was interesting the last couple of elections how closely most of the polls reflected the actual vote. I wouldnt discount polls that say the race is very close.

This is the Gallup Poll accuracy from 1936 - 2008.

Tom Spaulding said...

I'm pretty motivated to vote democratic even if I have to crawl so I'm motived - particularly by the prospect of Mitten become president.

Wow. Proud and public declarations that prove Einstein's Insanity Postulate never get old.

Crawl with motivation over the idle bodies of 23 million without jobs.

Vote on, citizen!

Hagar said...

I think it may be a close election, or maybe someone will say or do something somewhere - maybe not even in this country - and we will have another blow-out election that nobody saw coming.

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows:And the %'s may change significantly if the various states that are trying to surpress the vote are blocked from doing so.

I thought vote fraud was so insignificant it couldn't change anything. Now you are saying it is highly significant. What made you decide to admit this now?

Or did you mean that there are millions of people who regularly vote but don't have any form of ID and can't get it? If so, it would be very interesting to see the evidence for that.

The Drill SGT said...

Gabriel Hanna said...
Or did you mean that there are millions of people who regularly vote but don't have any form of ID and can't get it? If so, it would be very interesting to see the evidence for that.


interestingly, to vote or even get into the DEM Convention, you need one of those expensive new fanggled pitcher ID's. Who'd a thought that the poor delegates could figure out how to get them...

edutcher said...

Hagar said...

I think it may be a close election, or maybe someone will say or do something somewhere - maybe not even in this country - and we will have another blow-out election that nobody saw coming.

I think what we're seeing is pointing to a blow-out, but the demos are counting on vote fraud (what else have they got?).

The Romney people seem OTOH trying to make their case while doing anything they can to get under Zero's skin.

Of course, Joe could pull an Akin and that would do it right there.

elkh1 said...

In a previous poll, 9% of Dems wouldn't vote for Obama. That poll was on 38% of voters claiming to be Democrats. Since 9% of 33% is less than 9% of 38%, so Obama is beaming with joy that less Democrats would not vote for him.

rcocean said...

It doesn't so much matter how many are Republicans there are as where they are.

All Obama needs is 50.1% in the right states and he'll stay in the white house.

dreams said...

"It was interesting the last couple of elections how closely most of the polls reflected the actual vote. I wouldnt discount polls that say the race is very close."

That wasn't the case in 2010.

elkh1 said...

"All Obama needs is 50.1% in the right states..."

He certainly has the advantage since he is getting votes from 57 states, Romney's votes are from 50. Obama is also getting all 30,000 dead North Carolinian votes.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/group-says-it-found-30000-dead-north-carolinians-registered-to-vote.html

Kchiker said...

Aren't Ras's figures based on the assumption that those responding via landline will be representative of the general public?

Lindsey Meadows said...

Gabriel Hanna said...
"I thought vote fraud was so insignificant it couldn't change anything. Now you are saying it is highly significant. What made you decide to admit this now?"

Are you being purposefully dense or can't you read?

There is virtually no voter fraud anywhere and what little this is in a pin-prick in an elephant's butt (no pun intended). The supression I referenced was the widespread attempts in republican controlled states to supress minority vote and aged vote.

But you knew that didn't you? You were just putting out some dumbass stuff just to see if anyone caught you.


Erik Robert Nelson said...

Everything is looking very much like 2010 at this point, which makes me think this isn't going to be as narrow a result as people are predicting. Nevertheless, it's not exactly 2010, and presidential elections are fundamentally different from mid-term elections. Honestly, if the polls were showing a large GOP blowout, I'd be more worried about overreach by Romney-Ryan. The polls being so close might actually keep them disciplined and on message. Maybe.

Bruce Hayden said...

It was interesting the last couple of elections how closely most of the polls reflected the actual vote. I wouldnt discount polls that say the race is very close.

Here is the problem there. The polls that count, when you look election to election, are those that whose results are published right before the election. Not the ones from 2, 4, 6, etc. months out. And, so, polls can be, and may actually be, diddled a bit early on, with the pollsters increasing their accuracy as they get closer to the election.

The problem is that most of the polls up until now have used a persistent Dem bias, with Gallop being one of the more blatant, with D+4, D+6, and even D+8, despite the major shift in party identification and party registrations that has been seen. The argument seems to have been that they were using the 2008 exit polling results as being more accurate than the 2010 results because it was the last Presidential election. Something like that.

Not surprising then, that a lot of Obama's edge throughout the spring seems to disappear, when this persistent Dem weighting is removed.

Of course, the polls that we are talking about are the ones for general release. The parties, etc. have their own, and I think that maybe we can infer a closer race, with maybe a Romney advantage, even before the Republican Convention, by the apparent panic in the Obama camp this summer, and lack thereof in the Romney camp. (Or, it could just be the two personalities).

My prediction is that the excess Dem weighting will mostly disappear from the polling from here on up to the elections, since, as I pointed out above, the closer to the election, the more incentive the pollsters have for being right.

Erik Robert Nelson said...

" The supression I referenced was the widespread attempts in republican controlled states to supress minority vote and aged vote."

Every time I hear this suppression argument with voter ID, I start having "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" going off in my head. It's ludicrous. Getting photo ID is easy.

Very nearly everyone does it, it rarely causes issues, and if you're getting a job, opening a bank account, driving a car, traveling overseas, receiving any sort of public benefit, flying on a plane, buying cigarettes or alcohol, purchasing a gun, applying for college, entering government buildings, and even getting a freaking library card often requires a photo ID. But voting? NO! IT'S SUPPRESSING THE VOTE! Grow up.

Bruce Hayden said...

There is virtually no voter fraud anywhere and what little this is in a pin-prick in an elephant's butt (no pun intended). The supression I referenced was the widespread attempts in republican controlled states to supress minority vote and aged vote.

And, how, pray tell, do you know this? And, why, has there been rampant documented voter registration fraud by Obama and Dem related groups, if there is no intent to engage in voting fraud?

Or, and how much actual voter suppression has there been documented?

Bruce Hayden said...

I would agree with the majority of posters here, and disagree with Lindsay and the other libs, that when they claim that voter ID laws are designed to suppress voting, we see this argument as defending significant voter fraud.

And, keep in mind that the two are equivalent, in terms of outcome. One overvote is the equivalent of one undervote. One dead person voting from a Chicago cemetery is equivalent to one person legitimately turned away at the polls. Or, one white person turned away by uniformed New Black Panthers with baseball bats outside polling places.

But, you have to expect that overvoting is a big issue for the Dems for the simple reason that they go bonkers whenever voter ID comes up. My expectation is that they know that they win a lot of close elections this way, and are scared of losing this election edge, if voters are required to show photo ids. Otherwise, they would be more worried about getting free photo IDs to those they claim would be disenfranchised. That they don't, I think, is indicia of where their issues really are.

Now, I don't doubt that Lindsay really believes what she says. She picks up and repeats the her party's talking points with alacrity.

shiloh said...

Acually, re: 50.1% a "study" which was conducted by Clinton's '92 campaign determined because of the electoral college, if a pres nominee gets at least 1.5% more than their opponent, it should "ensure" said nominee an electoral victory.

Gore got .5% more than Bush43.

carry on

shiloh said...

Actually

ken in sc said...

The idea that there is no voter fraud problem does not hold water with me. I have read of several cases of more votes being cast than there are registered voters. There are well publicized cases of people obtaining ballots using someone else's name. There is the ACORN scandal of false voter registrations. The scandal caused ACORN to be mostly de-funded and going underground. One black Alabama politician, I think it was Artur, I'm not sure, said he had people brag to him about how many bogus votes they had created.

Voter fraud has long tradition in Alabama. My step-father lost a Sheriff's race in Tuscaloosa County one time because of it.

P.S. Don't ask for sites and links, I'm not out to convince you because I don't think it can be done. I'm just letting you know what I think or know.

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows:The supression I referenced was the widespread attempts in republican controlled states to supress minority vote and aged vote.

So you have chosen the second option, that millions of minority and aged people who regularly vote do not have, and cannot get, IDs--enough of them to significantly affect the vote.

Where is the evidence for this?

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows: Let's review some of the things we need to have ID for.

Writing a check, buying cigarettes or alcohol, applying for and receiving public benefits, driving, flying.

Are you seriously claiming that there are millions of aged and minority voters who regularly vote, but do none of the things that require an ID?

Until you have demonstrated that these people exist, I do not believe that their votes are being suppressed.

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows: Let's assume for the sake of argument that you find some evidence that these voters who always vote but never have ID exist. Since the laws that you claim will suppress votes invariably provide free ID to those who don't have them, what remains of your objection then?

Unknown said...

Not one democrat I know is anything other than determined to vote for Obama. To be sure, he's been a disappointment on continuing the Bush era national-security state. But even if there is an enthusiasm gap, with Republicans, that party's determination to repeal the 20th century more than fills in. Politics is routinely dishonest, but this year Republicans and their minions in the commentariat have just gone above and beyond. Y'all will lose and you should lose. Cheers!

kentuckyliz said...

I witness vote fraud about every election. My friend's husband died in the late 90s but she can't get him off the voter registration rolls. She has sent certified letters with notarized copies of his death certificate to both the county clerk and the state secretary of state. He's still on there. I usually vote late, close to closing, after work, and his name is near mine on the rolls--it's always signed. And no I don't live in Cook County IL.

I see dead people voting.

It's like I have a sixth sense.

kentuckyliz said...

Just to salt the wound, Bush would have won the recount in progress in FL in 2000 if the SCOTUS hadn't stayed it.

Dave said...

EXAMPLE? How about this?

"Bill Internicola is a 91-year-old, Brooklyn-born, World War II veteran. He fought in the Battle of the Bulge and received the Bronze Star for bravery. He’s voted in Florida for 14 years and never had a problem.
Three weeks ago, Bill received a letter from Broward County Florida stating “[Y]ou are not a U.S. Citizen” and therefore, ineligible to vote. He was given the option of requesting “a hearing with the Supervisor of Elections, for the purpose of providing proof that you are a United States citizens” or forfeit his right to vote."

AARP has reported that an estimated 11 million US citizens 65 years of age or older do not have picture id's .... and that they would find it difficult if not impossible to obtain one.

But facts don't mean anything to the party of Crooks (read - tax evader Romney) and Liars (Lyin' Ryan - champion marathoner and fake deficit hawk)!



Dave said...

By Associated Press, Published: August 29 | Updated: Thursday, August 30, 4:38 PM

DENVER — Sixteen of nearly 4,000 Colorado registered voters who received letters questioning their citizenship have voluntarily withdrawn from voting rolls, state election officials said Thursday.

The figures released by Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler drew criticism that the small number casts further doubt on the merits of Gessler’s investigation and contention that non-citizens are on voter lists and casting ballots.

john said...

dreams said... That wasn't the case in 2010.

You are correct. I should have restricted my comment to the presidential elections, not mid terms.

Erik Robert Nelson said...

"AARP has reported that an estimated 11 million US citizens 65 years of age or older do not have picture id's .... and that they would find it difficult if not impossible to obtain one."

Baloney. It's not difficult at all to get a photo id. You call Social Security to get a copy of your card (unless you already have it). Usually that's all you need, along with proof of residency (such as a utility bill with your name on it). Boom. Done. "Impossible" to obtain one? No one takes this argument seriously.

Lindsey Meadows said...

Bruce Hayden said...
"And, how, pray tell, do you know this? And, why, has there been rampant documented voter registration fraud by Obama and Dem related groups, if there is no intent to engage in voting fraud?"

Bullshit. Show me where. Give a source. Don't lie.

Do you have to lie to make your point? why is that? you know it isn't true and you can't point to any source whatsoever that shows "rampant" voting fraud.

JesusChrist. You MF liar.


Lindsey Meadows said...

Erik Robert Nelson said...
"No one takes this argument seriously."

You have better numbers than AARP? Where did you get them? Out of your ass.

More Republican Bullshit arguments.

Lindsey Meadows said...

kentuckyliz said...
"I see dead people voting. It's like I have a sixth sense."

I rest my case. What bullshit. I see turds fly Liz..Whaddaya think about that. They fly. Right out of the punch bowl..circle around for a while and land in the yard. Dambest thing.


Lindsey Meadows said...

Gabriel Hanna said...
"Are you seriously claiming that there are millions of aged and minority voters who regularly vote, but do none of the things that require an ID?"

800,000 in Pennsylvania don't have it and the court tossed the law out. What does it take? You go to a major metro area where people don't drive - older people - and you figure it out.

I don't get you folks at all. You are just dumbass blind.


Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows: I see lots of name-calling, but I don't see you presenting any evidence whatever about these millions of people who always vote but have no ID.

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows: You don't need to drive to have photo ID. Every state has them for non-drivers.

Once again, I'd like to see a) actual evidence that these voters exist and b) why laws that give free ID don't fix the problem.



Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows: Here's the documents you need to get a state ID, not a driver's license, in my home state.

You've presented no evidence that there are significant numbers of voters who cannot meet these requirements. You are claiming that there are millions of people who never worked, never drove, never flew, have no birth certificate, are not in Social Security, have never bought cigarettes or alcohol.

That is what your argument requires us to believe. And you insist we do so without evidence.

Jay said...

garage mahal said..

And a decided advantage in the state polls ie electoral college


Really fatso?

Point us to said polls.

Jay said...

Dave said...

AARP has reported that an estimated 11 million US citizens 65 years of age or older do not have picture id's .... and that they would find it difficult if not impossible to obtain one.


Hysterical.

Yes, when you're 65, you're trapped in your apartment just sitting there with No ID.

Where do you morons come from?

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

R's seem to be bailing on PA already, and Romney has to win Ohio to have any shot.


Um, the R's are not "bailing on PA" since Ryan was just here the other day, fat idiot.

Further, if Romney wins WI & MI, Ohio is irrelevant.

You are so dumb it is sad.

Ben G. said...

The PA Voter ID law has not been tossed.

Jay said...

Lindsey Meadows said...

800,000 in Pennsylvania don't have it and the court tossed the law out.


Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life.

No court threw out any PA voter ID law.

You're an idiot.

ricpic said...

A cursing Lindsey is a Lindsey at a loss
'Cause someone dared to dis her "Hey, I'm boss!"

Ben G. said...

Jay,
Don't cast aspersions on the fat and the drunk. Stupid can't be fixed though. I live in a suburb of Harrisburg, PA (brokest city in the new world), and they have been editoriliazing the crap out of how awful the Voter ID law is for months. If you weren't racist for supporting it, you were a classist, or age-ist, and it was certainly unconstitutional anyway, wingnut. They also recently noted that they were going from a 7 day a week publishing schedule down to 3 day a week actual-tossed-in-your-driveway paper printing schedule. Fat and drunk though I might be, I can understand why the conservatives in Central PA won't buy the Patriot-News.

Ben G. said...

I should note that the "they" in the previous comment = "The Harrisburg Patriot-News".

Jay said...

Ben G,

I'm outside of Pittsburgh. And the local news goes into hysterics over this.

You should enjoy this:

Lead plaintiff in Pa. voter ID case gets her photo ID

Ben G. said...

Jay -
Oh yes, I noticed that. The Philly Inky had to do that article on that the day after, as they had been parading her about as the figure-head of the anti-voter ID movement. Sad really, but as I mentioned, stupid can't be fixed - and all the PA papers - Harrisburg, Allentown, Philly, P-burgh, Scranton, have been all over this for months. First it was a bad, unconstitutional law, then it was in the courts, then after it was ruled A-OK by the PA courts, it was too late to implement in correctly. Never mind the fact that they caused the time-frame. Pathetic.

John Lynch said...

I don't believe the poll.

I believe that people are picking what they perceive as the likely winner.

B said...

Dave said:
has reported that an estimated 11 million US citizens 65 years of age or older do not have picture id's

I'll use Lindsey's style of rebuttal.

JesusChrist. You MF liar. 11 million? AARP said no such thing. AARP estimated, about 4 days ago, that about 8 million people over 65 lack a current, government-issued photo ID. 'current, government-issued photo ID'. AARP is gaming here. AARP has advised seniors for years to keep their expired licenses as photo ID and knows damn well that 8 million number goes way down when you consider that.

Lindsey Meadows said...
You have better numbers than AARP? Where did you get them? Out of your ass.

It certainly appears that Dave did. Which makes you a MF liar, or at least makes you a MF imbecile for believing numbers without verifying their provenance.

B said...

You know, Lindsey, you are a very ill informed person and are out of your depth here. You spout talking points without even filtering them through even rudimentary common sense.

I think your leisure time is better spent sticking to your hobby of going out for casual sex rather than posting on Althouse.

john said...

I think your leisure time is better spent sticking to your hobby of going out for casual sex rather than posting on Althouse.

Don't listen to him Lindsey. You just go have all the sex you want but come on back here later for a smoke.

The Godfather said...

On the accuracy of the polls: As I recall, in 1980, the polls were showing a close race almost up to Election Day, when Reagan started to move ahead. So the narrative was that Reagan proved in the debate with Carter that he wasn't a senile old doofus and it was OK for people to vote for him.

Except that real people thought all along that with his pathetic performance as president, Carter was never going to re-elected. For whatever reason, the polls were missing the reality.

I knew Reagan was going to win, no matter what the polls were saying. In my lifetime, the only presidential election in which I was wrong about who the winner was going to be was 1960 (I was too young to vote in that one, so maybe it shouldn't count). I'm not a prophet. It was obvious. Did you really think Humphrey, carrying LBJ's baggage, would beat Nixon? Did you really think Bush 41 would beat Clinton in the midst of a recession? Did you really think that McCain -- or ANY Republican -- could be elected president in the shambles of the Bush 43 administration?

If Obama pulls this one out it will be one for the record books.

But the Obamanites who expect Romney to win are preparing to delegitimize his election through all their unsupported cries about voter suppression. Things are going to be nasty for awhile after the results are in.

Unknown said...

Pardon me for reading this critically as say a high school graduate would.............

"Bill Internicola is a 91-year-old, Brooklyn-born, World War II veteran. He fought in the Battle of the Bulge and received the Bronze Star for bravery. He’s voted in Florida for 14 years and never had a problem.
Three weeks ago, Bill received a letter from Broward County Florida stating “[Y]ou are not a U.S. Citizen” and therefore, ineligible to vote. He was given the option of requesting “a hearing with the Supervisor of Elections, for the purpose of providing proof that you are a United States citizens” or forfeit his right to vote."

............ But this unfortunate confusion regarding this hero has nothing to do with voter id.

If you are critiquing sloppy work in the LEGALLY REQUIRED process of maintaining voter roles, remember these people will soon be in charge of your health care.

===

Regarding 'does our voters haz ID?'. Here's a datapoint.

Milwaukee County went to the possible root cause for why a democratic voter might not be able to get a photo id. They postulated that these potential voters may not have access to their own birth certificate. And gadzooks, getting their own birth certificate from the County registrar costs twenty samolians.

So Milwaukee, moving on the devastating scale of problems alleged by our democrat friends, set up a $ 500 K fund to provide birth certificates free to any needy potential voter who could not afford the $20 cost.

In June, this metropolitan county of 950,000 had had about 112 applicants for the assistance. Not definitive, but a piece of data pointing to the colossal lies of democrats when alluding to voter suppression.







Lindsey Meadows said...

"So Milwaukee, moving on the devastating scale of problems alleged by our democrat friends, set up a $ 500 K fund to provide birth certificates free to any needy potential voter who could not afford the $20 cost."

Can you provide a reference link to the above? I can't seem to find anything that supports your claim.

http://www.jsonline.com/newswatch/162942176.html

bagoh20 said...

I would like to try some casual sex. Do I need an I.D., or would you like to screw George Clooney?

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows: Here's the program you couldn't find, even though it's the first thing that came up when I put "Milwaukee county birth certificate ID fund" into the Google.

Gabriel Hanna said...

@Lindsey Meadows: To get a free birth certificate, Milwaukee County asks for ANY two of:

Government-issued photo ID
A badge with a photo
Passport
Checkbook
Major Credit Card
Lease
Utility Bill
Traffic Ticket

Now explain to us how many millions of voters will have none of these things and thus can't get ID.

Rusty said...


There is virtually no voter fraud anywhere and what little this is in a pin-prick in an elephant's butt (no pun intended). The supression I referenced was the widespread attempts in republican controlled states to supress minority vote and aged vote.



130,000 black Milwaukee voters don't exist.
Hmmm. Wonder what party they are registered as?
Any guesses?

30,000 dead voters in Charlotte NC.
Who do the dead vote for most often do you think?