Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

catbyte

(34,402 posts)
2. Most likely because those in a position to actually do anything about it, won't.
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:30 PM
Nov 2016

I'm not a lawyer type, but I know enough to see that there's no will to do it. Plus, they don't give a shit.

Response to catbyte (Reply #2)

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
3. Crosscheck goes back years, not something specific to this election. Plus,
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:37 PM
Nov 2016

I think crosscheck would be a indictment of this election if anyone creditable can show any significant number of people who showed up to vote, but were turned away because of crosscheck. Have not seen that, and doubt that it happened.

I'm not a lawyerly type, just someone tired of every excuse in the world for why we lost, even conspiracy theories ranking right up there with Oswald couldn't have hit Kennedy.

JHan

(10,173 posts)
5. when I read what happened in North Carolina this year ..
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:45 PM
Nov 2016

it's worth belaboring the point. There was actual voter suppression in states and a form of "voter suppression" the Trump Data Analytics team used online.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Can some lawyer type expl...