Strike

Mark Davis already proved this entire premise wrong. That's what's so frustrating with you. It's ok to have differing opinions. You push opinions as FACT, even when proven wrong.

Who says I doubt it? Maybe I just don't care?

ANONYMOUS SOURCES!!!!!

No, the government doesn't foot the bill upfront. It simply enters a judgment saying the convict owes the money. Just like child support. It gives the victim to ability to go after any assets the convict has. If it's a rich person, such as a Justin Bieber, they get paid up front. If it's a poor person you can go after them any time they get some money. Does it guarantee these people get paid? No. But it puts the convict on notice and they can be gone after just like a creditor goes after you. Don't over complicate this and don't spend public money funding it. It's not our job to make people whole when people do bad things.

Of course it would be useless to sue in that situation. That's a civil case and, if the dude doesn't have anything, you're paying your lawyer to get a judgment you'll never see. If you wanted to pursue it I'm sure your lawyer would have though as long as you were paying him. And I have no doubt he would have loved going after the person if that person was Justin Bieber though. I assume this law would make the payments part of the criminal sentence so there wouldn't be any legal fees that the victim would have to pay to get that judgment. I really don't get why you libs oppose EVERYTHING. I mean, if someone gets drunk and runs their car in to your house, and they don't have insurance, would you try to get what you could from them to fix your house or would you just say "well, they don't have anything, so I'll just live with a hole in the front of my house?"

Of course it does, and I think at least three of us have outline why it does. But you do you, banned alias.

Ooh, now the backtracking and goal post moving starts......

The other issue is people like Tim like to focus on BIG elections, like for President. But most elections also include local issues and/or candidates. So, the same people who may be committing "insignificant" Presidential election fraud may ALSO be committing SIGNIFICANT LOCAL election fraud, as in the case I mentioned above in my response to Tim. If you're in a small town of 50 people a few fraudulent votes may swing the election. There is no valid argument against some form of voter identification. It's just laughable.

Liar. I literally posted an example where voter fraud was PROVEN to affect an election in your own backyard over at FBG's years ago that YOU read. The election was invalidated and people prosecuted. So GFY, you focking liar.

Just out of curiosity, is this an alias of @OldMaid or are you just her scissor sister?

Colorado has mail-in voting down to a science, and 99% of the population uses it. There's nothing inherently wrong with mail-in voting, with the right safeguards. What happened during Covid where every state basically moved to all mail-in voting WITHOUT those safeguards is when it's a problem.

No. There were 17 people on the ballot. Now there will be 2. If everyone who voted for all the Republicans votes for the Republican that person will get almost 60% of the vote. The results you're gloating over are simply the result of the votes for one party being split more than the other. Come on man. You're smarter than this. You're either trolling or TDS is rotting your brain.

No, Tim. Your story doesn't tell the entire story, and I did in my post. She said the same thing 25 minutes apart. And it's not like it was breaking news. This story is several days old. There's no reason for her to get it wrong in the first place, and absolutely no reason for her or someone on her staff to not know it was wrong before she said it again 25 minutes later. It was INTENTIONAL. And her apology is a non-apology. But again, you do you and suck on the MSM teets Timmay.

You know what's great about it? Just about every time he got suspended from FBG's it was for that reason. And he would come back a couple weeks later all remorseful, admit he went over the line, and vow to do better. And then revert back to the same old habits. Honestly, I'm curious what he did to get suspended here. He won't tell us I'm sure being the poosey that he is but his M.O. is old news and why people such as myself don't fall for it when he tries to act like he's learned anything.

Yeah, I know. That was my point.