Nice job, Brad!!

This is great but will it get a wide audience or is it only on YouTube?

(Somebody's getting chubby cheeks.The nicorette gum must be working.

GWN said:

(Somebody's getting chubby cheeks.The nicorette gum must be working.

Who asked ya?

Nicely done, Brad.

i would of added...after filming your ward/precinct results compare them to the official tally...and then watch that the official tally does not "change"

Nice job Brad!

Plus, congrats on the nicorette gum working. I quit 13 months ago and have never felt better....

If you are too lazy to get off your fat arse and get an id, do you deserve a say? I think not...

The comment by Gungets Tuft @7 typifies how dangerously misinformed a large segment of Americans are about this issue.

The problem has nothing to do with someone being "too lazy" to get the requisite Photo ID.

As we noted in covering the petitioner's appellate brief challenging Pennsylvania's Photo ID law:

The problem is especially acute for those at the lower end of the economic spectrum who don't own or drive a car.

In Texas, where a federal court struck down the Lone Star State's Photo ID requirement, some individuals would have been required to travel 250 miles round trip to obtain the requisite Photo ID.

In its Per Curium decision, the PA Supreme Court observed:

Frankly, the petitioner's brief in Applewhite should be mandatory reading for every citizen of Minnesota whom the GOP is seeking to dupe into passing a democracy-destroying Photo ID law as a constitutional amendment.

Integrity? Where? Certainly not here. You are not "independent". I am old enough to remember JFK winning when they stumbled on an additional 3000 votes in Chicago (Daley) and Texas (LBJ). Those voters all turned out to be dead. The Dems have a very long history of voter fraud. What is so wrong about an ID anyway. That is what is suspicious about this nonsense.

BubbaMusic - Since you're new here, and clearly desperately under-informed, I'll invite you to read a few stories before I take the time to respond to your "What is so wrong about an ID anyway", since we've written about that voter suppression here for about 10 years.

For the record, though, it's not "an ID" that's a problem. I'm sure you haven't heard from Fox, but "an ID" is already required for all first time voters by federal law, either when they register to vote, or at the polling place if they registered by mail. The problem is a very specific type of state-issued PHOTO ID, only required at the polling place (not via absentee, where most such "voter fraud" occurs), and that 22 million legally registered Americans, largely Democratic-leaning, don't own.

As to the fraud in Chicago and Texas you mention (and the fraud in Hawaii by Nixon's folks that same year, which you forgot to mention), that was insider election fraud. Not voter fraud. Insiders stuffed the ballot box. No polling place Photo ID restriction in the world would have kept them from doing so.

It would, however, as the Republican party well knows, keep hundreds of thousands of legally registered voters from being able to cast their vote at all. And that is why, of course, it is being instituted.

Sorry if your RW media outlets failed to tell you that part, but they are hoping to play you for a fool. Looks like they've succeeded until now. Read up around here, and maybe you'll do better next time.