Kramerguy wrote:I don't understand why having a third party come in to monitor voting and ensure it's legitimate is a problem? Surely, you want the election to be fair, right? It's become clear that voter fraud is rampant in this country, and I for one welcome a third party to come in a monitor it, as it's apparent that our monitoring efforts have been corrupted.
Firstly, Obama IS the U.N. candidate in this election. I have no doubts that he is behind this, since it has never happened before in our nation's history.
If :
it has been requested by a state
if there is history of suspicious fraud in the registration process
if there has been a history of questionable results (dead people voting, etc)
In those cases, I could see why it might be a good idea to have independent monitoring, but the U.N. is
anything but "independent"
But this is only voter intimidation disguised as "monitoring" and, imo, setting up the real possibility of throwing the election to Obama since the reports I've heard is that they are being sent
only to conservative districts.
Lets suppose that the election is a squeeker in a couple of conservative districts of Florida like it was in 2000. Just the U.N. observers implying that there "might" have been cheating will set off riots. Romney would be forced to consider conceding for the good of the country in that case. Worse, riots could split the country and make all of America EXTREMELY politically unstable through the Inauguration. God help us if it goes longer than that.
If they are able to throw out the results in only a few strategic conservative districts, it could swing the entire election and we're all disenfranchised.
If they really are concerned about voter fraud, they should be jailing the leaders of ACORN and SEIU who regularly devise ways to cheat with the Communist/Democrat party.
It's criminal that the military vote is being suppressed by the Communist/Democrat Party, while they accuse suppression in places where they want to start a race riot.
