Each American state has its own definitions of a legal domicile / residence.
We used to travel in our 5th wheel for 5+ years. We moved our legal domicile to South Dakota because they recognized the pmb as a legal residence and there was no state income tax. Our RV was our residence because it had running water, a heat/cooking source and a…
Each American state has its own definitions of a legal domicile / residence.
We used to travel in our 5th wheel for 5+ years. We moved our legal domicile to South Dakota because they recognized the pmb as a legal residence and there was no state income tax. Our RV was our residence because it had running water, a heat/cooking source and a bedroom. We voted via absentee ballot.
Our pmb was acquired by a business that catered to full time travelers.
During our tenure on the road in the American West we encountered many who did actually live in RV parks. That would be the same segment of the population that lived in long term hotels. Many of these residents were only able to obtain very low income jobs or were the elderly trying to live on social security. These people bring financial stability to the small businesses. Every place we stayed long term (30+days) was intolerant of illegal activity.
Perhaps it is not legal in GA to keep your head above water by residing in one of these places. What a shame. It would also be a shame for these residents to be denied the right to vote because of their financial situation.
By sharing this data I do not object to voter verification - It has always been essential.
But a stigma is applied that does not rightly belong.
Voter VERIFICATION is what many on the right have been calling for for a long time. It is virtually always fought against by the left. I hate using right/left, but that's mostly what it is. I don't doubt your example can account for some legitimate voters, but it's not going to explain away more than 600,000 votes. (far beyond the margin of "win")
As I stated: I do not object to voter verification - It has always been essential.
I will add this: I agree - it doesn't explain away excess. But don't assume people do not live in these places or that all are criminals.
It does not matter what boundaries we establish to diminish the fraud. As a conservative with libertarian leanings I believe it is essential to protect the right to vote while establishing boundaries. We also must enforce the penalties when fraud is found.
Immoral people will always find a way around boundaries.
None of the above has been consistently applied because society TRUSTED THE SYSTEM IN PLACE. No one thought the numbers were pure, but expected the numbers to be properly reflective.
The reality we face today is new technology that has opened the field to mulitple forms of corruption. As a society we will need to find the new best method to stop it.
The other reality is the vast coordinated effort to install power against the will of the people while gaslighting them to believe the people chose it.
Each American state has its own definitions of a legal domicile / residence.
We used to travel in our 5th wheel for 5+ years. We moved our legal domicile to South Dakota because they recognized the pmb as a legal residence and there was no state income tax. Our RV was our residence because it had running water, a heat/cooking source and a bedroom. We voted via absentee ballot.
Our pmb was acquired by a business that catered to full time travelers.
During our tenure on the road in the American West we encountered many who did actually live in RV parks. That would be the same segment of the population that lived in long term hotels. Many of these residents were only able to obtain very low income jobs or were the elderly trying to live on social security. These people bring financial stability to the small businesses. Every place we stayed long term (30+days) was intolerant of illegal activity.
Perhaps it is not legal in GA to keep your head above water by residing in one of these places. What a shame. It would also be a shame for these residents to be denied the right to vote because of their financial situation.
By sharing this data I do not object to voter verification - It has always been essential.
But a stigma is applied that does not rightly belong.
Voter VERIFICATION is what many on the right have been calling for for a long time. It is virtually always fought against by the left. I hate using right/left, but that's mostly what it is. I don't doubt your example can account for some legitimate voters, but it's not going to explain away more than 600,000 votes. (far beyond the margin of "win")
"it's not going to explain away"...
As I stated: I do not object to voter verification - It has always been essential.
I will add this: I agree - it doesn't explain away excess. But don't assume people do not live in these places or that all are criminals.
It does not matter what boundaries we establish to diminish the fraud. As a conservative with libertarian leanings I believe it is essential to protect the right to vote while establishing boundaries. We also must enforce the penalties when fraud is found.
Immoral people will always find a way around boundaries.
None of the above has been consistently applied because society TRUSTED THE SYSTEM IN PLACE. No one thought the numbers were pure, but expected the numbers to be properly reflective.
The reality we face today is new technology that has opened the field to mulitple forms of corruption. As a society we will need to find the new best method to stop it.
The other reality is the vast coordinated effort to install power against the will of the people while gaslighting them to believe the people chose it.
NEVER BEFORE HAS THIS HAPPENED.
No one said the people who actually lived there were criminals. Just that the addresses were used