Archive for the ‘Elections’ Category

Vote fraud in Colorado

by John Lott on Thursday, November 13th, 2014

This is article 44 of 46 in the topic 2014 Elections
Story developing at Colorado Peak Politics:

Remember when it was concerning that Joe Salazar’s representative basically gave her blessing for an undercover James O’Keefe and his friends to commit voter fraud?  This is why.  Today, our sources tell us that allegedly a Denver Police Officer ballot with a signature cure turned up in Adams County.  The only problem?  The officer is saying he did not vote.  Our source up north is further saying that many showing up on the cured list have moved away.  . . .

Go straight to Post

GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy educates professor about voter ID laws

by John Lott on Wednesday, November 12th, 2014

Contemplating Election Day, and Beyond

by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton on Tuesday, November 4th, 2014

This is article 40 of 46 in the topic 2014 Elections

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

While polls suggest that November 4th should be a very good election for Republicans—by most accounts they will take control of the Senate and increase their majority in the House—doubts remain. For one thing, as it is often said, the only poll that counts is the one taken on Election Day. But with many states offering early voting, and in some cases, such as Colorado, mail-in voting only, it is more than just Election Day that can determine the outcome. Among the other factors not reflected in the polls are third-party candidates, voter fraud and media bias.

The mainstream media, as always, are firmly in the corner of the Democrats. In the run-up to this year’s election, one would hardly know that the Obama administration has been caught up in scandal after scandal—from the IRS to Veterans Affairs to Benghazi (“phony scandals,” as the media and the administration label them)—or that the President’s approval rating has been dismal, to the point that almost none of the Senate candidates want the once-popular President anywhere near their state. In fact, the news has been so bad for the Democrats that the three major broadcast network news shows barely acknowledged the elections. In fact, ABC’s World News Tonight went nearly all of September and October without a single story on the mid-term elections.

We have documented the incestuous relationship that exists between the media and the Obama administration, providing the Democrats with a built-in edge.

Last May, Accuracy in Media published a special report by James Simpson titled “Voter Fraud: An Existential Threat to America,” that detailed many of the ways that Democrats have been incorporating voter fraud into their election strategy. Simpson concluded, “Voter fraud, and the corrupt political infrastructure that facilitates, or at best ignores it, is an existential threat to our American Republic.” And we have seen many more examples in the days and weeks leading up to this election.

Here, for example, is the latest video from James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, in which several Democratic campaign workers encouraged people they believed to be non-citizens to vote. There have been credible stories about voting machines in Chicago and Maryland in which votes intended for Republicans ended up registering as votes for Democrats.

In addition, the Obama Justice Department has done what it could to block common-sense voter ID laws, claiming that they disproportionately disenfranchise minority voters. But the evidence suggests there is a need for such laws. It’s not just people misrepresenting who they are when they show up at the polls, but as columnist Mona Charen recently cited, there are millions of voters who are registered to vote in more than one jurisdiction, and there are felons and dead people who should have been purged from voting registers in many states.

And what if, in spite of all this, Republicans do very well in the elections, and seize significant majorities in both houses of Congress? Would that show that these concerns were without basis, or rather that the victory was so sweeping that even the media and voter fraud couldn’t overcome it? Perhaps we’ll never know.

But a discussion on CNN on Monday night suggested what the media’s spin might be in case of a Republican victory.

Click to continue reading “Contemplating Election Day, and Beyond”
Go straight to Post

Vote Fraud? Video Shows Man Stuffing Hundreds of Ballots Into Ballot Box

by Selwyn Duke on Thursday, October 23rd, 2014

This is article 376 of 377 in the topic Elections

552042_low

Defenders of lax election laws say it rarely happens — but apparently it’s happening again. In what critics describe as a shocking example of likely vote fraud, a surveillance video (see below) from a Maricopa County, Arizona, polling place shows a man stuffing hundreds of ballots into a ballot box.

The act was observed by A.J. LaFaro, chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Committee, on August 25 while he was stationed at the MCTEC facility at 510 S. Third Avenue in Phoenix during the primary election cycle. Writes the Arizona Daily Independent:

LaFaro recounts that between 12:54 p.m. and 1:04 p.m., he heard a loud thud and turned to see what was going on. “A person wearing a Citizens for a Better Arizona (CBA) t-shirt dropped a large box of hundreds of early ballots on the table and started stuffing the ballot box as I watched in amazement.”

6d0b1dab4899e24743f5ce8677fa43d6_XL

Vote Fraud? Video Shows Man Stuffing Hundreds of Ballots Into Ballot Box

 

While sound is not available on the recording

LaFaro provides the following account:

Person from CBA: “What’s your problem?”

LaFaro: “I don’t have a problem.”

Person from CBA: “Stop watching me. You’re annoying me.”

… LaFaro: “One of your ballots isn’t sealed.”

Person from CBA: “It’s none of your business. What’s your name?”

LaFaro: “I’m the chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Party. What’s yours?”

Person from CBA: “Go [f***] yourself. I don’t have to tell you who I am.”

After the man was mostly done with his ballot stuffing, he began taking pictures, which were images of ballots “that he staged in the slot of the ballot box. He then hid behind the ballot box and table as he slipped the unsealed ballot [mentioned earlier] into his brief and left,” the paper reports LaFaro as saying. The man is then seen on the video leaving the building and subsequently returning to drop the ballot into the box. As he left for good he said to LaFaro, “Go f*** yourself, gringo.”

Not surprisingly, LaFaro describes the CBA operative as “a vulgar, disrespectful, violent thug that has no respect for our laws.” “I would have followed him to the parking lot to take down his tag number, but I feared for my life,” said LaFaro.

The next day he visited four other polling locations, where he observed poll workers doing nothing and heard about “ballot parties,” events at which activists collect large numbers of ballots from people so they can “vote them illegally,” as LaFaro put it.

And what’s the nature of CBA? American Thinker’s Thomas Lifson weighs in, writing, “Citizens for a Better Arizona appears to be a left wing organization, hiding behind the usual bland rhetoric.” Its website tells us that it is “a predominantly volunteer driven organization of Republicans, Democrats and Independents committed to improving the quality of life of all Arizonans — better schools, better health care, better jobs, better government and a better, more civil tone of respect and decency when it comes to solving Arizona’s problems.” But, reports Lifson, “[H]ere are some of the stories highlighted on its [CBA’s] “news” page”:

PROTESTERS CONFRONT THE WOMAN BEHIND ARIZONA’S HATE LAW

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/02/26/protesters-herrod-hate-law-arizona/ Tweet Read More

ACTIVISTS PRESENT CONSERVATIVE REP. WITH TOILET

http://www.kfyi.com/articles/arizona-news-118695/activists-present-conservative-rep-with-toilet-12057574/ Tweet Read More

But CBA isn’t the only player in the vote-fraud game.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Serious voting problems in this election, fraud, illegal aliens registered, and errors favoring Democrats

by John Lott on Wednesday, October 22nd, 2014

This is article 375 of 377 in the topic Elections
Regarding Colorado:

James O’Keefe, the guerilla filmmaker who brought down the ACORN voter-registration fraudsters in 2010 and forced the resignation of NPR executives, politely disagrees. Today, he is releasing some new undercover footage that raises disturbing questions about ballot integrity in Colorado, the site of fiercely contested races for the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House, and the governorship. When he raised the issue of filling out some of the unused ballots that are mailed to every household in the state this month, he was told by Meredith Hicks, the director of Work for Progress, a liberal group funded by Democratic Super PACS.: “That is not even like lying or something, if someone throws out a ballot, like if you want to fill it out you should do it.” She then brazenly offered O’Keefe, disguised as a middle-aged college instructor, a job with her group. . . .

From Illinois:

Early voting in Illinois got off to a rocky start Monday, as votes being cast for Republican candidates were transformed into votes for Democrats.
Republican state representative candidate Jim Moynihan went to vote Monday at the Schaumburg Public Library.
“I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent,” Moynihan said. “You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.”
The conservative website Illinois Review reported that “While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race. He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race . . . . .

Illegals registered to vote in North Carolina:

The voter rolls kept by the State Board of Elections contain 145 names that belong to a certain category of ineligible voter – immigrants in the U.S. under a federal program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, according to elections officials.
Josh Lawson, an SBOE spokesman, said that election officials found out about the number Tuesday night, after the N.C. Division of Motor Vehicles ran a specific search for drivers with DACA licenses.
Letters from the SBOE will be sent to the 145 people asking for documentation that they are U.S. citizens, Lawson said.
More people who are ineligible because they are not U.S. citizens may be on the voter rolls.  Nearly 10,000 names on the rolls are tagged by the DMV as “legally present,” according to elections and transportation officials. But that doesn’t mean that all 10,000 are ineligible to vote at this time. . . .

 

Go straight to Post

Good thing that there is no such thing as vote fraud: CT State Rep. Christina Ayala arrested on 19 voting fraud charges

by John Lott on Sunday, September 28th, 2014

This is article 374 of 377 in the topic Elections
It is pretty amazing how many different places within the state that this state representative votes.  But this isn’t unusual.  For other examples of vote fraud see here or here.  From the New Haven Register:

State Rep. Christina “Tita” Ayala, D-Bridgeport, was arrested Friday on 19 voting fraud charges.

Ayala, 31, is accused of voting in local and state elections in districts she did not live, the Chief State’s Attorney’s Office said in a press release.

The arrest warrant affidavit also alleges Ayala provided fabricated evidence to state Election Enforcement Commission investigators that showed she lived at an address in a district where she voted while actually living outside the district, according to the release.

Ayala, who represents the 128th District, was elected in 2012, replacing her cousin, Andres Ayala, who was elected to the state Senate. She chose to run for reelection earlier this year, despite the voting fraud investigation, but lost a four-way primary in August.
The Elections Enforcement Commission referred the case to the Office of the Chief State’s Attorney in October 2013, recommending criminal charges.

Ayala allegedly voted in various Bridgeport Democratic Town Committee elections, a municipal primary election and a state primary election between 2009 and 2012 in districts inconsistent with the location of her residence, according to the release. She is also accused of voting in the Bridgeport state general election in 2012 in a district where she didn’t live. . . .

Go straight to Post

The Democratic Party’s White Voter Problem

by Daniel Greenfield on Monday, September 22nd, 2014

This is article 373 of 377 in the topic Elections

Hardly a week goes by without some Democratic Party hack putting finger to iPad and swiping out a screed about the Republican Party’s problem with women or minorities.

This time it was Debbie Wasserman Schultz with “The GOP’s Woman Problem”. Schultz claims that the Republican Party was “rejected again by a bloc of voters that make up more than half of the electorate”. That claim is as real as Schultz’s hair color. The only bloc that rejected Romney was the same bloc that rejected Hillary; the bloc of minority voters who came out in force for Obama.

And unless Hillary Clinton also had a “woman problem” they didn’t do it over gender.

For example in the South Carolina Democratic primary, Obama beat Hillary among women by 54 to 30. That’s a much bigger split than the one between Obama and Romney among women. While Hillary Clinton beat Obama among white voters, Obama won 78 percent of the black vote.

There was no gender gap. There was a racial gap.

Throughout her campaign, Hillary Clinton consistently won the votes of white women in large numbers and lost the votes of women who said that their gender was not important. Obama won the female vote by his largest margins in southern states because he wasn’t really winning by gender, he was benefiting from a large turnout of black women.

Obama won the female vote in Georgia by 32%, but Hillary won 62% of the white female vote. Obama however had won 87% of the black female vote. In Ohio, Hillary and Obama had nearly the same split, but Hillary won the female vote in Ohio by 16% because the racial makeup of the voters was different.

In 2012, Romney won 53% of the white female vote and 3% of the black female vote in Ohio. He didn’t lose women. He lost the same “bloc of voters” that had rejected Hillary, not over gender, but over race.

The Republican Party doesn’t have a “woman problem”. Romney won the votes of white women in every age group; including young women. And Obama lost white women as he did all white voters.

He lost white voters by 59% to 39%. He lost white voters of every age and gender. His loss among white voters was completely unprecedented for any winner of a presidential election.

The GOP doesn’t have a “woman problem”, but the Democrats have a “white woman problem” and a “white man problem”.

The articles about the GOP’s problem with minority voters blame the Republican Party for alienating minority voters. But shouldn’t the Democratic Party be held accountable for alienating white voters?

This is about more than just numbers.

The Democratic Party’s poor performance among white voters is leading it to engage in some very questionable behavior. If Obama and his party weren’t polling so poorly among white voters, it’s doubtful that the Democrats would be nakedly exploiting racial tensions in Ferguson in the hopes of turning out black voters for the midterm elections.

This isn’t a conspiracy theory. It’s a New York Times article which describes how the Democrats are hoping to retain control of the Senate “as they urge black voters to channel their anger by voting Democratic in the midterm elections”.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

New York Times/CBS Poll Shows Republicans doing extremely well this election

by John Lott on Wednesday, September 17th, 2014

This is article 372 of 377 in the topic Elections

Click on figure to enlarge.  The NY Times article on their September 12-15 survey is available here.

– Right before the 2010 midterm elections Obama’s approval rate was at 45 percent.  Before the 2012 election it was at 50 percent.  Today it is at 40 percent.
– Right before the 2010 midterm elections 34 percent thought that the country was heading in the wrong direction.  Before the 2012 election it was at 39 percent.  Today it is at 27 percent.
– At the 2010 midterm elections 46 percent approved of Obama’s foreign policy.  Before the 2012 election it was at 47 percent.  Today it is at 34 percent.
– Right before the 2010 midterm elections 42 percent approved of Obama’s economic policy.  Before the 2012 election it was at 46 percent.  Today it is at 40 percent.
– Before the 2010 midterm elections 51 percent approved of Obama’s terrorism policy.  Today it is at 41 percent.
– Today 30 percent approve of how Obama is handling immigration.
If this election is viewed as a referendum on Obama’s policies, Democrats have reasons to be concerned.

Go straight to Post

Americans Alone

by Daniel Greenfield on Tuesday, September 16th, 2014

This is article 371 of 377 in the topic Elections

For the first time in American statistical history, the majority of American adults are single. 124 million or 50.2% of Americans are single. Some will get married, but increasing numbers never will.

Demographically a population of single adults means the death of the Republican Party. It eliminates the possibility of libertarian and fiscally conservative policies. It leads inevitably to the welfare state.

Single people are less likely to have a support system that keeps them from becoming a public charge. Children born to single parents perform poorly in school and are more likely to engage in criminal behavior. A nation of single people will inevitably become a welfare state and a police state.

The statistics have always been known and the conclusions to be drawn from them are inescapable.

A lot of attention is being paid to the political consequences of the nation’s changing racial demographics, but it’s not a coincidence that the racial group that Republicans perform worst with is also the least likely to be married. While there are other factors in the mix, Republicans do better with married than unmarried black people.

The same is true of most other racial groups.

The latest Reuters poll shows that 36% of married Hispanics are planning to vote for a Democratic candidate in the upcoming midterm election and 28% are planning to vote for a Republican candidate. Among unmarried Hispanics, those numbers change to 42% Democratic and %15 Republican.

If Republicans want to start getting serious about the Hispanic vote, they might want to spend less time muttering about amnesty and more time thinking about where their strength with married voters lies.

Married white voters lean toward a Republican candidate by 43% to 24%. Among single white voters, Democrats lead 34% to 26%. There are other factors that affect these numbers such as age, race, sexual orientation and religious affiliation. Growing minority demographics have certainly helped make single Americans a statistical majority, but it’s dangerous to ignore the bigger picture of the post-family demographic trend.

If Republicans insist on running against the nanny state, they will have to replace it with something. That something was traditionally the family. Take away the family and something else has to fill its place.

In the West, government has become the new family. The state is father and occasionally mother. The nanny state is literally a nanny. It may be hated, but it is also needed.

That is why married whites oppose ObamaCare 65% to 34% while single whites also oppose it, but by a narrower margin of 53% to 47%.

ObamaCare’s support base among whites is highest among single white men and women. (Despite Julia and Sandra Fluke, the latest poll numbers show that young single white women oppose ObamaCare by a higher margin than young single white men. Pajama Boy with his hot cocoa is more likely to be a fervent proponent of ObamaCare than Julia. But the margins for both sexes remain narrow.)

It’s unrealistic to expect people to vote against their short term interests. Without family, the individual is vulnerable. A single bad day can leave him homeless and hungry.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

"Riots & Racism" and "Inconvenient Truths"

by Burt Prelutsky on Friday, August 22nd, 2014

Can we all agree that , the recent riots in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, MO, had as much to do with the police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown as it did with a hurricane in Hawaii or a square dance in Iowa?

As I have written in the past, a legitimate protest consists of tossing tea into Boston Harbor; it doesn’t involve stealing a TV. Time and again, young black thugs in Detroit, L.A., Philadelphia and now St. Louis, have taken advantage of an event to run amok, turning over cars, looting stores and setting fires. They do it because they are bottom-feeders who feel empowered by corrupt politicians, a liberal media and race hustlers like Al Sharpton, to carry out the sort of violence which when committed by one or two individuals results in jail time, but when committed by a mob results in liberal pundits justifying the mayhem.

A reader, Bob Alton, wrote to me, posing the following question: Now that Hillary Clinton is speaking out against Obama’s foreign policy, can we expect her to be branded a racist? It’s a fair question when you realize that her husband was labeled one in 2008 for no other reason than that he campaigned for his wife during the primaries, and “racist” has been branded on the rump of every Republican who has voiced an objection to anything Obama has said or done over the past six years.

It’s no secret that Democrats, including Obama, have been pressuring the older liberals on the Supreme Court to retire ASAP so that Obama can leave a longer lasting impression on America. I think it’s a move that can wind up biting the Democrats in the butt in 2016. After all, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 81, Anthony Kennedy, 78, and Stephen Breyer, 76, are too old for the job, which pretty much consists of sitting around reading briefs and occasionally casting a vote, it might be hard to convince people they should run out and vote for Hillary Clinton, who will be 69 when the 2016 election takes place, and a ripe 77 by the time her second term would conclude. But perhaps they simply assume that being the commander-in-chief is as easy a gig as Obama makes it seem: rounds of golf, interspersed occasionally with expensive vacations and fund-raising galas.

Speaking of things that have not only ripened, but dropped off the tree and are well on their way to being mulch, we have Jimmy Carter. According to a recent article in the Washington Times, the reason that Carter, who once condemned Israel as an apartheid nation, is such a vociferous fan of Hamas is because he blames his loss to Ronald Reagan in 1980 on Jewish voters.

As a Jew, nothing would make me prouder. However, inasmuch as Reagan garnered 43 million votes to Carter’s paltry 35 million, and 489 electoral votes to Carter’s infinitesimal 49, and that Jews represent a mere 2% of the population, it’s a bit far-fetched. What’s more, although he did better than other recent GOP presidential candidates, Reagan still managed to lose the Jewish vote 39% to Carter’s 45%.

1 2 3 4
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin