Who could possibly have thought, even in his wildest imaginings, that Hillary Clinton, of all people, married to that paragon of rectitude Bill Clinton, would have engaged in vote fraud?
Most infuriating is the Nevada primary, where Hillary Clinton won by only 700 votes. Among the issues reported there were shortages of ballots as well as ballots already pre-printed with Hillary Clinton’s logo. Also, several Clinton supporters were shown on video walking past poll workers while wearing Clinton T-shirts, which is illegal. One of the voters was heard to say that they weren’t registered, but would do so after they voted, which is also not allowed.
Which brings us to Kentucky, where the Attorney General’s office fielded 76 calls to the election fraud hotline. Fox 19 states that the calls came from 31 different counties and included issues with voting machines, illegal electioneering, buying and selling votes, and poll disruption as well as voter registration issues and procedural and legal questions.
Even more concerning are the discrepancies between the exit polls and the actual results of the elections. According to Money Morning, Edison Reporting is responsible for conducting the exit polls, and they are considered to be incredibly accurate as they are conducted at polling stations on the day of the election. This year, the results have been far beyond the expected margin of error in 17 primaries. Of those, nine had a margin of error of greater than 7 percent. In each case, the margin of error was in Clinton’s favor, and the cases with the highest margin were also the cases where the voting machines were over 10-years-old and therefore susceptible to hacking and other forms of tampering.
One should be able to expect his or her commander-in-chief to act within the bounds of the law and with respect to their constituents. Should Hillary win the presidency, if the primaries are any indication, this will not be the case.
Steven Hayward over at Power Line reminds us of why Democrats fight voter ID tooth and nail: because they benefit from vote fraud:
How extensive is voter-fraud, especially among non-citizens? Just bring up the question, or suggest we need to have voter-ID at the polls like every other advanced democracy, and the answer will be instantly supplied: You’re a racist. But as Dan McLaughlin points out over at The Federalist, Democrats seem to win a suspiciously high number of close elections, well beyond what a random statistical trial would suggest.
There’s a bombshell academic study out on this issue right now that the media is mostly ignoring (the only exception being the Washington Post’s very fine wonky MonkeyCage blog), in part because it appears in an obscure academic journal, Electoral Studies, that is behind an expensive subscription paywall, and in part because any reporter who does a story about it will be called a racist. Since I’m an academic these days, I’ve got access to the article, “Do Non-Citizens Vote in U.S. Elections?”, by Jesse T. Richman and Gulshan A. Chattha of Old Dominion University and David C. Earnest of George Mason University.
The conclusion of the abstract alone ought to set off alarm bells:
We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.
Using data from the Cooperate Congressional Election Study, which sampled 32,000 voters in 2008 and over 50,000 voters in 2010, the authors conclude that as many as 14 percent of non-citizens—potentially as high as 2.8 million—are registered to vote. The authors conclude that a mid-point estimate of 1.2 million non-citizens cast votes in 2008: Continue reading
It has always been incomprehensible to me that we don’t require photo identification for voting. The idea that you can just go up to an election official, simply state your name, and then receive your ballot is mind boggling. We require identification for so many other important functions, yet we’re basically leaving it up to the honor system when it comes to voting. It’s simply a matter of fairness. It’s bad enough that my vote gets cancelled out by idiots – you know, people like Joe Biden – but it is even more unfair to have it cancelled out by someone who does not have a legal right to vote in that particular election. Requiring identification certainly wouldn’t eliminate all incidents of voter fraud, but they would go a long way in ensuring that everyone who votes has a legal right to do so.
Well, the major argument against these laws is that we are somehow disenfranchising people. This is utter nonsense. No one who has a legal right to vote would be barred from voting because of a photo i.d. law. Sure, there are people who do not possess photo identification, particularly the elderly. How they function without identification is a mystery to me, but most of the proposed laws have provisions to help these people get identification.
Yet that is not how some people on the left claim to see it. To them, evil Republicans just want to make sure the poor and the elderly are forced to stay home on election day. Today I had a twitter exchange that typified the attitude of many anti-i.d. folks. It hammered home a few things about their attitude that is frankly quite scary.