Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 23, 2015, 12:59:21 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
86238 Posts in 2275 Topics by 1068 Members
Latest Member: cdenny
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] Print
Author Topic: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.  (Read 100479 times)
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12440


« Reply #450 on: May 26, 2014, 10:15:04 AM »

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/03/19/fraud-local-nbc-investigation-discovers-dozens-of-illegal-voters-in-florida-n1811547
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #451 on: June 30, 2014, 01:03:55 PM »



http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/u-s-election-corruption-6-9-million-multiple-voters-in-28-states-report-finds/ 
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #452 on: July 02, 2014, 07:20:42 PM »

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/01/critics-who-claim-voter-id-laws-are-racist-wont-like-the-results-of-this-study/ 
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12440


« Reply #453 on: July 02, 2014, 09:21:10 PM »


The voter ID laws harm key dem voting groups, like dead people, illegal aliens and multiple voters.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6468


« Reply #454 on: July 02, 2014, 10:58:17 PM »


2.8 million Americans (that we know of) registered to vote in more than one place.
One in eight active registrations is invalid or inaccurate.
There are about 1.8 million dead people listed as active voters.
12 million registrations have errors serious enough to make it unlikely that mailings based on them will reach voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/us/politics/us-voter-registration-rolls-are-in-disarray-pew-report-finds.html?_r=0

Trust, but verify. 
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #455 on: July 03, 2014, 09:29:30 AM »

Interesting this is in the NYT.  Probably page 555.  Interesting too is Maryland's proposal to allow online registration if one has a valid ID! 

As a physician I "sign" online a person's death certificate that is in NJ's records.  Would it be that hard to notify SS, Medicare, and Election departments of the person's death?

The Darn Government is driving hospitals and doctors nuts with our reporting requirements.  So what about them doing this?   
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #456 on: July 16, 2014, 08:09:39 PM »

The lawyer for state Sen. Chris McDaniel announced at a press conference on Wednesday afternoon in Jackson, MS, that he has enough evidence to file for an official challenge of the election results, and will do so in the coming days.


“The million dollar question: What did we find? We found a lot,” Mitch Tyner, of Tyner Law Firm, said after he and McDaniel supporter state Sen. Michael Watson walked the press and McDaniel supporters at the press conference through how they have serious concerns with the election review process in Mississippi.


“We’ve heard it our entire lives in Mississippi,” Tyner said. “Votes are being bought. Ballot boxes are being stuffed. There are false affidavit ballots. There are invalid affidavit ballots. There are invalid absentee ballots—we’ve heard it all our lives. I’m 51 years old and it’s the first time I saw it up close and personal. It exists. We are committed to finding it and rooting it out and stopping it.”


Tyner thanked Sen. Watson for standing up against alleged voter fraud and said Watson “can do something about it in the next legislative session.”


Tyner walked those at the press conference through how the McDaniel campaign’s attorneys, especially Sen. Watson, have been arguing before various courts in the state for judges to order election officials in a variety of Mississippi’s 82 counties for orders that they open election materials up for inspection. Every time, Tyner noted, the judges have sided with Watson’s arguments and order election officials to open the materials up for McDaniel campaign review.


The campaign is asking the Mississippi Supreme Court to rule on the matter so that the poll books and other election materials can be opened up to the McDaniel campaign for no charge. “That’s the issue that we want to make sure that the Supreme Court rules on: that it doesn’t matter how much money you have, you still get to look at the poll books,” Tyner said.


Tyner walked reporters through the “categories of information we’ve been finding” next.


“There’s crossover votes, we know that,” Tyner said. “There’s illegal votes—all types of illegal votes going on, absentee problems, votes that were cast—we’re going as far as into the boxes to see if how many people signed in are the same number that were cast. You’re going to be astonished. They aren’t. It’s amazing. You’re going to see problem after problem after problem.”


Tyner then addressed how Sen. Thad Cochran’s campaign and its supporters have said there’s no evidence in public yet, so there’s nothing there. “Am I going to sit right here and try my case in the media and do a tit-for-tat with the Cochran campaign?” Tyner asked rhetorically. “‘We found this but it says that.’ I’m not going to do that. We’re going to be mature about this.”


Tyner promised that soon, when the campaign files its challenge, it will publish all the evidence for the public to see. “We’re going to put it all together in a complete package,” Tyner said. “I was really hoping we’d have it today. Monday, a week ago, I was sure we would. But I wasn’t sure we were going to run into this many problems. We’re going to get that together and at the same time we file a challenge, we’re going to give you a complete copy of it.”


Tyner also told the reporters that he’ll be providing a copy of the evidence to federal and state law enforcement officials as well. “We’re not only going to give it to you guys in the media, we’re also going to give a copy of it to the U.S. Attorney, to the Federal Election Commission, and we’re also going to give it to the Attorney General of the State of Mississippi,” Tyner said to cheers from McDaniel supporters at the press conference.


Tyner said that this is “much bigger than” just differences between Cochran and McDaniel.


“I praise Chris for not throwing in the towel,” Tyner said. “The conventional wisdom is out there. Everyone knows he was a very popular candidate and everyone knows he could have conceded and written his ticket for any office next year. But Chris McDaniel said, ‘no, I want to root out the problems. I want to integrity in this process, and if it destroys my political career so be it.’ That’s the kind of candidate we need for every elected office in Mississippi as well as inside the beltway.”



When local reporter Scott Simmons asked them if they have enough evidence to file a legal challenge of the election, Tyner replied: “Yes. There’s already enough evidence to file the challenge.”

When Simmons followed up to ask if that evidence is entirely ineligible crossover votes—Democrats who voted in the June 3 Democratic primary then in the June 24 GOP primary runoff—Tyner responded that he’s “not going to go into the specifics of everything, but crossover votes are a big part of our challenge.”

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #457 on: July 18, 2014, 10:16:45 AM »



http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/17/Mississippi-Supreme-Court-Rejects-McDaniel-s-Request-For-Access-To-Election-Records?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+July+18%2C+2014&utm_campaign=20140718_m121390411_Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+July+18%2C+2014&utm_term=Mor 
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #458 on: August 27, 2014, 04:13:32 PM »

https://termlimits.org/illinois-judges-blocks-citizens-voting-term-limits/ 
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #459 on: September 18, 2014, 02:24:23 PM »



http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2014/09/17/obamas-catalist-database/?singlepage=true
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #460 on: September 25, 2014, 03:36:12 PM »



http://www.dickmorris.com/voter-fraud-indispensable-element-obamas-grand-plan-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #461 on: October 21, 2014, 05:22:35 PM »


Politics Home
 Midterm Elections
 Executive
 Senate
 House of Representatives
 Defense
 Judiciary
 Scandals
 


Supreme Court

Supreme Court allows Texas to enforce new voter ID law, sparking mixed reaction

Published October 18, 2014·
FoxNews.com


Feb. 26, 2014: An election official checks a voter's photo identification at an early voting polling site in Austin, Texas (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)

The Supreme Court said Saturday that Texas' new voter-ID law can remain in effect for the November election, sparking mixed reaction.

In a rare weekend announcement, a majority of the high court’s justices rejected an emergency request from the Justice Department and civil rights groups to prohibit Texas from requiring voters to produce certain forms of photo ID to cast ballots. Three justices dissented.

The law was struck down by a federal judge last week, but a federal appeals court had put that ruling on hold.

The judge found that roughly 600,000 voters, many of them black or Latino, could be turned away at the polls because they lack acceptable identification. Early voting in Texas begins Monday.

"We are pleased the Supreme Court has agreed that Texas' voter ID law should remain in effect,” the state’s Attorney General’s Office said. “The state will continue to defend the voter ID law and remains confident that the district court's misguided ruling will be overturned on the merits.”

The high court’s order was unsigned, as it typically is in these situations. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented, saying they would have left the district court decision in place.

"The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters," Ginsburg wrote in dissent.

The law sets out seven forms of approved ID -- a list that includes concealed handgun licenses but not college student IDs, which are accepted in other states with similar measures.

"Hundreds of thousands of eligible voters in Texas will (now) be unable to participate in November's election because Texas has erected an obstacle course designed to discourage voting,” said Sherrilyn Ifill, president and counsel for the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund. “A federal court has found that the obstacles erected by Texas were designed to discriminate against black and Hispanic voters. This is an affront to our democracy. "

The 143-page opinion from U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos called the law an "unconstitutional burden on the right to vote" and the equivalent of a poll tax in finding that the Republican-led Texas Legislature purposely discriminated against minority voters in Texas.

Texas had urged the Supreme Court to let the state enforce voter ID at the polls in a court filing that took aim at the ruling by Ramos, an appointee of President Obama. Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican who's favored in the gubernatorial race, called Ramos' findings "preposterous" and accused the judge of ignoring evidence favorable to the state.

The defense fund, which is separate from the NAACP, presented testimony and oral arguments in the lower court trial.

“This battle isn’t yet over, said Natasha Korgaonkar, a lawyer for the group’s political arm.

Two years ago, the group and Justice Department joined other organizations in blocking the implementation of a photo-ID law in Texas.

The court had intervened in three other disputes in recent weeks over Republican-inspired restrictions on voting access. In Wisconsin, the justices blocked a voter ID law from being used in November. In North Carolina and Ohio, the justices allowed limits on same-day registration, early voting and provisional ballots to take or remain in effect.

Ginsburg said the Texas case was different from the clashes in North Carolina and Ohio because a federal judge held a full trial on the Texas election procedures and developed "an extensive record" finding the process discriminated against ballot access.

Texas has enforced its tough voter ID in elections since the Supreme Court in June 2013 effectively eliminated the heart of the Voting Rights Act, which had prevented Texas and eight other states with histories of discrimination from changing election laws without permission. Critics of the Texas measure, though, said the new ID requirement has not been used for an election for Congress and the Senate, or a high-turnout statewide election like the race for governor.

Ramos' issued her ruling on October 9. Five days later, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans put her decision on hold and cited a 2006 Supreme Court opinion that warned judges not to change the rules too close to Election Day.

The challengers in Texas said that the last time the Supreme Court allowed a voting law to be used in a subsequent election after it had been found to be unconstitutional was in 1982. That case from Georgia involved an at-large election system that had been in existence since 1911.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12440


« Reply #462 on: October 22, 2014, 04:23:17 PM »

http://pjmedia.com/blog/okeefe-video-voter-fraud-ground-zero-in-ghetto-aurora/?singlepage=true
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #463 on: October 22, 2014, 07:39:01 PM »

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/22/calibration-error-changes-gop-votes-to-dem-in-illinois-county/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12440


« Reply #464 on: October 22, 2014, 10:15:59 PM »


Saves them from having to manually stuff the ballot boxes.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #465 on: October 24, 2014, 08:10:30 PM »

Democrats. If they can't convince enough voters just import them:

*****Could non-citizens decide the November election?

By Jesse Richman and David Earnest October 24 at 3:06 PM

 (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)

Could control of the Senate in 2014 be decided by illegal votes cast by non-citizens? Some argue that incidents of voting by non-citizens are so rare as to be inconsequential, with efforts to block fraud a screen for an agenda to prevent poor and minority voters from exercising the franchise, while others define such incidents as a threat to democracy itself. Both sides depend more heavily on anecdotes than data.

In a forthcoming article in the journal Electoral Studies, we bring real data from big social science survey datasets to bear on the question of whether, to what extent, and for whom non-citizens vote in U.S. elections. Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races.

Our data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Its large number of observations (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010) provide sufficient samples of the non-immigrant sub-population, with 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 CCES, we also attempted to match respondents to voter files so that we could verify whether they actually voted.

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Estimated Voter Turnout by Non-Citizens 
 2008 2010
Self reported and/or verified 38 (11.3%) 13 (3.5%)
Self reported and verified 5 (1.5%) N.A.
Adjusted estimate 21 (6.4%) 8 (2.2%)

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given 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. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.
Advertisement



We also find that one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted.

An alternative approach to reducing non-citizen turnout might emphasize public information. Unlike other populations, including naturalized citizens, education is not associated with higher participation among non-citizens. In 2008, non-citizens with less than a college degree were significantly more likely to cast a validated vote, and no non-citizens with a college degree or higher cast a validated vote. This hints at a link between non-citizen voting and lack of awareness about legal barriers.

There are obvious limitations to our research, which one should take account of when interpreting the results. Although the CCES sample is large, the non-citizen portion of the sample is modest, with the attendant uncertainty associated with sampling error. We analyze only 828 self-reported non-citizens. Self-reports of citizen status might also be a source of error, although the appendix of our paper shows that the racial, geographic, and attitudinal characteristics of non-citizens (and non-citizen voters) are consistent with their self-reported status.

Another possible limitation is the matching process conducted by Catalyst to verify registration and turnout drops many non-citizen respondents who cannot be matched. Our adjusted estimate assumes the implication of a “registered” or “voted” response among those who Catalyst could not match is the same as for those whom it could. If one questions this assumption, one might focus only on those non-citizens with a reported and validated vote. This is the second line of the table.
Advertisement



Finally, extrapolation to specific state-level or district-level election outcomes is fraught with substantial uncertainty. It is obviously possible that non-citizens in California are more likely to vote than non-citizens in North Carolina, or vice versa. Thus, we are much more confident that non-citizen votes mattered for the Minnesota Senate race (a turnout of little more than one-tenth of our adjusted estimate is all that would be required) than that non-citizen votes changed the outcome in North Carolina.

Our research cannot answer whether the United States should move to legalize some electoral participation by non-citizens as many other countries do, and as some U.S. states did for more than 100 years, or find policies that more effectively restrict it. But this research should move that debate a step closer to a common set of facts.

Jesse Richman is Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies at Old Dominion University, and Director of the ODU Social Science Research Center. David Earnest is Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies at Old Dominion University, and Associate Dean for Research & Graduate Studies in the College of Arts and Letters.*****
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #466 on: October 29, 2014, 04:07:01 PM »



http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/11/mandela-t-shirt-get-an-id-register-vote/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #467 on: October 29, 2014, 08:13:27 PM »

What a riot!  grin

He must have been trying to disenfranchise South African whites.  wink

Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #468 on: October 30, 2014, 09:54:26 AM »

Finally.  Here is the smoking gun we all new had to exist.  Massive fraud either phony jury duty responses or massive voter fraud.  This also shows just how hard it is to prove because without state issued photo IDs that can be traced how can one prove fraud???  This is exactly why we need voter IDs. 

We know almost all if not all are Democrats doing this.

I like the legal argument that each fraudulent vote *cancels out * a legitimate vote as the Constitutional basis for a legal remedy to this.

To think how many elections went the way of the Crats because of this.....

*****Massive Non-Citizen Voting Uncovered in Maryland by
Bryan Preston

October 29, 2014 - 11:45 pmPage 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single PageShare on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services671Email Print Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size An election integrity watchdog group is suing the state of Maryland, alleging that it has discovered massive and ongoing fraudulent voting by non-U.S. citizens in one county. But because of the way that the non-citizens are able to cast votes in elections, the fraud is likely happening in every single county and subdivision across the state. The group believes that the illegal voting has been happening for years.

The group, Virginia Voters Alliance, says that it compared how voters in Frederick County filled out jury duty statements compared with their voting records. The group’s investigation found that thousands of people in Frederick County who stated that they are not U.S. citizens on jury duty forms went on to cast votes in elections. Either they failed to tell the truth when they were summoned for jury duty, or they cast illegal votes. Both are crimes. The same group previously found that about 40,000 people are registered to vote in both Virginia and Maryland.

It is a federal crime to cast votes if you are not legally eligible to vote. Non-citizens, whether in the country legally or not, are prohibited from voting in most local and all state and federal elections. Yet the VVA investigation found that hundreds of non-citizens have been voting in Frederick County, Maryland. One in seven Maryland residents are non-U.S. citizens.

“The lawsuit is the equivalent of the lookout spotting the iceberg ahead of the Titanic,” state Del. Pat McDonough told the Tatler. He added that the group’s investigation found a voter fraud “smoking gun.”

Maryland state law makes it easier for non-citizens, both those present legally and those in the country against the law, to vote. Maryland issues drivers licenses to legal and illegal aliens. Driver’s licenses in turn make it easier under the Motor Voter law to register to vote. Maryland also offers copious taxpayer-funded social programs to non-citizens in the state.

The group filed suit in Baltimore’s U.S. District Court on Friday. They are suing the Frederick County Board of Elections and the Maryland State Board of Elections.

Del. Pat McDonough (R-Baltimore and Harford Counties) detailed the alleged fraud in a Maryland press conference today. He is calling for a special state prosecutor because the fraud may be taking place statewide, with significant impact on Maryland elections. Maryland currently holds 10 electoral votes in presidential elections. McDonough is also proposing legislation including voter ID to close the loopholes that he says non-citizens are using to cast votes.******
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6468


« Reply #469 on: October 30, 2014, 10:31:20 AM »


That makes a pretty good bumper sticker answer to a difficult question: 

I agree with Nelson Madela on Voter ID.

Voter ID is an obvious way to guarantee honest elections.  Oppression would be if you found a state office somewhere, anywhere that denied or took months or years to issue ID's to blacks or some other group.  Or if the IRS did that granting 501 status to conservative groups.  It would be outrageous, un-American, unconstitutional, prosecutable.  Right?




Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #470 on: October 30, 2014, 11:53:55 AM »

Lets see.  I don't suppose one reason the Dems are saturating illegals in many states is to get them registered to vote is it?

October 30, 2014 10:00 AM
Non-Citizens Are Voting
James O’Keefe documents the problem in North Carolina, where the Senate race is close. By John Fund

John Fund  Could non-citizen voting be a problem in next week’s elections, and perhaps even swing some very close elections?

A new study by two Old Dominion University professors, based on survey data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, indicated that 6.4 percent of all non-citizens voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election, and 2.2 percent in the 2010 midterms. Given that 80 percent of non-citizens lean Democratic, they cite Al Franken ’s 312-vote win in the 2008 Minnesota U.S. Senate race as one likely tipped by non-citizen voting. As a senator, Franken cast the 60th vote needed to make Obamacare law.

North Carolina features one of the closest Senate races in the country this year, between Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan and Republican Thom Tillis. So what guerrilla filmmaker James O’Keefe, the man who has uncovered voter irregularities in states ranging from Colorado to New Hampshire, has learned in North Carolina is disturbing. This month, North Carolina officials found at least 145 illegal aliens, still in the country thanks to the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, registered to vote. Hundreds of other non-citizens may be on the rolls.

A voter-registration card is routinely issued without any identification check, and undocumented workers can use it for many purposes, including obtaining a driver’s license and qualifying for a job. And if a non-citizen has a voter-registration card, there are plenty of campaign operatives who will encourage him or her to vote illegally.

O’Keefe had a Brazilian-born immigrant investigator pose as someone who wanted to vote but was not a citizen. Greg Amick, the campaign manager for the Democrat running for sheriff in Mecklenburg County (Charlotte), was only too happy to help.

Greg Amick: Here’s a couple of things you can do. You do not have to have your driver’s license, but do you have any sort of identification?

Project Veritas investigator: But I do have my driver’s license.

Amick: Oh, you do. Show ’em that and you’re good.

PV: But the only problem, you know, I don’t want to vote if I’m not legal. I think that’s going to be a problem. I’m not sure.

Amick: It won’t be, it shouldn’t be an issue at all.

PV: No?

Amick: As long as you are registered to vote, you’ll be fine.

But North Carolina officials shouldn’t be “fine” with Amick, who appears to be afoul of a state law making it a felony “for any person, knowing that a person is not a citizen of the United States, to instruct or coerce that person to register to vote or to vote.”


Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6468


« Reply #471 on: October 30, 2014, 01:11:11 PM »

There ought to be a law against subverting our electoral process and betraying the principles of our constitutional republic - felony treason I am thinking, punishable by capital punishment with mandatory deportation of the remains if the offender is found to be here illegally.

Alternatively, we could set aside some land for all the people who do not wish to live within the agreed framework of this country.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2014, 01:14:23 PM by DougMacG » Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #472 on: October 31, 2014, 07:12:26 AM »

"felony treason I am thinking, punishable by capital punishment with mandatory deportation of the remains if the offender is found to be here illegally."

How about this:  send them to ISIS as hostage meat.  They want to live lawlessly then enjoy your time spent with them.   wink
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #473 on: October 31, 2014, 10:40:00 AM »

Right is right and wrong is wrong.  This sure looks wrong!

http://samuel-warde.com/2014/10/judge-wont-intervene-lost-voter-registrations-georgia/

But OTOH there is this:

http://www.11alive.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/10/20/missing-voter-applications/17596625/

« Last Edit: October 31, 2014, 10:44:05 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #474 on: October 31, 2014, 11:08:31 AM »

second post

 Latest Reason to Oppose Amnesty? Voter Fraud
Genevieve Wood, Daily Signal, 10/30/14

Are non-citizens potentially voting in Tuesday’s election?

Yes, according to Old Dominion University Professors Jesse Richman and David Earnest, who wrote an article for The Washington Post highlighting their findings:

Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races. Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 Cooperative Congressional Election Study sample), we find that this participation
was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections.

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.

The professors acknowledge that there are “limitations” to their research and that they are “much more confident” non-citizen votes were a factor in Minnesota than they were in North Carolina. But the overall evidence points to the fact than non-citizens have had an impact on the outcome of some of our elections.

Unfortunately, President Obama seems poised to give amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants through executive order after the election. It’s hard to imagine how giving legal status to millions of people who are here illegally will not make the problem of voter fraud worse.

There are numerous reasons to be both outraged and concerned about Obama’s plan to go around Congress before year’s end, wielding his phone and pen strategy, to give amnesty.

To start, the fact he isn’t taking action until after the election shows that he is isn’t just bypassing lawmakers, but also the American people. Obama well knows the majority of Americans oppose amnesty.

Were he to take action now, voters would have the opportunity to show their opposition by voting against members of his party who are up for election.

But snubbing the Constitution and voters is just the beginning.

According to news reports, a draft proposal from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services indicates the agency is looking for a private vendor that has the capacity to produce 30 million work permits and green cards over the next five years–and they’d like them to be ready to produce 9 million such documents in the first year alone. How much of this “preparation” is needed to fulfill whatever Obama does through an executive order on amnesty is unknown, but we can be fairly sure its part of the calculation.

Such a move is fraught with economic and security concerns. Is the president, who is so concerned about raising the minimum wage, not the least bit concerned about how a flood of low-skill workers would affect the U.S. economy and many of the very American citizens he says he wants to help move up the economic ladder? Is he willing to ignore the huge burden amnesty will place on American taxpayers?

And considering we appear to have very little control over our borders, with tens of thousands of people flooding the southern border earlier this year, and that the Obama administration has trouble even deporting criminals who are here illegally, Americans are right to be concerned about their safety and security.

No wonder Obama doesn’t want to talk about any of this prior to next week’s elections.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #475 on: October 31, 2014, 02:51:32 PM »

Seriously.

Why can not a case be built up against the DNC for encouraging voter fraud?

They should be held responsible for a lot of this.

Why cannot they be sued for damages?  We know there people are all over the country pushing fraud - why - because so far they know they can get away with it.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #476 on: October 31, 2014, 05:07:39 PM »

To build up a case of a conspiracy, first the violations on the ground have to be established, then a pattern shown, THEN the connection of the leadership to the pattern.  I suspect this last point will be difficult to prove to a sufficient probablility.

In the meantime, we are still at the ground level of getting convictions on the ground game.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #477 on: October 31, 2014, 06:12:10 PM »

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/31/the-four-paragraph-letter-a-musician-got-in-the-mail-that-he-says-shows-the-democrats-just-threatened-me/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #478 on: November 02, 2014, 11:28:02 PM »

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/massive-non-citizen-voting-uncovered-in-maryland-illegal-aliens/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12440


« Reply #479 on: November 03, 2014, 05:39:16 AM »

http://thepunditpress.com/2014/11/02/voter-fraud-in-new-mexico-voter-turned-away-after-illegal-voted-as-him-lack-of-voter-id-law-blamed/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #480 on: November 12, 2014, 12:23:13 PM »

http://www.dickmorris.com/obamas-ghost-army-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #481 on: January 05, 2015, 12:30:40 PM »

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/01/04/republicans-seem-to-steal-elections/
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6468


« Reply #482 on: January 05, 2015, 01:59:53 PM »


We are a Union of States and the majority of those are Republican by choice.  The Democrat party has amazing loyalty and turnout power in a relatively small number of concentrated areas. 

Rule by majority was contemplated by our founders - only in the context of how to prevent it.

"The problem is that the deck is stacked in favor of small states".

   - That is a feature, not a bug, of the constitution.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6468


« Reply #483 on: January 06, 2015, 01:38:08 PM »


Sean Trende of Real Clear Politics shoots this down quite effectively:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/01/05/the_myth_of_democrats_20-million-vote_majority_125145.html

"...add up the total number of votes cast for all Democratic candidates and Republican candidates in the 2010, 2012 and 2014 elections ... [and eliminate the double count of special elections] the margin shrinks to 2.1 points."


Interestingly, the proposal to eliminate the Senate, even by constitutional amendment, is specifically prohibited by Article V of the constitution.  "...no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #484 on: February 13, 2015, 11:13:17 PM »


http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/obama-amnesty-creates-loophole-that-allows-illegals-to-vote-in-elections
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #485 on: March 01, 2015, 01:35:18 PM »

ID cards for this is great but ID cards to vote is "disenfranchising".   The left has made us into a laughing stock:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/28/ny-id-cards-a-smash/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #486 on: March 11, 2015, 08:41:42 PM »

I have tremendous respect for Judge Posner, but I gotta say, this really surprises me.


http://bradblog.com/Docs/JudgePosnerDissent_PhotoID_WI_101014.pdf
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #487 on: March 15, 2015, 10:49:28 AM »

 The Paradox of America's Electoral Reform
Geopolitical Weekly
March 10, 2015 | 07:56 GMT
Print
Text Size
Stratfor

By George Friedman

We are now in the early phases of selecting the president of the United States. Vast amounts of money are being raised, plans are being laid, opposition research is underway and the first significant scandal has broken with the discovery that Hillary Clinton used a non-government email account for government business. Ahead of us is an extended series of primaries, followed by an election and perhaps a dispute over some aspect of the election. In the United States, the presidential election process takes about two years, particularly when the sitting president cannot run for re-election.

This election process matters to the world for two reasons. First, the world's only global power will be increasingly self-absorbed, and the sitting president — already weakened by the opposition party controlling both houses of Congress — is increasingly limited in what he can do. This is disturbing in some ways, since all presidential elections contain visions of the apocalypse that will follow the election of an opponent. During the U.S. election season, the world hears a litany of self-denigration and self-loathing that can be frightening emanating from a country that produces nearly a quarter of the world's wealth each year and commands the world's oceans. If Honduras were to engage in this behavior, the world would hardly notice. When the United States does it, the public discourse can convince others that the United States is on the verge of collapse, and that perspective has the potential to shape at least some actions on the global stage.
Tempering the Passions of Politics

The United States sees itself as the City on the Hill, an example to the world. But along with any redemptive sensibility comes its counterpart: the apocalyptic. The other candidate is betraying the promise of America, and therefore destroying it. Extreme messages are hardwired into the vision that created the republic.

The founders understood the inherent immoderation of politics and sought to solve problems by limiting democracy and emphasizing representative democracy. Americans select representatives through various complex courses. They do not directly elect presidents, but members of the Electoral College.

Likely an archaic institution, the Electoral College still represents the founders' fear of the passions of the people — both the intensity of some, and the indifference of others. The founders also distrusted the state while fully understanding its necessity. They had two visions: that representatives would make the law, and that these representatives would not have politics as a profession. Since re-election was not their primary goal, they were freed from democratic pressures to use their own wisdom in crafting laws.

The founders saw civil society — business, farms, churches and so on — as ultimately more important than the state, and they saw excessive political passion as misplaced. First, it took away from the private pursuits they so valued, and it tended to make political life more important than it should be. Second, they feared that ordinary men (women were excluded) might be elected as representatives at various levels. They set property requirements to assure sobriety (or so they thought) in representatives and at least limit the extent to which they were interested in politics. They set age requirements to assure a degree of maturity. They tried to shape representative democracy with standards they considered prudent — paralleling the values of their own social class, where private pursuits predominated and public affairs were a burdensome duty.

It is not that the founders regarded government as unimportant; to the contrary, it was central to civilization. Their concern was excessive passion on the part of the electorate, so they created a republican form of representative government because they feared the passions of the public. They also feared political parties and the factions and emotions they would arouse.

Parties and Party Bosses

Of course it was the founders who created political parties soon after the founding. The property requirements dissolved fairly quickly, the idea that state houses would elect senators went away, and the ideological passions and love of scandal emerged.

Political parties were organized state by state, and within state by counties and cities. These parties emerged with two roles. The first was to generate and offer potential leaders for election at all levels. The second was to serve as a means of mediation between the public — for multiple classes, from the wealthy to the poor — and the state. The political machines that dominated the country served as feeders of the republican system and ombudsmen for citizens.

The party bosses did not have visions of redemption or apocalypse. They were what the founders didn't want: professional politicians, not necessarily holding office themselves but overseeing the selection of those who would. Since these officeholders owed their jobs to the party boss, the boss determined legislation. And the more powerful bosses populated the smoke-filled rooms that selected presidents.

This was a system made for corruption, of course, and it violated the founders' vision, but it also fulfilled that vision in a way. The party bosses' power resided in building coalitions that they could serve. In the large industrial cities where immigrants came to work in the factories, that meant finding people jobs, securing services, maintaining the schools and so on. They didn't do this because they were public-spirited, but because they wanted to hold power. Even if companies that kicked back money to the bosses built the schools or the brother-in-law of a party boss owned the company that paved the streets, the schools got built and the streets got paved. The political machines were very real in rural areas as well.

Every four years, party bosses gathered at the party convention with the goal of selecting a candidate who would win. They would allow the candidate his ideological foibles, so long as they retained the ability to name postmasters and judges and appoint federal contracts in their areas. The system was corrupt, but it produced leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower, as well as some less illustrious people.
The Boss System Breaks Down

Starting in 1972, following Richard Nixon's presidency, the United States shifted away from a system of political bosses. This was achieved by broadly expanding primaries at all levels. Rather than bosses selecting candidates and controlling them, direct democratic elections were used for candidate selection. Since the bosses didn't select candidates, the candidates were beholden to the voters rather than the bosses. Each election year, the voters would select the candidates and then select the officeholder. Over time, the power of the political machine was broken and replaced by a series of elections. The founders did not want this level of democracy, but neither did they explicitly want the party boss.

This change had two unanticipated consequences. The first was that the importance of money in the political process surged. In the old system, you had to convince bosses to support you. That took time and effort and required that promises be made, but it did not require vast amounts of money. Under the primary system, apart from the national election, primary elections take place in almost all states. Candidates must build their own machines in each state and appeal directly to voters. That means huge expenditures to create a machine and buy advertising in each state.

As the bosses' corruption was curbed but money's centrality soared, the types of corruption endemic to the political system shifted. Corruption moved from favors for bosses to special treatment of fundraisers, but it was still there. Reformers tried to limit the amount of money that could be contributed, but they ignored two facts. First, a primary system for the presidency is fiendishly expensive simply because delivering the message to the public in 50 states costs a fortune. Second, given the stakes, the desire to influence government is difficult to curb. The means will be found to donate money, and in some cases it will be done in the hope and expectation of favors. The reforms changed the shape of corruption but could not eliminate it.

The second unintended consequence was that it institutionalized political polarization. The party boss was not a passionate man. But those who go to the polls in primaries tend to be. Turnout at American elections is always low. The founders set the election for a Tuesday rather than a weekend as in many countries, and it is a work day, with children to be picked up at school, dinner to be cooked and so on. The founders designed politics to be less important than private life, and in the competition on Election Tuesday, private life tends to win, particularly in off-year elections and primaries.

The people who vote in primaries tend to be passionate believers. The center, which holds the largest block of voters in the general election, is not a passionate place. The kids' homework comes first. Passion exists on the wings of both parties. This means that in the primaries, only two types of candidates win. One is the extremely well funded — and the passion of the wings make funding for them even more important. The other is the ideologically committed. The top fundraisers face the most passionate voters, and the contest is whether the center can be turned out with money. Frequently the answer is no. The result is that the wings, although likely a minority in the party, frequently select candidates in the primary who have trouble winning the general election. From their point of view, winning means nothing if you give up principles.

All of this applies equally to elections to the House and Senate. It has been said that there has never been less bipartisanship than there is now. I don't know if that is true, but it is certainly the case that the penalties for collaboration with the other party, or for moving to the center, are extremely high. The only ones who can do it are the ones who can raise sufficient money to draw the center out. And that is hard to do. As a result, everyone must run to the extreme in the primary and run to the center in the general election. The reforms have institutionalized hypocrisy and outsized strength for marginal groups, though they succeeded in breaking the party bosses.

Since 1972, the United States has elected presidents like Ronald Reagan, the two Bushes, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. I will leave it to the reader to determine how this compares to the boss-generated leaders. However, I would argue that the ombudsman system has broken down. Bosses, because they were corrupt, could provide an interface for voters with employers (who wanted contracts) and government. I suspect that the collapse of the boss system made it easier for the Italians, Irish and Jews to integrate into society, and harder for blacks and Hispanics. There are pockets of bosses, but they are not the norm, and they cannot offer as much without going to jail.

This is not meant to romanticize the bosses. We are, on the whole, better off without them, and we can't resurrect them. I am trying to explain why our elections have become so long, why they cost so much money, and why the wings of the parties get to define agendas and legislative and executive behavior.
The Geopolitics of the U.S. Elections

There is a geopolitical side to this as well. The internal political process of the leading global power is always a geopolitical matter. The structure and method whereby leaders are selected shape the kinds of leaders who govern and define, to some extent, the constraints placed on governments. Geopolitics, as Stratfor uses the concept, argues that the wishes and idiosyncrasies of individual leaders make little difference in the long run. This is because leaders are constrained by global realities. It is also because internal political processes define what must be done to take and hold power. Those internal political processes have their own origins in impersonal forces.

There has been a long struggle between the founders' vision of how politics should work and the reality of the process. The party boss was, in a weird way, an implementation of the principle of representative government. He was also a symbol of corruption and anti-democratic behavior. His demise has created the primary system, which carries with it its own corruption. Moreover, it has systematically limited the power of the center and strengthened the power of the most ideological. It has also caused U.S. elections to put the world ill at ease, because what the world hears in the Georgia, Vermont or Texas primaries can be unsettling. The American Republic was invented and it is continually being reinvented on the same basic theme. Each reform creates a new form of corruption and a new challenge for governance. In the end, everyone is trapped by reality, but it is taking longer and longer to enter that trap.

This situation is not unique to the United States, but the pattern differs elsewhere. Over the centuries, the U.S. public has been shaped by immigration, and the U.S. government was consciously constructed out of the theoretical constructs of its founders. It was as if the country were a blank slate. It was in this context that waves of reform took place, all changing the republic, all with unintended consequences.

I have tried to show here the unintended consequences of the post-Watergate reforms to illustrate why the American political system works as it does. But perhaps the most important point is that redrawing the government is endemic to the kind of government the United States has, and that the United States both absorbs change well and is frequently surprised by what change does. In other countries, there is less room to maneuver, and perhaps fewer surprises and standards of success. The political parties emerged against the founders' intentions, because political organization beyond the elite followed from the logic of the government. The rise of political bosses followed from the system, and simultaneously stabilized and corrupted it. The post-Watergate reforms changed the nature of the corruption but also changed the texture of political life. The latter is the issue with which the United States is now struggling.

China, Russia and Europe are all struggling, but in different ways and toward different ends, frequently because of problems endemic to their cultures. The problem endemic in American culture is the will to reform. It is both the virtue and vice of the U.S. government. It has geopolitical consequences. This is another dimension of geopolitics to be considered in the coming weeks and months.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #488 on: April 15, 2015, 08:49:13 PM »

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/15/obama-amnesty-granted-more-500k-ssn/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4462


« Reply #489 on: April 17, 2015, 10:31:53 AM »

The Democrats and Bush Republicans will not even have to import them from around the world to increase the Democrat voter rolls.   Just let them do it online from other countries.

One can easily predict the fraud this will allow in multiple scenerios.   Our sovereignty is being thrown out the window.   I am not optimistic.   Only a catastrophe will turn this back I fear.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/04/16/263477/as-states-warm-to-online-voting.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33268


« Reply #490 on: May 22, 2015, 08:55:54 PM »



Under a new name Acorn is up to its old games:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/19/hired-black-lives-matter-protesters-start-cutthech/
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!