Does Voter Fraud Make a Difference? Yes, Yes It Does

In this short example, John Fund confirms that voter fraud would not make a difference nationally in the popular vote that Trump erroneously Tweeted would put him ahead of Hillary — HOWEVER — it does affect smaller races. AND THIS can have very damning consequences on public policy that effects the entire populace.

Illegally.

Here is an article by Byron York:

When 1,099 Felons Vote In Race Won By 312 Ballots

In the ’08 campaign, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman was running for re-election against Democrat Al Franken. It was impossibly close; on the morning after the election, after 2.9 million people had voted, Coleman led Franken by 725 votes.

Franken and his Democratic allies dispatched an army of lawyers to challenge the results. After the first canvass, Coleman’s lead was down to 206 votes. That was followed by months of wrangling and litigation. In the end, Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. He was sworn into office in July 2009, eight months after the election.

During the controversy a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons — all ineligible to vote — who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race.

Minnesota Majority took the information to prosecutors across the state, many of whom showed no interest in pursuing it. But Minnesota law requires authorities to investigate such leads. And so far, Fund and von Spakovsky report, 177 people have been convicted — not just accused, but convicted — of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial. “The numbers aren’t greater,” the authors say, “because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and ‘knowingly’ voted unlawfully.” The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong.

Still, that’s a total of 243 people either convicted of voter fraud or awaiting trial in an election that was decided by 312 votes. With 1,099 examples identified by Minnesota Majority, and with evidence suggesting that felons, when they do vote, strongly favor Democrats, it doesn’t require a leap to suggest there might one day be proof that Al Franken was elected on the strength of voter fraud.

And that’s just the question of voting by felons. Minnesota Majority also found all sorts of other irregularities that cast further doubt on the Senate results.

The election was particularly important because Franken’s victory gave Senate Democrats a 60th vote in favor of President Obama’s national health care proposal — the deciding vote to overcome a Republican filibuster. If Coleman had kept his seat, there would have been no 60th vote, and no Obamacare…..

Someone on LIVELEAK had a great insight! LEFTISTS like to repeat lines, one being from DailyKos, who’e headline reads:

  • MORE THAN A BILLION VOTES: 31 CASES OF VOTER FRAUD…

Here is the comment from LiveLeak:

“Wait, 1200 illegal votes in just that one election. What the [effe] happened to “There have only been 31 actual cases of voter fraud in the last decade!” Time for a full recount of all districts across the U.S. Not because it will change anything but because it is easier to tell someone to shut the [effe] up when you have numbers behind your argument.” — Fedup Withitall

Here is the entire interview with John Fund where the above came from AS WELL AS a portion of the WALL STREET JOURNAL article that prompted the interview (video is from the WSJ):

…How common is this? If only we knew. Political correctness has squelched probes of noncitizen voting, so most cases are discovered accidentally instead of through a systematic review of election records.

The bottom line is that the honor system doesn’t work.

The danger looms large in states such as California, which provides driver’s licenses to noncitizens, including those here illegally, and which also does nothing to verify citizenship during voter registration. In a 1996 House race, then-challenger Loretta Sanchez defeated incumbent Rep. Bob Dornan by under 1,000 votes. An investigation by a House committee found 624 invalid votes by noncitizens, nearly enough to overturn the result.

How big is this problem nationally? One district-court administrator estimated in 2005that up to 3% of the 30,000 people called for jury duty from voter-registration rolls over a two-year period were not U.S. citizens. A September report from the Public Interest Legal Foundation found more than 1,000 noncitizens who had been removed from the voter rolls in eight Virginia counties. Many of them had cast ballots in previous elections, but none was referred for possible prosecution.

The lack of prosecutions is no surprise. In 2011, the Electoral Board in Fairfax County, Va., sent the Justice Department, under then-Attorney General Eric Holder, information about 278 noncitizens registered to vote in Fairfax County, about half of whom had cast ballots in previous elections. There is no record that the Justice Department did anything.

A 2014 study by three professors at Old Dominion University and George Mason University used extensive survey data to estimate that 6.4% of the nation’s noncitizens voted in 2008 and that 2.2% voted in 2010. This study has been criticized by many academics who claim that voter fraud is vanishingly rare. Yet the Heritage Foundation maintains a list of more than 700 recent convictions for voter fraud.

A postelection survey conducted by Americas Majority Foundation found that 2.1% of noncitizens voted in the Nov. 8 election. In the battleground states of Michigan and Ohio, 2.5% and 2.1%, respectively, of noncitizens reported voting. In 2013, pollster McLaughlin & Associates conducted an extensive survey of Hispanics on immigration issues. Its voter-profile tabulation shows that 13% of noncitizens said they were registered to vote. That matches closely the Old Dominion/George Mason study, in which 15.6% of noncitizens said they were registered.

Fixing this problem is very straightforward. The Trump administration should direct the Department of Homeland Security to cooperate with states that want to verify the citizenship of registered voters. Since this will only flag illegal immigrants who have been detained at some point and legal noncitizens, states should pass laws, similar to the one in Kansas, that require proof of citizenship when registering to vote. The Justice Department, instead of ignoring the issue, should again start prosecuting these cases.

The bottom line is that the honor system doesn’t work. There are people—like those caught voting illegally—who are willing to exploit these weaknesses that damage election integrity.

Marked Pattern Of Lower Support For Pro-Liberty Views Among Immigrants ~ Statistically Significant And Sizable

Anti-Liberty Votes

Democrat operatives have been seen busing Somali immigrants to early-voting stations in the swing state of Ohio, and telling them how to vote for the Democrat Party, sources report.

The Somalis, who cannot read English, are told by the Democrat operatives to “vote Brown all the way down,” anonymous eyewitnesses have told Human Events. The statement is an apparent reference to Senator Sherrod Brown, the incumbent Democrat Senator in Ohio who is on the ballot….

~The Right Perspective (Oct 2012)

Libertarian Republican’s post caused me to wonder the following:

Wouldn’t there be then, a correlation to these “less-liberty” immigrants voting overwhelmingly Democratic? Doesn’t this — anecdotally — show that maybe, just maybe, the “statistically significant and sizable differences” signify something? Hmmmmm?

Here is LB’s post:

  • “Marked pattern of lower support for pro-liberty views among immigrants… statistically significant and sizable” differences from Americans

Excerpted, MarginalRevolution, “U.S. Immigrants’ Attitudes Toward Libertarian Values” (link to study by UCSD psychologist Hal Pashler):

While there has been much discussion of libertarians’ (generally although not universally favorable) attitudes toward liberal immigration policies, the attitudes of immigrants to the United States toward libertarian values have not previously been examined.

Using data from the 2010 General Social Survey, we asked how American-born and foreign-born residents differed in attitudes toward a variety of topics upon which self-reported libertarians typically hold strong pro-liberty views (as described by Iyer et al., 2012). The results showed a marked pattern of lower support for pro-liberty views among immigrants as compared to US-born residents.

These differences were generally statistically significant and sizable, with a few scattered exceptions. With increasing proportions of the US population being foreign-born, low support for libertarian values by foreign-born residents means that the political prospects of libertarian values in the US are likely to diminish over time.

Pro-Open Borders, liberal-leaning libertarian Cato Inst. admits increased immigration will lead to electoral failure for libertarians

[To wit]

From Cato.org:

Here are some reasons why Pashler’s paper shouldn’t worry libertarians much or convince many to oppose immigration: First, libertarians generally support immigration reform, the legalization of unauthorized immigrants, and increasing legal immigration because it is consistent with libertarian principles – not because immigration reform will lead to breakthrough electoral gains for libertarian candidates. The freedom for healthy non-criminals to move across borders with a minimum of government interference is important in and of itself. General libertarian support for immigration reform does not depend upon immigrants producing a pro-liberty Curley effect – as nice as that would be.

LR comments on CATO’s position:

Editor’s note – Of course, the Cato Institute is not in the business of electoral politics. They’re in the business of pointy-headed intellectualizing and policy paper pushing. Why should they give a “f” what the electoral consequences are, of vastly increasing liberty-hating immigrants into the U.S. and putting them immediately onto the voter rolls.

A mighty f-u you goes out to our friends at the Cato Institute this morning from the political arm of the libertarian movement.

Ohio Now Added To the Obama-Care `Bird`

Forbes Online has this previously released story about the rising health premiums for Californians:

“[F]or the typical 25 year old male non-smoking Californian,” Roy added, “Obamacare will drive premiums up by between 100 and 123 percent.” For a 40 year old male non-smoker” Obamacare will increase individual-market premiums by an average of 116 percent.” Roy summarized, “For both 25-year-olds and 40-year-olds, then, Californians under Obamacare who buy insurance for themselves will see their insurance premiums double.” That is a conservative understatement of his actual results.

[….]

Barack Obama campaigned for President not on the intellectually honest position that “Obamacare will cost more, but it would be worth it,” but instead on the intellectually dishonest position that it would reduce the cost of health insurance, while covering everyone. Peter Suderman correctly reported on MSNBC on June 4 that during Obama’s first campaign, the candidate’s position was that under his health reform plan, “If you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change for you under the plan is the amount of money you will spend on premiums. That will be less.” Suderman added, “On the campaign trail in 2008, Obama continued to sell the [reform] as a way to lower health premiums, promising at least 15 times to reduce health premiums for families by $2,500 on average.”

I have used the term “Calculated Deception” to refer to Obama’s strategy of rhetorical deception, taking advantage of what Obama shrewdly perceives that the average person will not understand, and what the “mainstream” Democrat Party controlled media will not tell him. That pledge to reduce the cost of health insurance by $2,500 per family was calculated deception that is being exposed as such right now.

But such Calculated Deception amplified in the Democrat controlled media echo chamber just renders our democracy confused and dysfunctional.

…read more…

Again, Forbes on the rise of premiums in Ohio:

The rates that Ohio reported are proposed rates; the Department of Insurance still has to formally approve them. “A total of 14 companies proposed rates for 214 plans to the Department. Projected costs from the companies for providing coverage for the required [by Obamacare] essential health benefits ranged from $282.51 to $577.40 for individual health insurance plans.”

It’s called “rate shock,” but it’s not shocking to people who understand the economics of health insurance. In August 2011, Milliman, one of the nation’s leading actuarial firms, predicted that Obamacare would increase individual-market premiums in Ohio by 55 to 85 percent. This past March, the Society of Actuaries projected that the law would increase premiums in that market by 81 percent. Like good players on “The Price is Right,” they both came in just under the Dept. of Insurance’s figure.

…read more…

The Laffer Curve being applied to Obama-Care:

Romney Up In Ohio!?

Libertarian Republican has a good post showing that multiple polls actually has Romney up in Ohio:

In Ohio, the RealClearPolitics average of the public polls currently favors Obama by 6 points. Supposedly, Obama is going to win this state by a wider margin than he did four years, when he won the state by 5 points….

NOT!

Based on my average of thirteen polls conducted during the prior thirty days in Ohio, I have Romney currently ahead by 2.2 points, 47.6 to 45.3, with the remainder undecided or in favor of a third-party candidates.

…read more…

The Coach is Right has this astounding post that also shows their is some fuzzy math going on in the legacy media:

Media fraudulent pollsters you’ve been busted. Your fake numbers have been exposed by two very unlikely and probably unwilling sources. Last Friday the Leftist cheer leaders at the Third Way “think tank” made what had to be a very sad announcement for them. They told the world their researchers had found Democrat registration has fallen by 490,000 in just Ohio alone and without going into finer numbers had also declined by significant numbers in other important states. Florida Democrat registration is down 4.9% Iowa Democrats have lost 9.5% and remember that “thisclose” swing state of New Hampshire, the one that flipped its entire government just two years ago – Democrat registration is down 19.7%! More than this Third Way also found Republican registration was down only a 10th of the Democrat decline and that Independents (who favor Mitt Romney by 14 points) had grown in numbers.

The full story from Ohio must be chilling for Democrats because 44% of these Democrat registration drops come from the Cleveland (Cuyahoga County) area cutting deeply into their lead over local Republicans. Hamilton and Franklin counties, both huge Democrat strongholds have seen steep declines in the number of registered Democrats as well. The combined decline of all three counties accounts for about 79% of the now “missing” Ohio Democrats.

[…]

The second blow to the false polls we constantly see is the just released Gallup report showing Republicans 16% (64/48) more enthusiastic about voting than Democrats are. Remember these numbers when you read the next fraudulent poll. Added to the sharp drop in Democrat registration they prove Barack Obama is on his way to a landslide defeat next month.

…read more…

And the Daily Caller is reporting that an internal Ohio Romney memo says the state is up for grabs.

Bridge Bomb Plot By Leftists, Of Course

Most violence happens by those pushing a leftist ideal. Conservative violence is almost unheard of! Why? There is a goal of a perfect world being created in the here-and-now, and this naturally leads to organizations that encourage protest and violence. The most recent example of this are the Cleveland Bridge Bombers. The first player in this group of douche-bags looking to hurt and maim people and property is Brandon L. Baxter. On his FaceBook he has quite a few organization listed that he likes.

….Facebook profile, he lists his political views as “anarcho-communist,” and lists “#OccupyCleveland” as his employment.

also, in his “liked” section just a few organizations he apparently endorses:

Doug “liked”  { A.C.A.B } • All Cops Are Bastards

 

Tony liked some extreme or liberal interests/orgs as well:

 

….Joshua Stafford, 23, again lists “#OccupyCleveland” as his occupation. He also likes to smoke weed, according to his activities.

An older video but relevant for the violence we are seeing is this from occupy L.A. said violence and bloodshed is necessary:

When Unions Win People Lose Their jobs

BigGovernment has the story in regards to Ohio Unions beating back Kasich’s plan:

One month ago Ohio voted with its heart against reforms portrayed as an attack on public workers. Ohio, DC, and New York union bosses spent more than $30 million drenching the airwaves in images of sad firefighters, sad police officers, and evil Republicans, convincing voters to overlook a broken status quo.

A month later, how are local governments celebrating the union victory on Issue 2?

Emphasis mine. Cleveland City School District is eliminating preschool, high school busing, and 75 security positions….

Westerville City School District is firing 62 support staff, cutting busing, and eliminating all sports….

…read more…