Posted by Tina
The President’s commission to look into voter fraud has hit a few snags. As you know there are several states that refuse to cooperatively hand over information. But that hasn’t deterred those serving on the commission who are committed to discovering the truth about voter fraud in our elections. So far investigations seem to validate citizen’s concerns that there is fraud sufficient to turn some elections. Powerline reports on a study done by the Government Accountability Institute that shows “thousands of votes in the 2016 election were illegal duplicate votes from people who registered and voted in more than one state.”
The institute compared the lists using an “extremely conservative matching approach that sought only to identify two votes cast in the same legal name.” It found that 8,471 votes in 2016 were “highly likely” duplicates.
Extrapolating this to all 50 states would likely produce, with “high-confidence,” around 45,000 duplicate votes.
Powerline explains how this information is made significant:
The Government Accountability Institute wasn’t content just to match names and birthdays, which can be the same for different individuals. It contracted with companies that have commercial databases to further cross-check these individuals using their Social Security numbers and other information. When names, birthdates and Social Security numbers are matched, there is virtually no chance of false positives. …
… 45,000 fraudulent votes is not an inconsequential number. As Hans points out, Hillary Clinton won New Hampshire by fewer than 3,000 votes out of over 700,000 cast. (New Hampshire was one of the states that refused to turn over its data for this study. There have been allegations of Massachusetts residents voting there).
In addition, the 2000 presidential election was decided by 537 votes out of a total of 105 million cast. And in 2008, Al Franken won his Minnesota Senate race by a mere 312 votes. He ended up being the deciding vote that gave this country Obamacare.
Other types of voter fraud, voting by non-citizens and felons and absentee ballot fraud, were not captured by this information. There’s more work to be done. One question must be asked, as the folks at Powerline did, “What are the resisting states trying to hide?”
The claims by states that somehow their refusal to submit a list of registered voters – a public record – is to “protect their personal information and privacy” is hogwash. If the privacy issue was such a concern, those same states would not be selling their voter lists to political parties or others who can come up with the ca$h.
Judicial Watch has warned 11 states that they must clean up their voter rolls or risk being sued –
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-sues-voter-registration-data-national-voter-registration-act
– and strangely Taxifornia is not mentioned. But it’s early yet . . . . . . .
Tina, it isn’t “several” states that have refused to fully comply with the investigation. It’s 44 states. Many of these states are run by Republicans. Is it really possible that all of these states are just holding out for invalid reasons? Or is it that the investigation is politically motivated to justify laws that are intended to reduce lawful voter turnout?
The man behind the commission, Kris Kobach, has investigated voter fraud before; he only found about a dozen illegal votes in Kansas over a period of a decade. There is no “there” there.
This was the key part of the GAI’s findings, according to your link:
Notice that the study is confined to only one type of voter fraud — cases where an individual uses the same name to vote in more than one state. It does not capture cases of ineligible voting by noncitizens and felons — likely the most common type of fraud — and absentee ballot fraud.
If that’s true, how will Republican-backed voter ID laws solve the problem?
“…motivated to justify laws that are intended to reduce lawful voter turnout? ”
The idea that laws are “intended” to reduce voter turnout is absurd. Just another left political game to scare minorities and the elderly.
What authority does this commission have to enact laws anyway? (It doesn’t).
One excuse from a Secretary of State was ridiculous since the information requested is already public: “Not on my watch are we going to be releasing sensitive information that relate to the privacy of individuals.” The states sell the same information to campaigns and other interested entities. So their high standards dissolve when there’s a buck to be made.
“Notice that the study is confined to only one type of voter fraud”
But the commission intends to look into all types of voter fraud.
Those voting in two states would have a much more difficult time if they had to show ID to vote. The purpose of voter ID laws is to protect every vote. Laws have been written that address elderly and minority concerns…you lefties still stand against them.
As the commissioners and others asked, “What are the states afraid they will find?”
Perhaps that their state has the worst record.
“Those voting in two states would have a much more difficult time if they had to show ID to vote.”
How so? Explain.
“Laws have been written that address elderly and minority concerns…”
Which laws?
“How so? Explain.”
Those who travel to another state and use a dead persons information to cast a second vote would have to produce the ID of a dead man.
“Which laws?”
We discussed this before. I guess you don’t get or remember what you don’t want to hear. You also won’t recognize activist judges who make certain political activist claims of hardship and racism that stick because of the PC construct that obliterates reason in favor of feelings and attitude.
One example was Texas law that included language to assist minority and elderly people in obtaining registration and a voter ID was deemed “racist” and “discriminatory” by left lawyers and courts. The absurdity is evident in their own opposite efforts to help minorities and the elderly sign up for other government programs like food stamps, welfare, Medicare and SS.
It’s no mystery that you on the left oppose measures that require adherence to our laws. Fuzzy laws translate to votes for Democrats.
Those who travel to another state and use a dead persons information to cast a second vote would have to produce the ID of a dead man.
Moving the goalposts. The study you cited had nothing to do with dead voters–it found voters who voted twice in separate states with the same information. Your example here has nothing to do with that.
One example was Texas law that included language to assist minority and elderly people in obtaining registration and a voter ID
I can’t find this law. Link?
A side note if you don’t want intrusive campaign phone calls around election tim – put the wrong phone number on your voter’s registration form . . . . . . .
Or get rid of your landline and use a cellphone with the TrueCaller app. Works wonders!