February 14, 2017

"I can tell you that this issue of busing voters into New Hampshire is widely known by anyone who's worked in New Hampshire politics."

"It's very real. It's very serious. This morning, on this show, is not the venue for me to lay out all the evidence.... I'm saying anybody—George, go to New Hampshire. Talk to anybody who has worked in politics there for a long time. Everybody is aware of the problem in New Hampshire."

Said Stephen Miller. He was talking to George Stephanopoulos, who kept asking for evidence, when all he needed to do was go to New Hampshire and ask anybody.... everybody in New Hampshire knows.

130 comments:

Original Mike said...

The New Hampshire AG appears to know.

mezzrow said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lin-a2lTelg

Lewis Wetzel said...

When people tell me that Trump was crazy for saying that there were 4 million illegal votes cast in last November's election, I ask them how many illegal votes were cast. No one seems to know for sure, but everyone is certain it wasn't 4 million.

Gusty Winds said...

It's seems the same as eyewitnesses who have seen the buses brought in from Illinois to vote in Kenosha. I work with a guy who lives in Kenosha and says the specific voting precinct and location is well known. He's a pretty honest guy. Says he took pictures of the buses a few years back and sent the pictures to the Milwaukee Journal and they weren't interested.

Big Mike said...

Is busing into New Hampshire a modern urban legend? What about busing voters up from North Carolina to vote in Philadelphia? Some of these have to be modern urban legends, but there's an awful lot of smoke floating around for there not to be any fire at all.

Brent said...

The day will come when voter signatures on election days will finally be compared to voter rolls and the project will yield huge numbers of races that were decided by illegal votes.

When that day comes no matter how close or far in the future, the left will immediately change its argument- --without an ounce of shame --- to "you cannot violate voters privacy by checking signatures" ( which is the sole reason signatures are required of course). The next argument will be to ask why signatures are ever needed at all.

I am serious. Bookmarl this for that future day. Do you know a lefty with any semblance of integrity?
Please.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

...everybody in New Hampshire knows.

I'm in New Hampshire, and I didn't know. Of course, I've never worked in politics, so I'm not invalidating his claim.

The biggest problem I've seen are all the immigrants flooding across our southern border, trying to escape their failed state. Then voting for the same policies that made them flee Massachusetts in the first place.

I think New Hampshire needs to build a wall along its southern border. ( We don't need one along the Vermont border. People in Vermont appear to be willing to put up with the consequences of their choices. )

M Jordan said...

The media's outraged -- outraged! -- every time Trump and comp. make these claims. How dare they? There's no evidence! But there is evidence. Just yesterday a guy got convicted of this very thing. "But he's just one guy!" Right. Which is one more piece of data than you, O media, O guardians of Truth and emitters of outrage, have produced.

So media, why not do some investigative reporting? I think America would like to see it.

John Tuffnell said...

"You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let's face it. It was you, Charley."

Relax, Donald. You won. You are someone and you're not a bum. Charley didn't come in on a bus and didn't do anything to you. Hope that helps.

Unknown said...

it is so obvious that there is illegal voting considering all the reports of mail in ballots sent to straw addresses, watching mentally disabled wheeled into precincts by their nurses, the fact that illegal immigrants have been convicted, millions double registered, no voter iD laws in democrat states, that fact that politicians have said there will be no consequences for illegal immigrant voting...

the media and the elites are running around trying to debunk 4 mil when the assumption is that there is less than 4 mil illegal votes

in other news, the everybody poops

Gusty Winds said...

It's amazing that the James O'Keefe video catching Scott Foval admitting to it as a common tactic doesn't peak anyone's interest in the Wisconsin Attorney General's office.

You have to figure if all those in power are afraid to investigate it and seek out the truth...it is more than likely true. Probably for both Democrats and Republicans. Maybe its just a gentleman's agreement they honor to keep the real chance of third party candidates out of the system.

Sebastian said...

Everybody knows, but not everybody wants to know, and nobody wants everybody to know that he knows but doesn't want to know.

Chuck said...

The Trump Administration is really screwing up this election law reform issue.

Inevitably, the Trumpist claims of massive voter fraud cases in the millions will not be proven. And there will then be the inevitable blowback from that. See? You never had proof of all that voter fraud that Trump claimed...

But those kinds of cases were never what the reform issue was all about. There are smart guys who can articulate this a lot better. Kris Kobach from Kansas; who Trump considered for an administration job but who didn't get picked. Hans von Spakovsky of Heritage and his frequent writing partner John Fund of National Review. Most of all Bradley Smith of Capital University Law School and a former FEC Commissioner.

There may indeed be problems of non-citizens voting, in marginal numbers that could be meaningful in rare marginal cases. There may be problems of people voting in multiple localities, or felons voting illegally, or other registration abuses.

There are issues, which if reviewed carefully, would support the reforms that Republicans favor. Those same issues, if demagogued recklessly, could be turned against the reform efforts.

A little knowledge seems to be a dangerous thing in the hands Donald Trump in particular. I expect that if Stephen Miller was still working for Jeff Sessions' Senate office staff, he'd be more careful and much more reigned-in. As he should be. There'd be some more well-qualified Judiciar Committee staff doing the talking.

LakeLevel said...

It may be true that massive voter fraud exists, but "everybody knows" is a terrible argument. Everybody knows that Nazis were right wingers right? But Early manifestos of the Nazis sound like a cross between The Green Party and The Democratic Party.
If you ever hear yourself think or say "everybody knows", stop yourself and look around for real evidence before you make a fool of yourself. What you think you know may have been implanted into you for political reasons.

rhhardin said...

It's a counternarrative introduced.

The original guy didn't want evidence, just a final say.

The joke used to be that a University of Chicago philosopher wouldn't argue with you beyond insisting that you define your terms. That was a similar finalizing move.

dreams said...

"everybody in New Hampshire knows"

And so does George.

Gusty Winds said...

Big business want's to bring in undocumented workers to exploit cheap labor. Democrats want to bring in undocumented people to pad the voting rolls. That's how they plan to turn Texas purple then blue. Are we supposed to pretend that's not true?

sunsong said...

Evidence please.

DanTheMan said...

There are at least a million illegal aliens in California with driver's licenses. When you apply for your license, you check a box to register to vote. And by law poll workers cannot ask you about your citizenship status.

But none of them voted, right?

Bob Boyd said...

Sebastian said...
"Everybody knows, but not everybody wants to know, and nobody wants everybody to know that he knows but doesn't want to know."

The first rule of what everybody knows is, you don't talk about what everybody knows.

Clayton Hennesey said...

I think it's reasonable to believe that, now that Trump has to do the real work of being President, a number of mini-Trumps will be delegated to create lightning sinks and to open rabbit holes for the media and others. The work is necessary and must be done to keep the treads rolling, but the President himself doesn't necessarily have to be the one doing it.

Francisco D said...

Chuck was the Sgt. Schultz of Detroit poll watchers.

He saw nothing ... nothing!

rhhardin said...

I don't think I've been in, or even over, New Hampshire. In fact I question even Vermont.


Oh wait yes I have, Nashua NH was the usual motel for visiting the Haystack Radar of Lincoln Labs.

Clayton Hennesey said...

But none of them voted, right?

Putting one's entire savings into the hands of thieving and predatory coyotes and risking death crossing the Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts is one thing.

Risking being caught voting illegally in a U. S. election so that others in your family don't have to is quite another thing entirely and clearly a bridge too far.

rehajm said...

I think New Hampshire needs to build a wall along its southern border.

Extremely short sighted unless this wall will have a doggie door that lets Massholes get to the New Hampshire State Liquor Stores.

roesch/voltaire said...

Stephen Colbert has invited everybody including Stephen Miller to his show tonight to provide proof and testimony. I wonder who will have their pants on-fire because of lies?

Chuck said...

Dan the Man:

You are partly correct. Illegal immigrants in California (and there are probably about 15 million of them in total) can apply for a driver's license known as an AB-60 license. It is not an ordinary Cali license. So it would not be usable to prove identity if California demanded photo id to vote.

Problem is, California's Democrats have never countenanced such a requirement.

I'd actually be okay, with a lot more accommodations for all sorts of immigrant workers, including alien driver licenses and work permits, if only we Republicans could be given full reign to impose much-needed election law reforms. More and stricter voter id. No more same-day registration. Tightened voter rolls. And much more.

Jess said...

Considering how easy it is to vote in some locations, the lack of oversight in others, a refusal to mandate identification, and a willingness to turn away from fraud for votes, Trump's claims are as accurate as those that say there is no voter fraud. While the argument continues, the accuracy of votes remains as inaccurate as is was.

James Kahn said...

There is certainly circumstantial evidence, and the means, motive, and opportunity for millions. There's also the phenomenon of convicted felons voting, which is known to have happened in the Franken-Coleman fiasco in 2010.

The fact that the Democrats in many states like California ensure that, and are opposed to investigations or measures to prevent it, leads me to think that the smoke means real fire.

Brando said...

So far they haven't provided evidence, and this "4 million" claim looks silly without such evidence. If we're just going to guess, why not guess 20 million?

But the Left is missing another point, which is that it makes sense to put in reforms that make illegal voting less likely. An ID requirement really isn't a bad idea, and for those rare cases that someone who is entitled to vote can't get ID that can surely be worked out reasonably. And it's a good idea to do better coordination between states and localities to make sure people don't remain registered at an old address (e.g., even Sean Spicer was found to be registered in more than one place, and I wouldn't be surprised if I was as well--when you move and register in another state, the old state might not quickly scrub you from the rolls). Most of those people don't go voting in every state, but it's not impossible for someone to do so.

But hey, why try to improve the system when we can score cheap political points to rile up our partisans in a festival of crap? Let's keep that up!

Chuck said...

Francisco D said...
Chuck was the Sgt. Schultz of Detroit poll watchers.

He saw nothing ... nothing!


You stupid fucking piece of shit. You continually toss out these little factless cheap shots against me, with no idea of what you are talking about. I've had more involvement in Detroit elections and Michigan Republican Party politics than you could dream of.

You wanna argue about this? Good. Bring it, you moronic asswipe. Be specific. Ask some good questions for a change.

And start with an apology for accusing me of something in connection with the 2016 elections in Detroit, since it was one of the first ones this century where I DIDN'T work as a Republican-credentialed supervising poll challenger.

tcrosse said...

Hasn't Stephanopoulos found his house in Australia yet?

traditionalguy said...

That is a distraction for the Media to play with, and only looks at voter impersonation. Meanwhile Motovoter States such as California Register and votes million of Mexicans. That remains the Big Deal issue.

rehajm said...

If we're just going to guess, why not guess 20 million?

The out of the ass 20 million figure has already been used by the Obama administration to describe how many people are grateful for Obamacare.

Gusty Winds said...

roesch/voltaire said...

Stephen Colbert has invited everybody including Stephen Miller to his show tonight to provide proof and testimony.

Seriously? We now expect to adjudicate these types of things on a late night comedy show. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I guess they are now not much different than the Sunday Morning political shows.

Kevin said...

Bingo! "When people tell me that Trump was crazy for saying that there were 4 million illegal votes cast in last November's election, I ask them how many illegal votes were cast. No one seems to know for sure, but everyone is certain it wasn't 4 million."

Lawyer: I bet it's not more than 2 million!

Me: So you agree with Trump on everything except the first digit.

Francisco D said...

Chuck,

You are losing it.

I can handle the vulgar insults. It's the straw man arguments that are annoying.

I never accused you of anything regarding the 2016 elections. You made a faulty inference a few weeks ago, but it's like a bee in your bonnet.

Maybe Michigan turned red in 2016 because you stopped being a Republican poll watcher. LOL :-)

Chuck said...

Brando said...
So far they haven't provided evidence, and this "4 million" claim looks silly without such evidence. If we're just going to guess, why not guess 20 million?

But the Left is missing another point, which is that it makes sense to put in reforms that make illegal voting less likely. An ID requirement really isn't a bad idea, and for those rare cases that someone who is entitled to vote can't get ID that can surely be worked out reasonably. And it's a good idea to do better coordination between states and localities to make sure people don't remain registered at an old address (e.g., even Sean Spicer was found to be registered in more than one place, and I wouldn't be surprised if I was as well--when you move and register in another state, the old state might not quickly scrub you from the rolls). Most of those people don't go voting in every state, but it's not impossible for someone to do so.

But hey, why try to improve the system when we can score cheap political points to rile up our partisans in a festival of crap? Let's keep that up!



D-I-T-T-O.

Brando one big thing, would be to actually have the Department of Justice use some of its large resources to actually look at this. While the SEC has elaborate fraud-hunting mechanisms in the equities markets, we have almost nothing of the kind in election law. When liberals howl that there have been close to zero criminal convictions for voter-fraud cases, it is in large part because no one is looking for them, and certainly no one is studying any larger-scale problems, and few prosecutors are interested in expending resources on odd individual cases.

The emphasis needs to be on systemic reform, and not -- as the Trump Administration is trying to communicate -- problems with "illegal aliens" or massive undetected criminal "fraud."

These reforms are not easy to pass and to defend in court. They don't get any easier if Administration figures are making disprovable claims.

Gahrie said...

Stephen Colbert has invited everybody including Stephen Miller to his show tonight to provide proof and testimony

The problem is , the Left refuses to allow us to do the investigations that would provide the evidence.

Fernandinande said...

M Jordan said...
So media, why not do some investigative reporting?


Good question. Although it's hard to prove a negative, the "disparate impact" nonsense regarding voter ID, promoted by the DOJ and their ilk, is evidence that They know about and approve of voter fraud.

All laws have "disparate impacts" on the various groups of Special People, but in most cases it's never mentioned or considered. The racial "disparate impact" of voter ID laws is a few percent (literally 2 or 3%), the "disparate impact" for murder laws is several hundred percent.

Bay Area Guy said...

There's at least 11 Million illegal aliens in the USA, and probably more. This is a recent development (20 years), actively promoted by the Democratic Left and its political allies.

Some % of these 11 Million illegal aliens unlawfully register and vote -- and they overwhelmingly vote Dem. And that makes Blue cities more blue, and the border states (Cal, AZ, NM, and Texas) more blue too.

While California tipped from Reagan Red to Blue over the past 30 years, thankfully, Texas has not tipped. Arizona is struggling to hold out. NM should probably begin the process of changing its name to "Old Mexico" (46% Hispanic, 40% white).

It would be nice if "journalists" like Stephanapoulos actually investigated this, but, of course, they won't, because it's good for their (political) side.

You want more Trump? This is how you get more Trump.



jacksonjay said...

Yeah, and everybody who saw that crowd on Jan. 20 knows that it was the biggest, most tremendous crowd ever in the history of crowds. Sad.

jacksonjay said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Amadeus 48 said...

Chuck has the best of this argument, but we are essentially talking tactics. Team Trump wants to keep the issue alive, and I expect that Sessions will take a more skeptical view of the "nothing to see here" claims than Obama/Holder/Lynch did.
That fact is that nobody knows how many illegal votes are cast because nobody has really looked.
I predict fewer illegal votes will be cast will be if people start looking. The Texas court sending that voting non-citizen to prison for eight years should wake some people up.

roesch/voltaire said...

Sorry but Miller claims he already has the facts, and I assume that has happened because of some investigation. Here in Wisconsin we on the left did not discourage investigations and what did they find? Two people who voted for Trump more that once LOL

Chuck said...

Gahrie said...
Stephen Colbert has invited everybody including Stephen Miller to his show tonight to provide proof and testimony

The problem is , the Left refuses to allow us to do the investigations that would provide the evidence.


See; that is the problem. Stephen Colbert isn't inviting Hans von Spakovsky on his show to talk about any real issues. Colbert has taken a reckess statement by Stephen Miller and is turning it against him.

Colbert, to be sure, doesn't do legal reform debates. Colbert does news theater. I suppose that is perhaps what Trump and Miller are doing; their own form of political/news theater. Trump and Miller would be wise to leave the news theater to the pros. Trump can sign federal legislation into law; that is his advantage over Colbert. Stick with your advantage, and stay out of the venues where you'll lose.


Angel-Dyne said...

Chuck: The Trump Administration is really screwing up this election law reform issue.

Yeah, just like they screw up every issue that you know with absolute assurance that your lot wouldn't have screwed up. Which is true, your lot wouldn't have screwed them up, because they never would have pursued them in the first place.

Articles written for think tanks don't mean squat unless somebody acts on the information. Fainéants bitching about the lack of finesse in people getting the ball rolling on an issue doesn't mean squat, either.

Mike Sylwester said...

The Federal Government should study the issue and then publish a report.

The Federal Government is uniquely able to determine voters' citizenship, registration in multiple places, and other considerations.

Unfortunately, the Democrats will try to prevent such a study, complaining that it is racist and "voter suppression".

Historically, the Democratic Party is the party of fraudulent voting.

exhelodrvr1 said...

If it's not a problem, why don't the Democrats investigate it fully, to put the issue to rest? That would be a win for them and for the country.

Chuck said...

Amadeus 48 said...
...
That fact is that nobody knows how many illegal votes are cast because nobody has really looked.
I predict fewer illegal votes will be cast will be if people start looking. The Texas court sending that voting non-citizen to prison for eight years should wake some people up.


Exactly right! Remember that one of the main goals of much of the proposed Repubolican election law reforms are not to "catch" discrete vote-fraud cases, but rather to work prophylactically to keep elections clean and confidence-inspiring. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

I want to add one additional thing, that I expect Amadeus and many other Althousians will agree with...

When some lefty cries about "voter suppression," ask them the same questions that are posed to us. Ask them about specific examples. Ask them for specific cases of "suppression." When they give you an example of an elderly black lady who was born at home in 1929 and can't find her birth certificate and who can no longer drive to the polls and whose city cut back on bus services, blah, blah blah...

Check the details. I have made a hobby of this. I have not yet found a case in which any voter was "suppressed." Not one. Not a single case, in which an elderly voter couldn't easily vote as an absentee. Not a single case, in which a voter without an id couldn't vote an actual ballot with an affidavit or a provisional ballot based on little more than an in-person representation. Et cetera, et cetera.


Brando said...

"These reforms are not easy to pass and to defend in court. They don't get any easier if Administration figures are making disprovable claims."

I think the obvious answer when the Left says "you have no proof" is to point out that of course there's no proof when you have no system in place to check it. If the cops never tried to catch speeders before, how could we estimate how many drivers have been speeding? If we haven't checked IDs or scrubbed voting lists how can we know how many illegal votes were cast? That's the frame we need.

The courts have been mixed on how the states have been doing this, but the general rule appears to be if the ID requirements are less onerous it'll pass muster.

Chuck said...

Angel-Dyne said...
Chuck: The Trump Administration is really screwing up this election law reform issue.

Yeah, just like they screw up every issue that you know with absolute assurance that your lot wouldn't have screwed up. Which is true, your lot wouldn't have screwed them up, because they never would have pursued them in the first place.


That's complete bullshit.

Most of these reforms can only be done on a state-by-state basis. Basic election law is state law. Federal law impacts only some aspects, of only some (the federal) elections.

And with the basic ground-level work of mainstream/establishment/whatever GOP activists, we've taken more statehouses than any time in three generations. It is in the states, where we have made strides in election law reform.

Of course, it has been against the headwinds of the U.S. Department of Justice in many cases. And that is one reason why Attorney General Jeff Sessions is one of my favorite things about the Trump Administration.

But you could not have been more wrong, to suggest that the establishment GOP would not move on election law reform. We've been working on it long before Trump ever imagined running for president.

SockPuppet#55 said...

Fake news, for real.

DanTheMan said...

R/V: I've posted this before, but it should give you a sense of scale. Add a simple requirement for proof of citizenship to vote, and we'd likely get a similar result.

Seven million "children", about 10% of the total population, disappeared in 1987. This happened when the IRS started requiring SSN's to claim them as dependents.

Gk1 said...

At least now there is an AG in place who will be sympathetic to states wanting to implement I.D checks and other measures to prevent illegal voting. Perhaps if the trump administration has the energy they can set forth DOJ investigations to provide hard data so we don't all have to rely on anecdotal information. Isn't that a win/win for everybody?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Fact Check: There have been no convictions of numerous people for the kind of criminal behavior alleged here. Since there have been no convictions there is no need for investigations, and since there are no investigations there have been no discoveries nor any arrests nor convictions. We haven't looked for anything and since we haven't looked nothing's been found, and since nothing's been found there is no evidence of any kind of a problem.

Verdict: 20,000 Pinochios.

EDH said...

"But now they know I know it."

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Personally I find the different standards of evidence applied to different cases based one one's political POV (or the POV of one's agency, etc) amusing.
What counts as evidence of bias or discrimination? Why anything, apparently, including of course the self-reported feelings of people interested in pushing a particular POV/ideological goal. What counts as evidence of a discrimination-caused wage gap, or of an epidemic of campus sexual assault, or...you get the idea.
What counts as evidence of possible voter fraud? Criminal convictions, of course. What else possibly could? Duh--put up some evidence or shut the hell up.

Matthew Sablan said...

Some investigative journalist should take them up on the offer.

Matthew Sablan said...

"When that day comes no matter how close or far in the future, the left will immediately change its argument- --without an ounce of shame --- to "you cannot violate voters privacy by checking signatures" ( which is the sole reason signatures are required of course)."

-- The secret ballot is sacred; but knowing WHO voted is less so, I think. Knowing that I voted doesn't tell you anything. Maybe I wrote people in, maybe I just voted on local issues and left the top tickets blank.

Marrying a specific person to a specific, cast ballot is bad. Stopping fraudulent votes BEFORE they are cast is where we have to focus efforts because, given that the left has given tax payer data to their allies to harass people they don't like and have leaked donor lists that were meant to be secret to protect people's privacy, there's no way I trust the state with knowing who voted for what.

Bay Area Guy said...

@rv,

Sorry but Miller claims he already has the facts, and I assume that has happened because of some investigation. Here in Wisconsin we on the left did not discourage investigations and what did they find? Two people who voted for Trump more that once LOL

1. Wisconsin isn't a hotbed destination for illegal aliens, duh

2. Wisconsin voted for Trump. LOL

cornroaster said...

roesch/voltaire said...
Sorry but Miller claims he already has the facts, and I assume that has happened because of some investigation. Here in Wisconsin we on the left did not discourage investigations and what did they find? Two people who voted for Trump more that once LOL

The left in Wisconsin also fought tooth and nail against Voter ID. However, after it passed, Trump won, to be the first Republican Presidential candidate to carry the state in a number of years.

James Kahn said...

"The secret ballot is sacred; but knowing WHO voted is less so, I think."

Knowing who voted is already public information, I believe. At least in some states. It should be possible to cross check that information with citizenship status.

buwaya said...

"Those same issues, if demagogued recklessly, could be turned against the reform efforts."

There would be no reform efforts if they are NOT "demagogued recklessly".

There is no value in low-key rational and narrowly focused argument. This is not a polity where this sort of thing works anymore. And I don't think it every really did, except in cases where there was no clear partisan advantage. These days, where so much is always at stake on every issue, there is no scope for this approach left at all.

If this issue is demagogued recklessly, and especially more so if the FBI is unleashed on high profile fishing expeditions in California, say, then it is at least a possibility that the other side will become fearful of going to far.

Between the US political sides it is all about a balance of terror.

Darcy said...

Anyone who claims that there isn't significant fraud committed at the polls in Michigan is either lying or not very bright.

I love that a Democratic Party recount finally exposed it. Tip of the iceberg.

If it isn't close, they can't cheat. I don't believe the last election was close in Michigan, though the final count says it was.

walter said...

Watching War room George posing as journalist never gets old.

Jeff Brokaw said...

I have a hard time taking people seriously when they, on the one hand, insist there is no vote fraud without hard evidence, and on the other, have zero interest in digging into the question.

Which covers nearly all Democrats, the media, Hollywood, the academy, and government bureaucrats. Not all, but nearly all.


Seeing Red said...

Amateurs.

Chicago has decades of experience.

Chuck said...

Darcy said...
Anyone who claims that there isn't significant fraud committed at the polls in Michigan is either lying or not very bright.

I love that a Democratic Party recount finally exposed it. Tip of the iceberg.

If it isn't close, they can't cheat. I don't believe the last election was close in Michigan, though the final count says it was.


I am guessing that this was aimed in large part at me. So for my benefit, could you please be more specific?

We've done pretty well with election law in Michigan. We have no early voting in Michigan. Zero; none. We have excuse-only absentee voting. We have a photo id requirement.

Now; we have almost no Republicans in the city of Detroit, which is 85% black, and 90%+ Democrat. Which makes it a fertile place for election malfeasance, and it's why we Republicans like to patrol it.

But you seem to have some specific complaints or ideas, and yet I don't understand what they might be.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Chuck,

And start with an apology for accusing me of something in connection with the 2016 elections in Detroit, since it was one of the first ones this century where I DIDN'T work as a Republican-credentialed supervising poll challenger.


Right. Which makes it look like you knew something. In a place like Libya the first sign you know trouble's coming is when the native security runs away. Detroit is like Libya.

What did you know and when did you know it, Chuck?

Seeing Red said...

I'm so old I remember when a city in Missouri kept the polls open cause a dead guy couldn't vote.

Chuck said...

Bad Lieutenant said...
Chuck,
And start with an apology for accusing me of something in connection with the 2016 elections in Detroit, since it was one of the first ones this century where I DIDN'T work as a Republican-credentialed supervising poll challenger.
Right. Which makes it look like you knew something. In a place like Libya the first sign you know trouble's coming is when the native security runs away. Detroit is like Libya.
What did you know and when did you know it, Chuck?


I was just dispirited by the campaign. I wasn't motivated; remember all my election day work is as a volunteer. I'm a proud Republican, but not a proud Trumpian.
As a rational election day-issue, Trump alone should not have determined my actions; his was just one of about 40 elections on a Michigan ballot. But this election was one in which neither the Michigan governor, nor the Michigan senate, the Michigan AG, Sec of State, and no US Senator was up for voting. We had almost no critical ballot issues. There were a few interesting local ballot issues.

Darcy said...

And if you truly were a poll watcher in Detroit, you know that Republican poll watchers have been often thrown out of precincts on election day. It is a game of objection on false grounds. That is the truth, Chuck. Are you going to tell me that hasn't happened?

For my proof, I will ask you to google the recent recount results, which revealed many more votes than actual ballots in Detroit.

damikesc said...

He could also point to O'Keefe's video of the Dem leader who bragged about busing voters around.

But the Left is missing another point, which is that it makes sense to put in reforms that make illegal voting less likely. An ID requirement really isn't a bad idea, and for those rare cases that someone who is entitled to vote can't get ID that can surely be worked out reasonably. And it's a good idea to do better coordination between states and localities to make sure people don't remain registered at an old address (e.g., even Sean Spicer was found to be registered in more than one place, and I wouldn't be surprised if I was as well--when you move and register in another state, the old state might not quickly scrub you from the rolls). Most of those people don't go voting in every state, but it's not impossible for someone to do so.

I'd advocate TOTAL voter roll purges every 4 years. Start at zero and let people re-register. A vote should require SOME effort.

Chuck said...

You people who think that Detroit was a hotbed of vote fraud seem to be getting a weird view of the news. I am presuming that you all just get your news from national sources, and mostly right-wing sources.

What I don't see in any of the early recount-period stories is any follow up. Nor any mention of the fact that Republicans control the highest levels of state government, including the Secretary of State's office. If there was rampant vote fraud in Detroit of a kind that Trumpians yell about, there'd be no reason for Republicans to deny it.

The interesting thing about Detroit and Wayne County is what the numbers bear out. The Michigan election was a razor-thin win for Trump NOT because there were fraudulent votes being turned out for Hillary; the Michigan win for Trump occurred because so many Detroit and Wayne County voters DIDN'T VOTE! Turnout was down, 130,000, from 2012. If all of those voters had bothered to vote, in a county where Democrats win by double digits all the time, Hillary would have won Michigan.

Kyzernick said...

Chuck,

Can you provide any detail of those miscounted Wayne County (?) ballots? No accusations here, just looking for what the facts on the ground (that you know of) were . . .

Kyzernick said...

Speaking of multiple registration, I might be registered in NY to this day, though I haven't voted there since 2008 and haven't resided there since 2009.

I should check on that.

buwaya said...

"If there was rampant vote fraud in Detroit of a kind that Trumpians yell about, there'd be no reason for Republicans to deny it."

Yes there would be. Note that the perpetrators of the vote fraud in question are black, and that a persecution of the groups involved could be taken as racist oppression. And they have been in the past. There is a tendency to shy away from such controversies because of the longstanding lesson of pain.

It is all about fear and pain.

Brando said...

"I'd advocate TOTAL voter roll purges every 4 years. Start at zero and let people re-register. A vote should require SOME effort."

Part of the problem is the states don't have uniform voter requirements. One basic requirement should be that you reaffirm your address on an annual basis, and states coordinate information to make sure a person is de-registered once they've registered somewhere else (it's possible I'm registered in Maine, New York, Virginia, D.C., and Maryland because each time I move I don't have to call the board of elections in the state I'm leaving to let them know). They also should be regularly coordinating with hospitals/morgues to take dead people off the rolls.

Chuck said...

Darcy said...
And if you truly were a poll watcher in Detroit, you know that Republican poll watchers have been often thrown out of precincts on election day. It is a game of objection on false grounds. That is the truth, Chuck. Are you going to tell me that hasn't happened?

For my proof, I will ask you to google the recent recount results, which revealed many more votes than actual ballots in Detroit.


No, Darcy; you can't seem to put a single paragraph together, without a mistake of some kind.

Earlier, you called it a Democrat recount in Michigan. It wasn't. It was a Green Party-requested recount. Although they hired Mark Brewer, a long time Democrat lawyer and former party chairman as their lawyer. Mark needs the work these days.

I've been an active party in a couple of cases where Republican poll watchers have been forced out of position on election day. Two cases. Out of the 75 or so Detroit precincts where I have supervised. The local Fox tv affiliate interviewed me on the air about one of them. It was a case involving an unruly enforcer from a Detroit public sector labor union being belligerent with a young Republican volunteer who probably weighed 200 lbs less than the union thug. Detroit Police helped us straighten it out. In another case that didn't make the news, a similar result obtained. These issues are a minor as they are infrequent. They do happen. Our real problem is not so much that our volunteers get pushed around. Out problem is that we only have 200 volunteers, when we need 2000 volunteers.

Now, your last point is your most important point (actual allegations of miscounted votes) and it is your worst point.

The Detroit News is Detroit's more-conservative paper. The Detroit Free Press is Detroit's liberal paper. Here is the Detroit News, recently, following up on the investigation conducted by (Republican) Secretary of State Ruth Johnson and the state Bureau of Elections. The Bureau's director is Chris Thomas, who is nominally a Democrat but who is someone who has played no role in any state politicking for decades. He is not a player. He is a past President of the National Elections Administrators Association. Anyway, here is the Detroit News reporting on your issue just a few weeks ago:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/24/election-audit/96999186/

There were an electorally-insignificant number of discrepancies between the number of votes registered on the scantron machine counters, and the numbers recorded in poll books. And there were some other instances of sloppy bookkeeping and materials-handling. It's a bad look, for Detroit. I don't speak for, or answer for, Detroit election officials. But it wasn't any systemic vote fraud. The same thing(s) happened elsewhere in the state. All exposed by the notion of a recount, and the first-ever use of certain recount rules. Because we've never had such a close election statewide.

If you read some more, and learn a bit more of what you think you want to talk about, maybe you can ask some better questions. I don't like having to ask all of the right questions for you, just so that I can fill you in on the correct answers.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

"busing voters into New Hampshire is widely known by anyone who's worked in New Hampshire politics"

I can say that is true with absolute certainty. Massachusetts voters are bused to New Hampshire to canvass for Presidential candidates. In 2012, I saw the buses lined up at Mitt Romney's campaign headquarters on Commerce Street in Boston. They went every weekend that fall, and I'm sure the Obama campaign buses did too.

How many of those bus riders voted in New Hampshire? Stephen Miller implied a lot more than he actually stated.


Whether

jdniner said...

10 percent of all transactions are fraudulent. In any system. Insurance states should bear that out. We should be asking ourselves why voting records are not matching that trend.

jdniner said...

Russians didn't hack the election they just Pentagon Papered Hillary's emails. That should make Putin eligible for a Pulitzer.

roesch/voltaire said...

Fighting against voter id which among other things restricts college students as well as the elderly and minorities should not be conflated with checking for voter fraud which is a different matter. And Bay you would be surprised at how many immigrants legal and illegal we have in Wisconsin. As I pointed out before the 10,000 milkers who are immigrants needed to run our large dairy farm I think voted for Trump and rigged the election for him.

Birkel said...

Is this the thread in which Chuck, after great deliberation, finally reveals that he's not really a supporter of the style employed by the Trump Administration? I've been waiting for that declaration and I'm glad we finally have it.

That said, the arguments above miss the point. Yes, there is an argument to be made in the ways that you extraordinarily-interested-in-politics people want to make it. But you're missing the point about how these things are perceived by the not-terribly-interested-in-24/7-politics people perceive these things.

When George Steponadickulous says something ridiculous that denies any voter fraud, people think it is absurd. Everybody in the camp of persuadable voters understands in any large system there is some fraud. Always.

Arguing about what that number is does not benefit the side that intends to deny voter fraud even exists. But to deny the need for an investigation makes one look foolish. If the Trump Administration had used 50,000 as the number it would have the same result. George Clinton Donator would have to deny the existence of ANY voter fraud. This is a terrific issue.

Chuck said...

Birkel said...
...
Arguing about what that number is does not benefit the side that intends to deny voter fraud even exists. But to deny the need for an investigation makes one look foolish. If the Trump Administration had used 50,000 as the number it would have the same result. George Clinton Donator would have to deny the existence of ANY voter fraud. This is a terrific issue.


I LIKE the idea of a careful review of national voting issues by the federal government, with lots of money to throw at it. I LIKE the idea of the DoJ getting active in the election-protection business, instead of the Democratic Party Voter Turnout business.

Those are good things. Neither one needs Donald Trump or Stephen Miller to say dumb things. The Administration can just do it, and not talk about it.

It is NOT a "terrific issue" if the simple takeaway for low-information voters is that Trump keeps making claims about "millions" of cases of "voter fraud," and apocalyptic tales of busloads of fraudulent voters corssing state lines, only to have the national media disprove all of the stories of that kind.


Mike said...

M Jordan: So media, why not do some investigative reporting? I think America would like to see it.

Exactly. They protest but they won't expend an ounce of energy looking into the facts. News is no longer fact-based. Every single news outlet on TV is tilting toward 80% opinion and he said/she said. Stephy is a contemptible rat who should never have been allowed to sit in a journalists role.

Darcy said...

There is no "more-conservative" paper in Detroit, Chuck. There hasn't been for many, many years, and pretty obviously since the papers merged. That you would call it that, I think exposes you. It is true that there aren't nearly enough volunteer Republican poll watchers.

Believe what you prefer on the fraud. I'm not here to convince you.

I don't believe you worked for the Republican party in Michigan in any capacity. But that's just my opinion based on reading your posts over time.

Mike said...

Same-day registrants in Minnesota exceed the margin of victory in many cases. Curious, no?

Mike said...

Brando: So far they haven't provided evidence, and this "4 million" claim looks silly without such evidence. If we're just going to guess, why not guess 20 million?

Think of it as a version of the old prostitution joke. In the end we aren't arguing whether illegals vote (along with other ineligible fraudsters) but how many vote in a particular election. # mil, 4 mil, 20? Who knows. But it ain't zero and that was the fiction the MSM-DNC complex wanted to put over on the public for a very long time.

This is one of many myths Trump has busted in a short time. Things the media must talk about now that they avoided before:

Fauxcahontas's lies
Blumenthal's and Harkin's stolen valor lies
"Islam is a religion of peace" lies
Fake news means CNN and MSNBC

Etc. and to be continued...

Mike said...

The emphasis needs to be on systemic reform, and not -- as the Trump Administration is trying to communicate -- problems with "illegal aliens" or massive undetected criminal "fraud."

Why prejudge it, Chuck? Isn't that what the investigations should reveal? There ARE illegals voting and it should be stopped and the perps prosecuted. And for years democrats bragged about using dead people to vote in Chicago and Detroit. Did they suddenly turn honest in your lousy opinion?

Mike said...

Chuck is proud of a sytem in such disarray that the Wayne County Board of Canvassers almost missed its two-week deadline to certify the presidential election.

And where 31 people voted twice in Michigan election last November.

"Some ballots, for example, were left in a tub below an electronic tabulator and not transferred to a secure box on election night. In one polling place, there were 300 voters but only 50 properly sealed ballots."

Seems like there's always room for improvement.

Chuck said...

Mike, would you please get together with Darcy, and try to talk some sense into her about any massive "vote fraud" in Detroit, in relation to the count discrepancies exposed by the Jill Stein recount.

Use your Snopes link, to educate her.

And Darcy if you don't believe me, about my election-day work for the Michigan Republican Party, I really don't care. As somebody said, I'm not here to convince you.

Birkel said...

Chuck, so called, has no idea how to view these things from the perspective of somebody else. It is beyond his ken. Nothing wrong with that, really, but Chuck cannot admit that he is limited in this way.

Persuadable voters who hear the press say, repeatedly, that there is no voter fraud do not believe the press. The press has less credibility than the current president. It's an amazing turn of events.

Keep telling yourself that you get it, so called Chuck.

Birkel said...

@ Chuck, so called: "I'm not here to convince you."

Mission accomplished. Your work here is done. Pour yourself a glass of your favorite and toast yourself.

Chuck said...

Birkel you stupid, mendacious, fucking assclown.

I never said that "there was no voter fraud" anywhere. I said I loved the idea of the Sessions DoJ doing more to look for it, in fact.

I am for better election law reforms. I have been for those reforms, from before the time that Donald Trump did his most recent conversion to being a Republican. From before the time that Donald Trump was pro-life, or was pro-gun rights.

I just don't believe that there is any basis to presume that thousands of people have been bussed into New Hampshire to vote. Or that millions of illegal aliens voted in California. I know that there was not conspiracy to manufacture votes in Detroit.

If you have proof of those things, cite the evidence. If you have no proof, admit it. If you think that there should be some better, high-quality and unimpeachable investigations, then we are mostly on the same page (and you should then be apologizing to me) but my concern is with any investigation that serves the interest of our political opponents and gets used to shut down useful election law reforms.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" Chuck: "You stupid fucking piece of shit. You continually toss out these little factless cheap shots against me, with no idea of what you are talking about. I've had more involvement in Detroit elections and Michigan Republican Party politics than you could dream of."

Which makes your complete obliviousness to the possibility of a Trump victory in Michigan all the more inexcusable.

Birkel said...

Chuck, so called, you seem to think I said something about you when I said that thing about George Clinton Stephanopolousoususous.

I don't care that you wish to insult me. You are as nothing to me.

But you'll kindly keep your shit together before embarrassing yourself by trying to put words in my typing that do not exist. (as you accuse me of doing in the very same comment)

Ok, pumpkin?

Birkel said...

@ Chuck, so called: "...our political opponents..."

I had to copy that bit of hilarity for posterity.

Fabi said...

"You stupid fucking piece of shit."

Someone's over the target and taking flak.

Fabi said...

"Birkel you stupid, mendacious, fucking assclown."

The NeverTrumpers have lowered into the gutter our discourse at Althouse.

AReasonableMan said...

Chuck said...
Birkel you stupid, mendacious, fucking assclown.


Leave Birkel alone.

Amadeus 48 said...

I'll stand up for Chuck here. He is for systemic reforms that make illegal voting unlikely, rather than chasing down malefactions in elections that are already in the rear-view mirror. The no-early-voting rule in Michigan takes away a major tool for ginning up random voters in advance of elections and locking up their votes. A few well-publicized convictions for illegal voting with real consequences will discourage a lot of nefarious activity--it's just not worth it. The fact that people are looking for illegal voting instead of ignoring it will change the dynamics of the game.
Chuck has always said that he he was a never-Trumper, but if I remember correctly, he said that in the event he voted for Trump in the general election. But that doesn't mean he has to like or respect him.
I am more interested in ways to clean up our elections than I am in personalities. Chuck deserves a hearing here. What do you think of his ideas?

BADuBois said...

Very late to the party, it seems, but I'm a life-long resident of N.H., with friends and family across the state, some who've worked as poll workers, and this bus story is pure b.s., start to finish. Have some Mass residents voted fraudulently in my state? Probably... but no buses.

Francisco D said...

Amadeus,

Chuck has engaged in numerous, vulgar ad hominem attacks. His language is offensive, although it's nothing I have not heard before.

He has also been inconsistent and contradictory. I do not believe him nor do I have any respect for him. He has worn out his welcome. Maybe he needs to get off the sauce.

Why does he deserve a hearing?

Amadeus 48 said...

Personalities (Chuck's personal abuse) vs. ideas (what Chuck advocates). I am trying figure out what might work in cleaning up our elections.

SockPuppet#55 said...

ARM,
Chuckling again at the "Leave Birkel alone" meme.

Francisco D said...

Amadeus,

I respect that opinion.

I may be a bit more cynical than you. I have no doubt that Democrats gets millions of illegal vote nationwide. It's only partially due to illegals voting (probably mostly in California). It's more about how big cities work.

As a native Chicagoan, it was clear to everyone that the job of the Democratic Precinct Captain was to cast as many straight ticket D votes as possible. It was not about electing a President or a Senator. It was all about the county races where the graft was.

For many Democrats in big cities, it is more about graft than politics. That is why we see such huge Democrat pluralities in those cities.

Chuck said...

Francisco D:

You're the insulting creep who began with me (I know you not) by accusing me of having been negligent in work as a Republican poll watcher in Detroit in the 2016 election.

When I didn't work for the party, in the 2016 election.

I don't know anything about you, other than that. And you sure as hell don't know me. But on that tiny set of facts alone, you are an asshole.

Amadeus 48 said...

Francisco--I have similar observations about the Cook County machine. Illinois is almost beyond redemption. But I am wondering what works in Michigan and Wisconsin, two states where the GOP has effectively become the majority party notwithstanding the Wayne County and Milwaukee Democratic machines. So I am interested in our friend Chuck, who says he has been working in the vineyard for the GOP in Michigan. What does he see that has worked? He says the same day voting law has helped. I can see that, but I also know that the Dems claim voter suppression. He says challenge them on their facts. I think that is important, since they are always going to claim voter suppression and cry racism.
I can't defend Chuck's default to personal abuse, but I think his ideas are worth discussing.

Birkel said...

So called Chuck:

When you ask me to apologize for things not written, and then do not apologize for the spittle-flecked, profanity-laced comment you make about things not written, I tend to take you less than seriously.

Care to comment?

exiledonmainstreet said...

Perhaps Chuck is Bill Kristol, who tweeted out:

Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics. But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.
7:36 AM - 14 Feb 2017

Yep. If it comes down to it, Bill prefers leftist rule to those icky deplorables.

It's remarkable how the masks have come off during the past year.

exiledonmainstreet said...

At my suburban polling place in Wisconsin, the poll workers were very scrupulous about not only checking photo IDs but asking voters to spell their last names and give their addresses (thus making it difficult to rattle off a unfamiliar address and name).

A black woman at work told me things were much different at her polling place. People were permitted to vote if they said they had left their ID at home and were not asked to repeat their names and addresses. Apparently there were no poll watchers.

I have no doubt that the tightened rules about voter ID have made elections more honest in Wisconsin. The rules only work if people enforce them.

Unknown said...

Is there any country in the world that permits voting without proof of identification? After we invaded Iraq and helped them hold an election, even the Iraqis had to provide ID and then ink their fingers.

It just beggars belief that anyone can plausibly claim that no vote fraud goes on. It's easy, there are no consequences, and there's a big upside for your side. What kind of moron thinks there is no voter fraud under those conditions? We've currently got an "honors system" in place even though no one in his right mind would trust such a system to secure his own property or interests.

When people say voter ID is about voter suppression, ask them what countries actually permit voting without an ID.

Birkel said...

So called Chuck:

I await your apology. I know I will wait a long time. But you are wrong and you should get on the side of right.

Dad29 said...

Chuck may or may not like this, but a friend of mine, a City of Milwaukee employee and dyed/wool (D) told me that 'there is always vote fraud' going on in Milwaukee. He asked, rhetorically, 'how much difference a few votes here and there' might matter.

Yes, it's real, and yes, there should be a very thorough investigation, nationally. One could start in Chicago--but that alone will blow through all 8 years of the Trump administration.

bagoh20 said...

You want evidence? So do I. Now the question should be why doesn't everyone? Nobody who says "where is the evidence" really wants it. Why doesn't the press want it? They sure aren't looking for it despite how much they care about "voter disenfranchisement". The Dems have lost a thousand seats in the last 8 years yet they don't care to look for it either. We all know why. If they thought looking into it would prove it was not a problem, or that it helped Republicans, it would be top of the agenda. Instead, an American asking Americans to buy products from another American is the scandal they find important. As I always say, judge people by what they do not what they say. The media and the Dems actions, or lack thereof, tell us exactly what they really think. They have no problem with voter fraud. What could possibly explain that?

SukieTawdry said...

Anybody who thinks there aren't illegal and fraudulent votes cast in American elections is willfully naive.

bagoh20 said...

If your team is losing a lot, why would you fight looking in to the possibility of cheating? The only answer is that you are cheating... and still losing.

Now if you are winning a lot, and you still want the possibility of cheating investigated, what does that show? Answer: You care about the rules, and fairness. At worst you suspect your opponents are cheaters and losers. Why don't the Dems think the Repubs are cheaters?

It's really very flattering.

Michael K said...

"It was not about electing a President or a Senator. It was all about the county races where the graft was."

Yup. I grew up there, too. If someone was sick, you did not take them to the emergency room at Cook County. You called the Alderman's office.

Qwinn said...

Chuck, unless you poll watched a heavily black district (like 95% plus black), that you apparently saw nothing untoward means nothing. Dems do all of their voter fraud in overwhelmingly black districts so that any questioning of it can be dismissed as racism. They do it that way because it works.

Qwinn said...

Oh, and also because those districts tend to be 98% Democrat and among a culture that believes "snitches get stitches". It makes it much less likely that anyone witnessing fraud in those districta would say anything. Again - it works.

Francisco D said...

Michael K.,

I think Cook County Hospital has been renamed (John) Stroger Memorial. The politics in ChiTown are rather blatant.

I hear that it is still a preferred destination for medical residents because they are able to work with such a wide variety of pathologies from gunshot wounds to gerbils up the butt to ....

Gahrie said...

Why don't the Dems think the Repubs are cheaters?

They do...they just know that they are better at it.

damikesc said...

Fighting against voter id which among other things restricts college students as well as the elderly and minorities should not be conflated with checking for voter fraud which is a different matter.

Feel free to explain how it is not unbelievably racist to assume black folks are not capable of getting a photo ID.

I know plenty of black folks and every single one has a photo ID. It isn't exactly a difficult thing to get. It's basically required to USE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES in the first place.

Why do you assume that minorities are too stupid to handle basic aspects of civic life?

Is there any country in the world that permits voting without proof of identification?

No. As has been pointed out, countries like India --- which has poverty that we cannot fathom --- requires photo ID to vote and the voters all have ID.

I'll say this: Athletes will take performance enhancing drugs, KNOWING THAT THEY WILL BE TESTED, in the hopes of getting an advantage.

They cheat when they know there is a not-small chance they will get caught.

But no chance partisans would cheat voting, where the odds of being caught are levels of magnitude lower.

JCC said...

Here's the way voter fraud worked in the large city where I was a cop for three decades:
In the mainly black areas, voting was centered around the churches. People would be lined up in front of the churches by precinct, and transported by church bus to the voting location. They would be handed a sample ballot as they boarded the bus which had the way they were supposed to vote. When they returned with one of those little stickers "I Voted" (sometimes an inked stamp on the hand which was an early attempt to control multiple voting by a single person), a person from the local Democrat Party would hand each voter cash - usually $10 but sometimes as much $20 - as they stepped off the bus. Then the voters would get back in another line, board a different bus and go vote again. We could see them sorting through various voter registration cards, which were required to vote but which were not photo ID, exchaning voter registration cards, etc. They was a lively trade in renting voter cards from the homeless, who would hang out and offer the cards for a few bucks. (At the time, if you were arrested for any misdemeanor and had a voter registration card, you could bond out for $1. So everyone had a voter card)
Others would be using voter cards from familiy members or neighbors, usually excusing it as "My aunt has to work so I'm voting to her" that kind of thing. Some people would vote as many as 4 or 5 times.
It was quite open and there was no attempt to hide what was happening. It was a festive event, lots of happy people getting paid in cash. Cops were stationed at each voter collection area to prevent the dopers from showing up and robbing people, like that.
Life in the big city.

Rusty said...

Michael K said...
"It was not about electing a President or a Senator. It was all about the county races where the graft was."

Yup. I grew up there, too. If someone was sick, you did not take them to the emergency room at Cook County. You called the Alderman's office.


LOL. Brings back memories.
You get a building permit from city hall. You get a driveway, garage, and roofing permit from your alderman.Prices may vary.

JCC said...

For what it's worth, rumors said the way the local Republicans tried to stack the deck was via retirement homes and group homes for the mentally disabled. Paid processors working for the party would then pay the attendants or resident-owners of the various homes to get signed absentee ballots, ostensibly from the residents but really just from someone working in the group home. (Many of these people were severly disabled, and/or were non-verbal, for instance. Suggesting they voted was laughable) These group homes located in residential areas and really nothing more than a rooming house to warehouse the disabled and/or the elderly are pretty common around here in white and mixed neighborhoods, but pretty uncommon in the all-black areas. I never actaully saw this kind of fraud myself, but it wasn't in a form to be easily discerned.

The voter fraud seemed to be a bipartisan thing, although I suspect the Democrats were far better at it.

tim in vermont said...

If cell phones with cameras had been common in 2000, when I lived in Palm Beach County, I could have made lots of video of expensive air conditioned coaches stopping at farm after farm on State Road 7, picking up migrant workers who usually are carted around in old school buses with the windows rolled down.

Timeforchange said...



I was at a pot luck dinner in Florida several years ago and the gentleman sitting across from me asked were I was from, I told him I currently live in Wisconsin but was raised in Chicago.
He replied when he was stationed in the navy at great lakes, the democrats would take a bunch of them to Chicago to vote. He got $5.00 for each vote. I can't believe he would share this information with me.