BUT WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHAT AMERICANS (Legals) THINK? THEY'RE NOT OUT THERE HISPANDERING FOR NOTHING!
Poll: Nearly 6-in-10 Americans Worry Mail-In Voting Will Spike Voter Fraud
2:11
Nearly 6-in-10 American likely voters say they are worried that nationwide mail-in voting will increase voter fraud, a new poll reveals.
The latest Rasmussen Reports survey of 1,000 likely voters finds that about 58 percent of Americans, or almost 6-in-10, are concerned over a spike in voter fraud should there be nationwide mail-in voting for upcoming elections.
A plurality of 36 percent of Americans said they are “very concerned” about more voter fraud because of mail-in voting, and another 22 percent said they are “somewhat concerned.” A minority of 39 percent said they are not concerned that mail-in voting will lead to more voter fraud.
Close to 80 percent of Republican voters said they are concerned about more voter fraud spurred by mail-in voting, along with more than half of swing voters. A majority of Democrats, 53 percent, said they are not concerned with voter fraud.
86 people are talking about this
Working and middle-class Americans are much more likely to be concerned with voter fraud from mail-in voting than wealthy Americans.
For example, more than 6-in-10 likely voters earning less than $30,000 a year said they are concerned about voter fraud, as well as 58 percent of voters earning $30,000 to $50,000 a year and 63 percent of voters earning $50,000 to $100,000 a year.
Among those earning more than $200,000 a year, though, only 35 percent said they are concerned about voter fraud, while 65 percent said they are not concerned.
The survey comes as elected Democrats are lobbying for nationwide mail-in voting for the November presidential election — a move that would potentially deliver ballots to an estimated 24 million ineligible voters. The plan is being bankrolled by organizations funded by billionaire George Soros.
Voters were surveyed from April 14 to 15 with a margin of error +/- 3 percentage points.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Pelosi Pushes Vote-by-Mail — ‘Every Person Registered to Vote Should Receive a Ballot’
2:38
Friday on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said “much more than” than the initial $400 million for a vote-by-mail initiative will be included in the next coronavirus stimulus bill to enable “every person registered to vote” to receive a ballot at home.
When asked about President Donald Trump not favoring bailout funding for the post office, Pelosi said, “The post office has over 90% favorability among the American people. They depend on the post office as a public institution. Seniors now are getting —they have always been getting their medicine by mail for a long time now and now even more urgently. People are buying things that are telemarketing and the rest, and they’re being delivered by the post office. So at this time, any time it’s a bad idea. It’s what they’re about, privatization, privatization, privatization. Let someone else go make money off someone that should be a public service for the American people. We will have to have that fight. We tried to get funding for the post office in the CARES one bill. We had some money in a bipartisan way, but the president I understand personally rejected it.”
She continued, “Let me tell you another reason he might be against it. We have to save the lives and livelihood of the American people. We also have to save our liberty, the life of our democracy. Voting by mail is central to this in any event, but at the time of the coronavirus, very essential. We had $400 million in CARES one. We have to have much more than that in CARES two so people can vote by mail.”
She added, “When the Supreme Court acting like party hacks said that the state of Wisconsin had to vote on that day and limited the importance of voting by mail, they were doing a Republican agenda, but the fact is is that having those people vote at that time was as if we invited them all to the Mardi Gras, probably caused more infections. People were standing in long for a very long time, keeping social distancing but nonetheless having to be out when they should be home. This issue of vote by mail and also saying every person registered to vote should receive a ballot and that we should have same-day registration for those who have not registered to vote. Opening the process, this is what our country is about, the vote, the sacred right to vote. I’m a former state chair of the party, and our purpose was always to remove obstacles for participation, whether they were Democrats, Republicans, Independents, or whatever they were.”
Follow Pam Key On Twitter @pamkeyNEN
California
Wants to Secede? Let's Help Them!
California admits it has no idea
whether non-citizens voted in last primary
Ballot-harvesting gets just a little harder in California, thanks
to Judicial Watch
Bienvenidos a Mexico: California's
ballot-harvesting, sure enough, is borrowed from Mexico
California
Wants to Secede? Let's Help Them!
California
is a part of America. But it’s no longer American. It is a foreign state. It is
a fugitive state. The U.S. Constitution and the rule of law no longer apply in
California. Call it, “The People’s Socialist Republic of California.” It’s a
state without a country. But it’s certainly no longer American in any
way.
Liberals
in California want to secede. They are trying to put it on the ballot. They
call it “Calexit.” I say, “Glory Hallelujah." Let’s help make it
happen. I propose 63 million Trump voters join the team. Let's work 24/7 to
turn their dream into a reality!
Millions
of illegal aliens live in California; drive in California with official
state-issued drivers’ licenses; and of course, use those licenses to vote in
California. Millions. That’s precisely how Hillary won
California by over 4 million votes.
California
supports illegal aliens over legal, law-abiding American citizens. They support
illegals getting free college tuition, while children of native-born Americans
pay full fare. They support illegals over police and ICE. Many liberals in
California want to abolish ICE. They want no borders and no immigration
law.
The
Attorney General of California has warned any business owner who cooperates
with ICE will face prosecution by the state of California. You
heard correctly. California will put the business owner in prison, for
cooperating with federal law, to protect the criminal breaking the law.
The Mayor
of Oakland famously played Paul Revere to warn illegal felons “ICE is coming.
ICE is coming.” The Feds report over 800 felons evaded arrest because of that
stunt. How many legal, law-abiding, native-born Americans will be robbed,
raped, or murdered in the coming weeks because of that act of sedition?
A
California judge just sided with the ACLU and barred LA County from enforcing
gang restrictions that dramatically lowered crime. California has once again
sided with hoodlums and gang-bangers over the law-abiding taxpayers.
In
Oakland, a coffee shop prohibits employees from serving police, in order to
create a “safe space” for their customers. Californians hate and distrust
police more than illegal felons and thugs who speak no English and wear gang
tattoos. Really.
All of
this is sheer madness. But California has taken it to a whole new level.
Just this
week the California Senate appointed the first-ever illegal alien to an
official statewide post. Lizbeth Mateo, a 33-year old illegal
alien-turned-attorney, will serve on the official state committee that doles
out money to illegals attending college. In California, illegals now decide how
taxpayer money is spent.
President
Trump loves to brand (see "Crooked Hillary"). Let’s brand California.
It’s not a “Sanctuary State.” It’s a “Fugitive State.” It’s a place that
chooses to let felons and fugitives run free. It’s a place where the rights of
criminals are far more important than protecting legal, law-abiding American
citizens who pay taxes. We are the second class citizens in California.
Here’s
the way to fix the problem. Liberal Californians want to secede. I'm joining
the movement. How about you?
Conservatives
should beg California to secede. We should make it easy for them. We should
help pay for it. Pass the hat. Every conservative should chip in $20. I’ll
throw $1000 to get the ball rolling.
Just
think of elections. Without California, Trump and all future Republican
presidential candidates would win, without breaking a sweat. Without
California, we’d easily win the popular vote. And we'd win the electoral vote
by a landslide.
Next
think of Congress. California has 53 House seats. Democrats lead 39-14, for a
net gain of 25 seats. Send California packing and the GOP gains a 25 House seat
lead. We would dominate the House for decades to come.
And of
course, the GOP would gain an automatic two seats in the Senate through the
subtraction of California. As it stands now, those two U.S. Senate seats are
deep blue Democrat forever. But if California secedes a 51-49 GOP lead
instantly moves to 51-47.
If 63
million Trump voters just gave an average of $20 each to the "Calexit
movement" that’s over $1.2 billion dollars. That’s enough money to help
California secede, with enough left over as a down payment on building a wall…
with California.
January 6, 2019
California admits it has no idea
whether non-citizens voted in last primary
After a hard-fought battle to obtain records by the
Sacramento Bee, we now learn that California's electoral officials are
admitting that they have no idea how many illegals and other non-citizens
voted in the last primary, based on the state's motor-voter registration, which
has been shown to have registered thousands of non-citizen voters. The
Bee reports:
California officials still can’t say whether non-citizens voted in
the June 2018 primary because a confusing government questionnaire about
eligibility was created in a way that prevents a direct answer on citizenship.
Apparently, tens of thousands of foreign nationals and other
ineligible voters, maybe 16 year olds, got registered
to vote at the DMV when they applied for
their drivers licenses whether they asked for it or not.
Investigators can see that people marked themselves as ineligible
to vote or declined to answer eligibility questions, but they can’t tell
why.
“We can’t assume why they declined to answer eligibility questions
or why they said they were not eligible,” the Secretary of State’s Office wrote
in an internal memo on Oct. 8, 2018.
That email and other documents The Sacramento Bee obtained through
the Public Records Act shed light on why the Secretary of State has been unable
to say clearly whether non-citizens voted last year. The
Bee filed a legal complaint for
the records when the Secretary of State initially withheld most of them.
The email shows that, for months, California officials have been
examining whether non-citizens voted last year. On Thursday, Secretary of State
Alex Padilla confirmed for the first time that his office has an active
internal investigation into the matter.
“The Secretary of State’s office does not comment on the details
of ongoing investigations,” the office said in a statement. “Determining
whether ineligible individuals who were erroneously registered to vote by the
DMV cast ballots requires a complete review. The Secretary of State’s office is
doing its due diligence by conducting a thorough investigation.”
Spokesmen for the office declined to say how the department could
otherwise determine citizenship of those registered.
This doesn't even include the undoubtedly significant numbers of
voters who answered that they were eligible to vote when they were not. Could
that have happened when the ballot-harvestors were out patrolling illegal
immigrant neighborhoods in search of votes? At a minimum, it most
certainly was possible, especially, since claims to voter-eligibility on
drivers license forms are never checked in California (it's the honor
system), according to voter-integrity activists. It also doesn't help that
California sneakily had residents sign to certify on their yellow mail-in
ballots that they were California residents(rather
than voting-eligible citizens) so as to prevent for illegals any potential
perjury charges in addition to vote-fraud charges.
If California has no idea who's a citizen, and has resisted every
effort out there to get that information (it has defied cooperation with
President Trump's electoral integrity commission), well, then what we can
conclude is that they don't want to know if a non-citizen is voting and now the
word is out that they don't. Apparently, Democratic interests in 'counting all
the ballots' as they say, means counting illegal ones, too.
They don't know, they don't want to know, and they aren't about
to clean this up. Keep after them, Sacramento Bee. In this case, the
Bee is a newspaper that's doing its actual job.
January 6, 2019
Ballot-harvesting gets just a little harder in California, thanks
to Judicial Watch
Judicial Watch has forced the state of California and Los Angeles
county to end its practice of keeping 'inactive' voters on the voter rolls as
is required by federal law. Here's the news
from the legal watchdog:
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it
signed a settlement
agreement with the State of
California and County of Los Angeles under which they will begin the process of
removing from their voter registration rolls as many as 1.5 million inactive
registered names that may be invalid. These removals are required by the
National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
The NVRA is a federal law requiring the removal of inactive
registrations from the voter rolls after two general federal elections
(encompassing from 2 to 4 years). Inactive voter registrations belong, for the
most part, to voters who have moved to another county or state or have passed
away.
Los Angeles County has over 10 million residents, more than the
populations of 41 of the 50 United States. California is America’s largest
state, with almost 40 million residents.
The state of California, run completely by Democrats, of course,
resisted this (at least until the midterm was over). They decided that
cleaning up inactive voters from the rolls wasn't in their interest and federal
laws were for other states, little states. And as a result, nearly a quarter of
California's counties had more voters registered than actual eligible voters.
And surprise, surprise, the state has suddenly turned solid blue.
L.A. county's approximately 1.5 million inactive voters on
those rolls (112% of age-eligible citizens alone) had been perfect fodder
for ballot-harvestors, not this last time at midterms (all of the Democratic
ballots harvested in the last midterm have made their voters active
voters), but for upcoming elections. That rich bank of potential
Democratic votes from ballot-harvesting is now gone with this Judicial Watch
agreement.
Ballot-harvesting is a disturbing phenomenon so prone to abuse
it's illegal in most states. In California, where it's not, Democratic
operatives selectively pay visits to the homes of indifferent voters who don't
want to go to the polls or mail in their ballots, engage those voters, and
then "help" them fill out their ballots in the way Democrats
want. That's why conservative areas such as Orange County were suddenly flipped
blue and popular candidates such as Young Kim, who had been winning by large
margins on election night - suddenly saw their results flipped. Democrats
learned that by extending the election count for weeks, turning in harvested
ballot after harvested ballot, they could win any election.
But the harvest had been incomplete, and with
many inactive voters, Democrats would need that bank of more potential
votes, which likely explains why California's Democrats resisted any cleanup of
voter rolls. California may have mailed these people ballots whether they
liked it or not or asked for it or not, as they did with all of us, and well,
Democratic ballot-harvestors could have easily gotten hold of those
unasked for ballots in the mailboxes of dead, moved-away, or
incapacitated voters and saw to it that they somehow got cast.
(Judicial Watch is investigating that one, too.)
The state's chief vote counter, Secretary of State Alex Padilla,
insists that not a single voter will be disenfranchised, given all his 'safeguards.' His official plan is to mail in a confirmation form to inactive
voters and strike their names if they don't respond, but somehow, I suspect the
ballot-harvestors will be paying visits to these inactive residents,
who may be indifferent and incapacitated voters, and somehow will get
them to mail those forms in, too, thereby subverting the process.
That said, Judicial Watch's victory is a great one and frees them
up to focus on other areas of abuse that are rife in California, such as
non-citizen registrations (the state still
says it has no idea how many there are),
illegal immigrant votes already cast, ballot harvestors using coercion,
foreign ballot-harvestors, gerrymandering, straight out fraud, and the whole cavalcade of
Democrat tricks that have disenfranchised conservative voters in the
state.
It's a welcome glimmer of light from a one-party state.
Bienvenidos a Mexico: California's
ballot-harvesting, sure enough, is borrowed from Mexico
In an extraordinary investigative piece on how ballot-harvesting
works by Steve Miller, published on Real Clear Investigations, we learn an
amazing amount of information about how ballot-harvesting works and why it's so
closely connected to election fraud, skewing elections in directions they
normally wouldn't go. Themust-read
piece is focused on how
Texas is dealing with the seedy issue, enforcing the law, prosecuting more
than twice as many cases of
electoral fraud as California, even hampered as Texas is by weak penalties for
violators. But a little detail stands out much deeper into the piece:
Ballot-harvesting, which is at the root of considerable fraud of all kinds, is
a practice specifically borrowed from Latin America, with a very
impressive Latino analyst, K.B. Forbes,
who has electoral experience in both countries, citing Mexico. Here's the
passage:
The practice has its roots in Latin America, said K.B. Forbes, a
political consultant and Hispanic activist who has served as an elections
observer in Sonora, Mexico. “In the Latin culture, they have colonias, which is
‘little colony,’ literally,” he said. “In these, they sometimes have the
equivalent of a precinct boss, and that’s how people move up. The
[politiqueras] deliver the vote and when the candidate moves in, the theory is
that they get a good post inside the government.”
That brings up California, where ballot-harvesting is perfectly
legal, and normal voters have to wonder how the heck that happened.
Ballot-harvesting has been a disaster for Republicans in California, with all
conservatives now shut out from any representation in once-red Orange County.
Most congressional elections there showed Republican candidates in the lead on
election night in the last midterm, but all of them flipped to Democrats as the
Democrat-led ballot-harvesting brought in votes and votes and votes from
supposed precincts, harvested by their political operatives, until the result
went the other way. (This by the way, didn't happen in districts where
Democrats held a small lead, nothing flipped in their cases and ballots did not
keep rolling in).
If ballot harvesting is a practice imported from Mexican politics,
what does that say about California politics, whose legislators would embrace
Mexican electoral practices over the U.S. standard? As I mentioned earlier,
Mexico has been called "a
perfect dicatorship" by none other
than Nobel Prize-winning literary lion Mario Vargas Llosa, owing to the
continuous power of the Mexican Partido
Revolucionario Institucional (or
P.R.I.), which up under a decade or two ago, had a hammerlock monopoly on
Mexican politics, winning every single election in what was then a one-party
state. That's a system so bad people emigrated illegally from that country to
get away from it. Now, the cultural practice is right there waiting for them in
California, albeit, virtually nowhere else.
And like the P.R.I.'s Mexican electoral practice of
ballot-harvesting, it's noteworthy that the ruling Democrats of California also
are famous for doling out the goodies to the loyal voters. They've promised
amazing things to California's illegal immigrant population, with the latest
thing free heath care. California's insurance commissioner, the respected
non-partisan Steve Poizner, was, conveniently, ballot-harvested out of office
after an election-night lead several days after midterm by utterly leftist
Democrat Ricardo Lara who openly declared his support and big plans for free
health care for illegals. He's tried it before in the legislator and now he's
going to do it this time through the executive. California's incoming governor,
of course, is all in for the goody-slinging. In Mexico, they used to pass out
bags of beans for votes. In California, the prizes are considerably higher, and
they go well beyond free health care. I've already noted the weird
similarities to how California is run, and P.R.I-style politics here.
Any wonder California is going way out of its way to welcome
illegal immigrants? "You're all welcome here," as Gov. Jerry Brown
famously said. California already hosts a quarter of the nation's illegals, and
with middle class families now moving out due to high living costs and punitive
taxation, the California P.R.I. likes new bodies coming in who have a lot of
needs, which keeps the congressional seats numerous and the federal funds
flowing.
It all makes a normal person wonder about the weird closeness of
California officials and their Mexican counterparts, too. Newsom has already
paid a visit to Mexico to discuss the caravan with the Mexican government in
Mexico City (not Tijuana, where he would have gotten a earful from the
generally conservative and more dissident-oriented Tijuana locals), and he has
declared he plans to withdraw National Guard troops from the U.S. border. With
his party now embracing the P.R.I's style of governance and having some unnaturally
close ties to Mexican officials (I've seen it myself at Los Angeles functions
as a guest of the Mexican government), it looks like a growing merger of
Mexican and California politics.
Mexico knows how bad the system is, and its citizens did rebel against
it with a Trump-like leftist president, Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador, who won on
a vow to end corruption. One can safely take that as a sign that Mexicans are
trying to move away from that kind of politics, which of course would include
ballot harvesting. California, on the other hand, is moving toward it,
embracing what Mexico is trying to reject. That speaks pretty poorly for the
sorry state of affairs in California. It's only great for the rulers and those
they patronize, until the money runs out.
Until then, clarification about California's Mexico
borrowings need to stand as an incentive to other states about what not to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment