 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Reporter Tells His Critic To Keep Blogging | Main | The Great Debate » October 8, 2004Voter Fraud Roundup
More stories about voter registration fraud keep popping up around the country. Today's Palm Beach Post reports on how an activist from a pro-John Kerry Muslim organization called Voting is Power intimidated the local election supervisor into accepting 550 registration applications after the deadline to register had passed. VIP's parent group is the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation, an organization that has a federal 501(c)3 designation for religious nonprofits. Although the group claims it is nonpartisan, its political action committee has formally endorsed John Kerry for president. In South Carolina, a man registering voters on behalf of the South Carolina Progressive Network has been arrested on charges of forgery and multiple counts of fraudulent registration or voting, after using names and personal information of people, including the mayor of Florence, on more than 1,000 apparently fraudulent voter registration forms and turning them in to the county voter registration office. "Florence County election officials began checking some of the names and quickly found out that a lot of the people were already registered and the information on the forms didn't match what was on the records, and several other people whose names were on these forms were deceased," prosecutor Ed Clements III said.The South Carolina Progressive Network claims its "Missing Voters Project" registered 3,500 new voters in a "non-partisan" voter registration drive. But the organization is very oriented to liberal causes. Anyone know if they targeted primarily Democratic communities for their "non-partisan" registration drive? The organization's Summer 2004 newsletter is cryptic on that point. The Network has launched a Missing Voter Project that uses high-tech online maps to identify neighborhoods with high concentrations of non-voters. These maps make registration efforts more efficient because they can target the areas more likely to yield new voters.The big question is, with all of the signs of voter registration fraud popping up in a variety of battleground states - Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and others - are we seeing the iceberg, or just the tip? If you spot a news story about suspected voter fraud in your part of the country, please send me the link and a brief summary to voterfraud-at-gmail.com. Posted in Voter Fraud
| Linked By |
Please support HobbsOnline by doing your online shopping at Amazon.com Comments
The South Carolina election statistics website isn't really set up to answer the question of political party affiliation, but here are the number of people voting in the 2000 Democratic and Republican primaries in counties targeted by the Progressive Network, according to their website: Persons voting in Democratic Primary vs. Persons voting in Republican Primary Beaufort 1266 (D) 6892 (R) South Carolina overall apparently has a pretty low voter turnout: South Carolina voter participation in November 1998 General Election: Voting Age Population: 2,886,000 Don't know if that's any help, but, there it is... Posted by: Elisa at October 8, 2004 09:06 AMAccording to the Progressive Network website they are targeting areas with low non-white voter registration. Their site links to the maps they used to choose their target areas. According to these maps, here are the estimated percentage of non-white 18+ not registered for the above counties: Beaufort: 50% to 60% Not sure if it will be much help, but here are the census breakdowns (as an aggregate) for all 8 counties combined. www.grind.org/report.xls Posted by: Toni at October 8, 2004 10:24 AMShorter Hobbs: Registering Democrats = voter fraud. Saddam Hussein would be proud. Posted by: ahem at October 8, 2004 03:36 PMNo, ahem, that's incorrect. Registering democrats according to the law is not voter fraud. But registering anyone fraudulently - dead people, non-residents, non-citizens, etc., - is voter fraud. And "non partisan" tax-exempt groups that focus on registering only in heavily democrat or heavily GOP districts are, in my opinion, in violation of their tax-exempt status which prohibits them from acting in a partisan manner. Posted by: Bill Hobbs at October 8, 2004 04:21 PMBill you are correct in all points. Partisan political activity could lead to voiding tax status of non-profit. Which reminds that the DNC recently sent a e-mail out to sympathic ministers asking them to distribute information to their flock in their. The ministers were also encouraged to highlight points during sermons. Contrary to what your eyes have seen lately with Kerry and Edwards getting pulpit endorsements recently this activity is not legal. I question the tax status of any organization that registers people to vote only in locations that likely to get democratic or just republican voters. Thats ethically questionalbe and possibly illegal. Posted by: Ralph at October 8, 2004 06:50 PMahem: if I were to set up a voter registration table at a mall with a sign that said: "Wanted, politically left leaning and minorities only" how long would it take before the ACLU, et al would be there to shut me down. There is no difference in my example as compared to what is happening in more than just a few states. It is illegal, it is wrong and it is not being widely covered. Posted by: Darrell at October 9, 2004 05:23 AM"how long would it take before the ACLU, et al would be there to shut me down." The ACLU? And you're committing voter fraud for the left? I'm guessing they'd get to it sometime around 2006, heh. What about the pahphlet Repubican supportets distrubted in the bible belt that told voters John Kerry would ban the Bible? Posted by: Rob at November 3, 2004 04:51 PMIt's quite clear that there is strong evidence in this presidential election and in elections past that there's been substantial election fraud. A comparison of exit poll data to reported tallies in this election show's discrepancies outside the margin of error only in Ohio and Florida. If you look at the history of voting machines in elections, you'll find controversial results in the Nebraska election that put Chuck Hagel into office. He was the formerly the president of electronic voting machines used in the election although he was not favored to win, and registered democratic voters outnumbered Republicans. he was the first Republican to win a Senate seat in Nebraska in 24 years. Roll back the election. Let's try democracy instead. Posted by: great beer at November 5, 2004 07:10 PMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
