Don't Believe Poll Propaganda
By DICK MORRIS
Published on DickMorris.com
Dear Friend,
I was outraged today when I saw a Washington Post
article headlined "Three Polls Show Obama Widening Lead Over Romney."
One was a poll from FOX News that showed Obama 9 points ahead. The
others were surveys by CNN and Reuters showing a 7 point Obama lead.
NOT TRUE!
Click Here to read the Washington Post article I am referring to.
The real numbers, of likely voters are found in the Rasmussen Polls which had Romney ahead
by three yesterday and four today. Gallup, which surveys registered
voters (as opposed to likely voters) has the race tied at 46-46.
There are several factors which explain the difference:
1. Obama's voters don't want to come
out and vote for him. They are only lukewarm and are not people who
always vote. Cynical and apathetic, they do not begin to approximate
the intensity of the Romney voters or even of the 2008 Obama backers.
2. Black turnout is traditionally
11% of the total vote. In 2008, rose to 14%, providing Obama with more
than half of his margin of victory. Current polls suggest a reversion
to the pre-2008 turnout level, but polling firms that do not measure
voter intention can't tell that and weight the black vote up to 12, 13,
or even 14 percent, padding Obama's vote artificially.
3. Likewise with Latino vote which
was 7% of the vote and grew to 8.5% in 2008. Their votes this time show
signs of returning to historic norms
4. Polls of registered voters tend
to weight up the Democratic respondents, according their opinions more
weight in the poll. That's because their data usually shows fewer
Democrats in their sample than in national registration figures. But,
in weighting for party, they obscure the fact that a great many
registered Democrats have left the Party, particularly in the past few
years, a finding that is obliterated by the weighting.
The fact is that Rasmussen and Gallup both showed
drops for Romney about 4-5 days ago when negative coverage of his
foreign trip (itself a sign of media bias) tended to dampen his
ratings. But both have shown a recovery since. Rasmussen and Gallup
poll every day. The other polls are conducted over a period of several
days. So the Rasmussen and Gallup data are a few days fresher than the
other polls and reflect Romney's recovery.
Thanks,
Dick Morris
Friday, August 10, 2012
Op-ed:
Mudslinging at the local level...as nasty as it gets
By: Diane Sori
Politics is dirty, make no mistake about it. Dirty from the top all the way down to the
lowest local election. And somewhere in the
middle sits the dirtiest mudslinging of all...the District 23 Congressional
race to unseat the infamous Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Obama’s little lapdog.
People have no idea just how low some candidates will go to
try and buy themselves an election, especially when they have NO qualifications
at all or made-up ones at best. It’s
well known that I am a supporter and volunteer for KAREN HARRINGTON. KAREN ran against DWS two years ago and got 40%
of the vote as a relative unknown. How’d
she do it...through hard work is how...going door-to-door, phone banking,
speaking at meetings...everything and anything to get her fiscally conservative
message out. And her showing for a first
time candidate was truly amazing, especially going against an entrenched
liberal Democrat in a Democrat controlled county.
Within a short period of time after losing this first
election KAREN made the decision to go it again as she felt, and rightly so,
that DWS was helping to take our country in the wrong direction. And so Karen started her new campaign with
her calling card being, FIRE DEBBIE!
And KAREN has run this campaign as she did her last, as a woman
of principles who supports among other things, our military and veterans, LEGAL
immigration, cutting and capping government spending, repealing ObamaCare,
traditional family values, Israel, and many more issues and beliefs near and
dear to our Conservative hearts. KAREN
is out there daily pounding the streets as she goes door-to-door getting her ‘principled
conservative’ message out to the voters.
Sounds like a winner against Debbie doesn’t it...well there’s
a wrench thrown into the mix. Being that
KAREN got 40% of the vote last time out and now has the name recognition needed
to beat DWS, ALL Republicans should have united behind her as a strong front
against Debbie. But did they...of course
NOT! We now have four other candidates,
two of which are johnny-come-latelies who are only in there only to split the
vote, one in fact who thinks his last name alone will take the Hispanic vote away from KAREN, and
the other laying the groundwork to become a career politician.
And that leaves the other two. One is a very nice man who is extremely
strong on the issues of Israel and the dangers islam and sharia law pose to the
fabric of our American society. However,
this is his sole strong point, as he knows very little about economic or
business issues, the crux of this election.
Maybe in time he will become a well-rounded candidate but he is not one
now, and I think he knows that as he panics like a deer caught in the
headlights when asked questions of an economic nature. Bottom line...this candidate is NOT strong
enough to take on Debbie and the vileness she is sure to campaign on.
As for the last candidate...well that is another story altogether. Never in my entire time involved in politics
have I ever seen a person sink to the same gutter level tactics the Democrats
are so famous for using. This candidate
is running his entire campaign based on out and out lies and innuendos against
KAREN, while at the same time pouring more and more of his own money into his
campaign, because he is NOT getting the private donations needed to run a campaign
that is supposed to be for and by the people...just another example of someone
trying to buy themselves an election as they have NO record or grassroots support to run
on. Also, remember that when someone has to try so hard to cover up and make excuses for past, what they refer to as so-called
‘mistakes,’ like this person is doing with his barrage of negative only attack fliers
and robocalls, they are just drawing more attention to those very so-called ‘mistakes’
they are trying so hard to hide.
For all I know, this candidate might be a nice guy in real
life away from the campaign trail, but with the constant lies about KAREN that
have spewed out of his mouth it leaves me doubtful. I feel strongly that if someone only runs a
campaign based on lies I doubt they’ll be able to even recognize the truth when
in DC. And we have enough of those now
in DC as it is, we sure don’t need another one, even with an R next to their
name.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz MUST be removed from office but NOT
replaced by someone just like her only dressed in Republican clothing. Washington needs a new brand of political
leaders who have not only knowledge and a will to stand by and speak for ‘We
the People’ but someone who will honor and govern by our Constitution; someone
who also lives by the principals of civility and decorum, and yes even has class,
because all these things have been missing from the little Obama mouthpiece and
Pelosi wannabe known as Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
The ONLY candidate who fits that bill to a tee is KAREN HARRINGTON. I wholeheartedly endorse and support KAREN
and I hope that all who live in District 23 will vote KAREN for Congress.
To learn more about KAREN HARRINGTON, visit her FB page ‘Karen
for Congress’ at:
Romney on the Record, and On Offense
By: Hugh Hewitt / Townhall Daily
(The audio and transcript of that interview are here.)
We also covered the president’s assault on Romany Catholic schools and hospitals as well as the president’s general disdain for the inconvenient limits on his authority imposed by statute or the Constitution.
“[A]mong people who pay attention to the process of governance and who hold to the Constitution with great strength and passion,” Romney stated, “this becomes a very big issue.”
“I do believe that one of the reasons you’re seeing this kind of intensity among many voters in this country, a lot of Tea Party folks and conservatives of various kinds,” Romney continued, “is that they recognize in this president someone who is skirting by the principles of the Constitution to pursue his own agenda.”
On issue after issue, President Obama has indeed disregarded traditional understandings of the executive’s authority.
The president directed the Department of Justice to drop the legal defense of the Defense of Marriage Act before even a single circuit court of appeals had found a flaw in the law which was passed with bipartisan support and signed into law by Bill Clinton and about which candidate Obama had said not a negative word.
President Obama has made recess appointments when the Senate wasn’t in recess.
And we all know what the president did when it became politically useful to declare parts of the Dream Act in operation despite his earlier blunt (and correct) statements that he lacked the authority under the law to do so.
Again and again the president has asserted power he does not have to pursue goals he could not obtain through Constitutional process of law-making and negotiation with the separate but equal branch at the far end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
What, voters ought to be asking themselves, would he do in a second term when his frustration with Congress increases?
Would he simply abolish most of America’s nuclear deterrent on the theory that such a bold move would sweep other nuclear powers along with us?
Would he use the newly discovered power over immigration rules to take his mini-Dream Act initiative to a much larger scale? There are no limits on the so-called “prosecutorial discretion” he employed to exempt certain illegal immigrants from the deportation process.
And what rules would he push through his agencies aimed at the Catholic bishops who have so vigorously and uniformly opposed his diktat aimed at their congregations and the institutions they have established?
Governor Romney is targeting the president’s attack on the work requirement of the welfare reform of 1996, and honest observers on the left side of the political aisle like Mickey Kaus –widely recognized as among the most knowledgeable of all of the welfare reform’s analysts—have detailed why the new rule guts the law, just as Romney focused on the president’s astonishing “You didn’t build that!” proclamation.
Those attacks have to both broaden and connect, however, into a comprehensive statement of the president’s abuse of power and rejection of the limits of his office.
This is a complicated case to make, but Romney is very, very good in the exchanges he has with reporters when they go into detail and when they go longer than the sound-bytes that dominate the evening news.
He should thus seek out more opportunities to have such discussions, contrasting his grasp of detail and command of facts with the president’s increasingly obvious loss of confidence in his ability to talk his way out of any jam.
Team Romney should invite The Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer or Dan Balz, or Politico’s Mike Allen, CNBC’s Joe Kernan, CNN’s Candy Crowley or Fox’s Bret Baier for longer, taped sit-downs on the condition that their exchanges be broadcast in their entirety. The candidate should also seek out longer interviews with Laura Ingraham, Bill Bennett, or any of the key half-dozen national talkers. He’s very good at the long form interview. He should use that advantage.
The choice between Romney and Obama could not be more clear, and Romney enjoys laying out that difference in detail. The debates ahead will be open to the president’s trademark filibusters as Romney and I discussed yesterday, but having established a record of willingness to answer questions directly and at length, Romney will have laid out the case for retiring Obama.
Practice in doing so now will lessen the likelihood of any major mistake in the big showdowns even as the president’s increasing isolation raises the odds that he will have another pratfall like “You didn’t buid that!”
At the core of Romney’s case are the president’s many failed choices, his deeply flawed ideology and his expanding willingness to do whatever he wants to double down on these failed policies.
All Romney needs to do now is lay out that record and contrast it with his abilities. The ceiling for his success in the fall is very high if he reaches for it.
Border Patrol Whistle Blowers Hand Election To Romney; Will He Take It?
Union heads of both the ICE and Border Patrol Councils have stated
that Barack Hussein Obama has deliberately handed a “get out of jail
free card” to illegal alien criminals.
In June, Obama bypassed Congress, issuing an unconstitutional executive order that requires Border Patrol agents to release illegal aliens who CLAIM to have: “come to the United States under the age of 16 and are not more than 30; lived in the U.S. for five straight years; are currently in school of have graduated high school; obtained a GED or been honorably discharged from the military; or have not been convicted of a felony or significant misdemeanor and are not a threat to public safety.”
And CLAIM is indeed the operative word in this, Obama’s latest betrayal of the American people; for upon being detained by ICE or Border Patrol agents, illegals need only assert their eligibility in order to be released under one of the many Dream Act stipulations manufactured by Obama. They are not required to produce any proof of their claims, and neither ICE nor Border Patrol agents are permitted to ask for it.
“Our orders are if an alien says they went to high school, then let them go; if they say they have a GED, then let them go,” said ICE Council president Chris Crane. “Officers have been told that there is no burden for the alien to prove anything.”
Not only is Obama deliberately purchasing illegal votes with the tax dollars of American citizens; he is exposing those citizens to violent criminals throughout the nation. A House Judiciary Committee report details “…the murder of 19 Americans and 142 sex crimes committed by illegal aliens.” The report also makes it clear that “all of these crimes could have been prevented” as each was committed by “illegal aliens who had previously been arrested for major criminal offenses” yet not prosecuted, “thanks to Obama and his win votes at all costs political campaign.”
Mitt Romney must make this disgraceful scheme of fabricating illegal votes a centerpiece of his campaign. Obama has consistently flouted the authority and will of Congress, and for once, every Republican in Washington must stand against him. Being the GOP nominee, Romney is at center stage. His every word will be reported by the liberal media, a circumstance that Republicans may depend upon only once every 4 years. It is imperative he take advantage of that opportunity and hammer Obama with his own incomparable arrogance and quest for power.
Romney MUST tell voters that Barack Obama is preventing dangerous, criminal illegals from being deported, deliberately allowing them to remain a real and documented threat to the public all for the purpose of obtaining fraudulent votes in November. The incontestable criminal evidence and accusations of Border Patrol agents are readily available to Romney and would make for devastating political attacks against Obama IF the GOP candidate has the guts to use them. The question is, does he?
In June, Obama bypassed Congress, issuing an unconstitutional executive order that requires Border Patrol agents to release illegal aliens who CLAIM to have: “come to the United States under the age of 16 and are not more than 30; lived in the U.S. for five straight years; are currently in school of have graduated high school; obtained a GED or been honorably discharged from the military; or have not been convicted of a felony or significant misdemeanor and are not a threat to public safety.”
And CLAIM is indeed the operative word in this, Obama’s latest betrayal of the American people; for upon being detained by ICE or Border Patrol agents, illegals need only assert their eligibility in order to be released under one of the many Dream Act stipulations manufactured by Obama. They are not required to produce any proof of their claims, and neither ICE nor Border Patrol agents are permitted to ask for it.
Not only is Obama deliberately purchasing illegal votes with the tax dollars of American citizens; he is exposing those citizens to violent criminals throughout the nation. A House Judiciary Committee report details “…the murder of 19 Americans and 142 sex crimes committed by illegal aliens.” The report also makes it clear that “all of these crimes could have been prevented” as each was committed by “illegal aliens who had previously been arrested for major criminal offenses” yet not prosecuted, “thanks to Obama and his win votes at all costs political campaign.”
Mitt Romney must make this disgraceful scheme of fabricating illegal votes a centerpiece of his campaign. Obama has consistently flouted the authority and will of Congress, and for once, every Republican in Washington must stand against him. Being the GOP nominee, Romney is at center stage. His every word will be reported by the liberal media, a circumstance that Republicans may depend upon only once every 4 years. It is imperative he take advantage of that opportunity and hammer Obama with his own incomparable arrogance and quest for power.
Romney MUST tell voters that Barack Obama is preventing dangerous, criminal illegals from being deported, deliberately allowing them to remain a real and documented threat to the public all for the purpose of obtaining fraudulent votes in November. The incontestable criminal evidence and accusations of Border Patrol agents are readily available to Romney and would make for devastating political attacks against Obama IF the GOP candidate has the guts to use them. The question is, does he?
Yes, Obama really is suppressing military vote
Exclusive: David Kupelian exposes most despicable form of election fraud yet
We’re all daily witnesses to Barack Obama’s two-pronged, slash-and-burn re-election strategy:
1) Tell astonishingly bold lies about your opponent;Thus, voters daily hear that Mitt Romney is a felon, has neglected to pay taxes for 10 years and gives people cancer.
2) Bribe the heck out of all your constituencies in hopes of cobbling together a winning voting coalition in November.
Simultaneously, Obama bribes every group he can, wooing female voters by ridiculously conjuring up a Republican “war on women,” endearing himself to homosexuals by embracing same-sex marriage, making an audacious play for Hispanic votes with his surprise amnesty edict – an executive action he himself previously claimed would be illegal, alluring college students with promises of student-loan rate extensions, homeowners with mortgage aid programs, union member exemptions from Obamacare requirements, and on and on.
But to put himself over the top – to capture that last few percent of votes necessary to win a close election – Obama needs one more voting bloc on his side. That would be the shadow group comprised of non-citizens, illegal aliens, repeat-voters, multiple-state-voters, dead people, felons and others ineligible to vote but who will vote anyway – for Obama.
To help this last “constituency,” Obama’s administration is currently engaged in what can reasonably be called a massive nationwide campaign to enable voter fraud. The current issue of Whistleblower magazine, which I serve as editor, tells the whole insane story – but don’t read it if you have a heart condition.
However, what I want to focus on here is without doubt the most despicable tactic the Obama camp has yet pursued in its efforts to stay in power through tampering with America’s hallowed election system. I’m talking about something even more outrageous than the Holder “Justice Department” attempting to block states from enforcing Voter ID requirements or purging dead people from their voter rolls – and even more corrupt than the left’s ACORN-style “swamping” of election officials with thousands of new (and often bogus) voter registrations at the very last minute and their national campaigns soliciting foreigners to vote.
As you may know, last month the Obama re-election campaign sued Ohio state officials in an attempt to suppress, in that pivotal swing state, the votes of America’s military men and women – people who traditionally lean conservative and vote Republican. (CNN exit polling data from 2008 show voters favored Republican John McCain over Obama by a 10-point margin, 54 to 44 percent.)
Now, the Obama camp vehemently denies any and all suggestions it is suppressing the military vote, claiming it simply wants an even playing field for all.
Let’s look at it: Current Ohio law – being challenged in the lawsuit brought by Obama for America, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party against Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted and the state’s Attorney General Mike DeWine – includes a special provision to allow military voters to cast their ballots during the last three days (Saturday, Sunday, Monday) immediately prior to Election Day.
However, according to the Obama lawsuit, Ohio’s special concession to military voters – an
acknowledgment of the difficulty soldiers deployed overseas often encounter in trying to get their vote in on time – is “arbitrary” and has “no discernible rational basis.” Remember those words, for as we’ll soon see they are the key to understanding this grand deception.
Because the Ohio situation is somewhat complex and involves several different bills and a bit of recent legislative history, I will only touch on the highlights, but will commend to you a good RedState blog posting if you’re up for an in-depth, play-by-play review of the relevant Ohio voting laws.
However, beyond a few right-thinking bloggers, reporters and talk-show hosts, the vast, perpetually mesmerized pro-Obama media – and even the establishment’s arbiters of All Truth On The Internet, Snopes, Politifact and FactCheck – side with Obama and characterize as “shameful” the comments made by the Romney campaign and the few analysts who see the Obama lawsuit for what it is – an attempt to restrict military voting.
Indeed, the elite press currently overflows with articles accusing those claiming the Ohio lawsuit is bad for the military of being both wrong and dishonest.
Really?
Is that why no fewer than 15 military organizations have joined together to fight this particular Obama-machine lawsuit in court? I’m talking about:
The National Guard Association of the United States
The Association of the U.S. Army
The Association of the U.S. Navy
The Marine Corps League
The Military Officers Association of America
The Reserve Officers Association
The National Association of the Uniformed Services
The Non Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S.A.
The Army Reserve Association
The Fleet Reserve Association
The Special Forces Association
The U.S. Army Ranger Association, Inc.
AMVETS
The National Defense Committee
The Military Order of the World Wars
Are America’s armed forces wrong and dishonest? Do the Army, Navy and Marine organizations listed above not understand the issues of military voting as thoroughly as the experts at Snopes and Media Matters? Are the Special Forces and Army Ranger groups just plain dumb?
Or – is it just possible our military knows something about military voting that Obama and his sleazy lawyers don’t know? Yes, “sleazy.” The lead counsel on this case is none other than Robert Bauer, who author/analyst Matthew Vadum reminds us, “asked the Department of Justice to prosecute Obama critics and fine television stations for daring to carry an ad about Obama’s close personal friendship with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Bauer, Obama’s former White House Counsel, is married to Anita Dunn, the Mao-loving former director of communications in the Obama White House. Bauer has been instrumental in whitewashing Obama’s radical roots by filing lawsuits keeping a bewildering array of the president’s personal papers hidden away.”
Should Team Obama prevail in the Ohio lawsuit, there are several possible outcomes: The judge could overrule Ohio’s Legislature and governor and resolve the issue by eliminating the three extra voting days for everyone, including military voters – something even the plaintiffs concede could be the result. That would hurt our soldiers. Or the judge could overrule the Ohio government, but impose the opposite remedy, forcing all voting precincts in the state to stay open all three days prior to Election Day for all voters in the state, not just military voters. That would hurt our soldiers even more.
What?, you may ask. How could everybody, including the military, having three more days to vote hurt our soldiers? Indeed, “what’s the matter with everybody having three extra days to vote?” is the current establishment refrain, its purveyors claiming incorrectly that all Ohio voters used to have those same three days for early voting. They didn’t: Although state law allowed it, local voting authorizes could decide if they wanted to implement early voting or not. Only “six counties had weekend voting and extended hours and 82 of them didn’t,” lead defendant and Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted told the Associated Press.
And why was that? Husted explained, in a Bloomberg Businessweek interview, that setting limits on early voting for most Ohioans – other than the relatively few in the armed forces – is necessary so Ohio’s election boards can synchronize the early balloting records with those at 9,800 polling places to prevent voter fraud – people voting more than once. And as Ohio’s state GOP chairman, Bob Bennett, said in a written statement: “Nobody is being disenfranchised here, as Ohio’s voters who choose to vote early can do so by mail 24 hours a day, seven days a week or at early voting polls.”
The REAL issue at stake here, the one virtually no one is talking about, and the reason it hurts the military if the judge forces Ohio to open all its polling places for all voters for the final three days, is the legal precedent that will be set – namely, that our soldiers cannot constitutionally be given a break, a few extra days, to get their votes in.
Friends, you can’t obtain “reasonable results” through abominable means and then call it good. (That would be like me robbing a bank and then going home and saying, “Dear, I made a lot of money today.”) The price America will pay to obtain in Ohio a totally unnecessary “three extra days for everybody to vote” (if the judge rules the way Obama for America is asking it to rule) is the creation of a new legal precedent that it is unconstitutional to give any special consideration to military voters. After all, that is precisely the plaintiffs’ legal argument.
But as the Ohio defendants’ legal response points out so eloquently, America has always made special concessions for its soldiers to assure their opportunity to vote, going back to the Revolutionary War.
“Unfortunately,” argue lawyers for the Ohio defendants, “throughout history military personnel have been prevented from … [exercising their right to the franchise] due to both procedural and logistic hurdles, resulting in their franchise being effectively ‘hollow.’” They explain:
The problem of how to allow those serving in the United States Military to cast a ballot has been with us since the time of our nation’s war for independence.
Dating as far back as the Civil War, President Lincoln issued an executive order declaring a cessation of military operations in order to allow military personnel to travel home so that they could cast their ballots.
In order to make sure that those serving in the Civil War had access to the franchise, many states authorized elections officials to travel to units in the field to set up polling locations and to collect ballots from soldiers.Military voters – the shocking truth
Putting aside arguments pro and con, is there or is there not a serious problem in today’s America with active-duty members of the armed forces having enough time to vote?
Here’s a one-question quiz: During the 2010 election, what percentage of America’s military and overseas voters do you think were able to cast a vote that actually counted in the election results?
If you guessed “5 percent,” you’re too high.
“Tens of thousands of service members’ votes not counted” was the headline of a June 27, 2012, McClatchy newspaper article detailing just how seriously flawed the current system is for enabling the millions of men and woman in the U.S. military to vote.
The story includes the following shocking statistics:
In 2010, of the approximately 2 million military and overseas voters accounted for in data reported by the states to the Election Assistance Commission, only 4.6 percent of those voters were able to cast an absentee ballot that counted, according to the Military Voter Protection Project’s analysis of that data from the federal Election Assistance Commission, which tracks participation in voting. That compared with 5.5 percent in 2006, which was also a midterm election, the organization concluded.
The overall national voter participation rate for the 2010 election was 41.6 percent, authorities said.According to that report, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted – yes, the same Jon Husted being sued by Obama for America – was so disgusted he told county election boards “it would be considered grounds for removal of board members if their agencies should fail to electronically send out absentee ballots 45 days prior to an election” to all military voters who requested one.
Maybe Team Obama didn’t like Ohio’s zeal to make sure our brave soldiers get to vote along with all the illegal aliens, dead people and others the left is so eager to have vote “early and often” this November.
It’s the same thing every election
This problem is not new. Ever since the Bush-Gore Florida recount in 2000, every election cycle has brought with it controversy over the counting of overseas military votes – which traditionally lean Republican.
Two weeks after Election Day 2000, Mark Herron, a Democrat lawyer in Florida, circulated a memo to members of his party throughout the state instructing them on how to disqualify overseas military ballots. The entire five-page memo, obtained and published by the Drudge Report, included tips on how to lodge protests against military ballots which were thought to heavily favor Republican George W. Bush.
Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, who commanded the Coalition Forces in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, led widespread condemnation of the Democrat memo, saying: “It is a very sad day in our country when the men and women of the armed forces are serving abroad and facing danger of a daily basis … and are denied the right to vote for the president of the United States who will be their commander in chief.”
Thousands of overseas military members registered to vote in Florida complained that they either never received requested absentee ballots, the ballots arrived too late or their votes were rejected. In an election won by Bush by just 537 votes, Florida officials had disqualified 1,527 military votes for lack of a postmark.
In 2004, the same sorts of complaints arose. And in 2008, legal complaints, news stories and studies showed dozens of states failing to allow soldiers enough time to vote.
Then in 2010, ex-DOJ attorney M. Eric Eversole spoke out against the Obama Justice Department for its failure to safeguard the military vote.
Although Congress had passed in 2009 a law mandating that military personnel overseas be given sufficient time to participate in U.S. elections, the DOJ’s Voting Section was ignoring the new laws, potentially allowing thousands of uncounted ballots to fall through the cracks, said Eversole, a former litigation attorney for the DOJ Voting Section.
And according to a 2009 Pew Center report, more than one-third of states did not provide military voters stationed abroad enough time to vote or were at high risk of not providing enough time. The study found six states provided time to vote only if their military personnel overseas return completed absentee ballots by fax or email – a practice with privacy and security vulnerabilities.
Although current law requires that absentee ballots be shipped to military voters overseas a minimum of 45 days prior to Election Day, Eversole said in a Washington Times column that tens of thousands of soldiers received their ballots too late to ensure their votes could be counted in 2010. After the 2010 midterm elections, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission released data showing less than half of the 119,000 overseas military votes cast were counted.
Leftists are masters of projection; they reflexively accuse others of the evil they themselves commit. So when Occupy protesters display widespread anti-Semitism, rape women and defecate on police cars, the leftist media ignore it and accuse tea partiers of similar misbehavior, utterly without evidence.
In the same way, while leftist-engineered vote fraud is a genuine problem in today’s America, the left denies it and instead projects its guilt onto Republicans with indignant cries of “voter suppression” in response to the most mild and reasonable attempts on the part of state officials to identify who people are before they vote.
Yet there is one form of voter suppression that is real and vexing. It is being perpetrated by the left. And its target is the one group that deserves, more than you or me or anyone else in America, to be able to vote for our next commander in chief. And that’s our fighting men and women.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)