Posted on 10/27/2012 8:02:44 AM PDT by kindred
On Monday of this week, Democrats in North Carolina clearly violated North Carolina state law in their efforts to turn out the vote for Barack Obama.
At roughly 10 a.m., two vans of students who worked at the North Carolina Jobs Corps location in Oconoluftee were transported from that location to the Swain County Board of Education one-stop voting location in order to cast their votes. The vans used to carry the passengers were Job Corps vans driven by Danny Muse, the son of O’neal Muse, a Democrat Swain County Board of education election official.
North Carolina law specifies that it is illegal to use Swain County Transit Vehicles, which are funded by the federal government, to transport voters to polling places. The Hatch Act clearly states that federal employees who work off-duty in partisan activities “May not engage in political activity while using a government vehicle.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Recall that NC was a state captured very narrowly by Obama in '08, and the difference there was probably accounted for by cheating. Something tells me that they are too far behind in the state this year, though, for cheating to turn it around. That's the only good news in this story.
Right on! That's why early voting came in during the Clinton era and the impetus for it in the states where it was adopted came largely from Democrats. Some gutless Republicans undoubtedly went along with the idea, so to avoid charges of "suppressing the vote of the minorities and the poor."
The same applies to "Motor Voter," which is another Clinton-era "innovation" which invites fraud and cheating.
If we manage to pull this out I’m going to hound my Reps & Senators to do something about the fraud.
Guess most of my work will need to be state but I’m sick of just watching these crooks steal our country.
“All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.” E Burke
Sometimes you need just have to face corruption square on.
Vans or trucks or buses (not govn. ones in this case), or cars, are allowed to bring voters to the polls.
The voter is in control of what they want to do in the way of someone helping them through the process if they need that. One thousand or any number of voters may use the same person to help them - it is their call.
The person the voter selects to help him/her, may go into the poll to help the voter. The election judge will make the helper take an oath and sign a document. Then, the voter may take the helper into the booth with him/her. It is none of the judge's business what happens in that booth as the voter is god of his/her ballot and the helper he/she chose.
It works a different way if the voter asks for help from the judge or election worker. At the beginning of the day, the judge and workers take the oath about helping a voter and that oath applies for the rest of the day.
If a voter asks for help, TWO workers (from different parties if available), go into the booth with the voter. One helps and the other one makes sure the worker helper doesn't go beyond what a worker helper is allowed to do. The worker helper may interpret if language is the problem, or may read the English if the person cannot read. The worker helper, in the case of an electronic machine may show the voter how to get to the ballot. The worker helper may NOT suggest which candidate to vote for.
by CONSERVATIVES!
Agree 100%. But as I said, in this specific instance, they probably can't overcome Romney's decisive advantage in the state's presidential race. And from what I've seen, the same holds for the US Senate race. Other down ballot races may be a different matter, though.
Very familiar with that quote. In fact, Burke was a contemporary of the Founding Fathers of the United States and IIRC, was a personal friend of some of them.
Sometimes you just need to face corruption square on.
Voting fraud and cheating needs to be prosecuted more with stiffer and better publicized penalties meted out for convictions. That will have somewhat of a deterrent effect.
That having been said, it's an intuitive guess that the problem overall around the country will probably be diminished in this election compared to 2008. There is (1) more public awareness of the problem; (2) at least one national organization has sprung up to specifically address it; (3) new photo ID requirements in some states; (4) more GOP Secretaries of State supervising elections.
Of course, elections, even for federal offices, are administered by states, and no two states have exactly the same election laws. So the Texas law you cited may or many not be applicable to North Carolina, where the events which are the subject of this thread occurred.
I would have to say that Texas now probably has one of the more fair and honest election laws in the country, and you don't generally hear too many complaints about it.
But no matter how fair and decent the law is on paper, any state requires courageous, fair and decent people supervising the election in order to minimize fraud and cheating. Texas probably had similar laws when Lyndon Johnson was able to abuse the system back in 1948 when he cheated his way to the US Senate, which became his eventual springboard to the presidency.
I taught election law for ten years.
After the fiasco in Florida, in 2000, federal laws were passed to reconcile election laws between the states, so election laws between states are now similar. When the new laws were passed, states were required to change their laws to coincide with the federal ones. Those were enormous changes and I was in the middle of that as I had to learn those new laws to teach those new methods. Those laws included the beginning of Provisional Ballots.
Anyway, election laws between the states are not that different now.
What is new and I think will continue to happen, is, states deciding to go with all mail ballots - no voting precincts anymore. That saves millions of dollars for every county/parish. There won’t be any transportation to voting precincts because voters will vote by mail.
“Texas probably had similar laws when Lyndon Johnson was able to abuse the system back in 1948 when he cheated his way to the US Senate, which became his eventual springboard to the presidency.”
Back them, we did not have similar laws compared to now and election judges/clerks were poorly trained, if at all, to hold elections. As time went on, election laws were passed to make elections equal between the counties and to put in place laws that would prevent voter fraud. Johnson could not do today what he did back then.
That sounds like an open invitation to fraud, especially if you are talking about, e.g., paper ballots for optical scanning. What is to stop party organizations (think Democrat) from filling out the ballots for people who they consider elderly and/or disabled and voting a straight party line for them? Doesn't even pass the smell test.
That system sounds even more subject to corruption than the old system of voting on paper ballots at a public polling place.
Better to spend some public money on public voting precincts to safeguard some integrity in the system.
The voter has to sign an application for a mail ballot and mail it back to the administrator of the election. The administrator has to verify that the person is a registered voter, and if that is correct, then sends the ballot packet to the voter at the already registered address on the voter master list - it won't be sent anywhere else.
The voter receives it and votes the ballot and seals the ballot in the ballot envelope, then puts that envelope into a mailing envelope and has to sign that envelope and mail it back to the administrator. A Signature Verification Committee made up of a judge and Democrats and Republicans, compares the two signatures and if they aren't the same, the ballot is thrown out.
That is only one way to check for ballot fraud in mail ballots, but there are other checks that happen also to find fraudulent ballots.
DID ANYONE USE THEIR VIDEO ON THEIR CELL PHONES TO RECORD THIS???
GET A CLEAR SHOT OF THEIR FACES
DID ANYONE USE THEIR VIDEO ON THEIR CELL PHONES TO RECORD THIS???
GET A CLEAR SHOT OF THEIR FACES
More of an opportunity for cheating and fraud than the current system, and you know which party specializes in that.
And what about voters who are unable to sign their own names? I have heard of 'Rats organizing votes from nursing homes; it has happened.
“And what about voters who are unable to sign their own names? I have heard of ‘Rats organizing votes from nursing homes; it has happened.”
From an article I recently wrote about mail ballots:
Fraud in nursing homes: As an example, let’s say the person running the nursing home is a rabid Democrat or Republican, and he/she has a building full of patients who have some form of slightly diminished mental capacity or they can think fairly well but they are used to following the orders of the administrator. The administrator or someone the administrator tells to do this, goes to each patient and “helps” them fill out the ballot but they actually told/showed the patients what circles to fill in. The administrator or person he/she is using to do this, signs the green envelope as the assistant. All those ballot envelopes have that one name on them as the assistant. What is the law? An assistant may help only one person unless the assistant is related to the others the assistant helps. Well, it is most doubtful the assistant is related to say, 100 patients in the nursing home – that doesn’t happen.
Also, remember the law that says an assistant has to sign and print his/her name AND print the address of the assistant. People who do this illegal act, “helping” numerous people, don’t know the law, and they seem to always fail there, leaving off required information. They just want to get the job over with as soon as possible and don’t know jack about election law and that’s why they get caught.
The Early Voting Ballot Board tosses out all the ballots that are signed by the assistant because there is more than one or two if related, and tosses ballots where the assistant didn’t sign/print his/her name and print his/her address. There go the fraudulent ballots as the board can’t prove the voter him/herself actually filled out that ballot since the “assistant” broke the law. Those ballots violate the law and must be rejected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.