Tag Archives: voting

There’s Voter Suppression

Posted on by
Reply

…and there’s voter suppression. A poll taken two days after the first Presidential debate and run by The Wall Street Journal and NBC has Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden opening up a 14-per centage point lead over incumbent President Donald Trump.

However.

Aside from the fact that the poll sampled registered voters, rather than more accurately sampling likely voters, the poll oversampled (Progressive-)Democrat registered voters by eight per centage points (and thereby undersampled Republican registered voters by the same amount), which greatly biased the results.

On the other hand, a Daily Express poll, taken after Trump’s diagnosis with the Wuhan Virus (but which methodology is not described) indicates a different status of the race:

68% said the illness would not affect their vote while 19% said they were “more likely” to support Trump and only 13% “less likely”.

And these poll results:

National Popular Vote

Trump (Republican) = 46%

Biden (Democrat) = 45%

Jorgensen (Libertarian) = 3%

Hawkins (Green) = 1%

Undecided = 5%

And

Battleground States – Popular Vote

Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin

Trump (Republican) = 47%

Biden (Democrat) = 43%

Jorgensen (Libertarian) = 4%

Hawkins (Green) = 1%

Undecided = 5%

Aside from having Trump in the lead in this poll, the other takeaway suggests that, despite low Libertarian support (in 2016, there was somewhat stronger Green support), a third party candidate could seriously affect the election’s outcome.

Which raises the question: is such evident bias in the WSJ/NBC poll an attempt to discourage Republican and Conservative voters from voting? It’s hard to believe these two news outlets could run such an incompetently done poll. In truth, though, they’re not alone. News outlets typically run such oversampled/undersampled polls.

Which makes the bias widespread, and the suppression, to coin a term, systemic.

Another Activist Judge

Posted on by
Reply

…stacking the vote and demonstrating the need for judges at all levels who will be true to their oaths of office and rule based on what the law says and not on what the judge wants the law to say.

[L]ast week a [Michigan] state judge ordered officials to keep tallying ballots that arrive up to 14 days late, provided they bear a postmark of November 2 or earlier.

Never mind what Michigan State law actually says on the matter. The judge knows better than the people’s representatives, and she considers herself eminently qualified and obligated to stray from her judicial constraints and intrude into a political matter.

This also illustrates the need to get a Justice confirmed for the Supreme Court seat previously held by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg—so Court ties can be settled by nine Justices, and not by a capricious Chief Justice.

A Naked Purchase Attempt

Posted on by
2

Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan have given $250 billion (that’s with a ‘b’) to the Center for Tech and Civic Life, an election activist organization that’s active in a number of Progressive-Democrat strongholds in Wisconsin and expanding nationwide.

George Soros, even if the tales are true, is a piker. Zuckerberg and Chan are openly trying to buy the upcoming election. This is another example of the Progressive-Democratic Party in action.

Our republic is in increasing danger from the Patrician class.

For another perspective, that works out to about a dollar a voter in the general election. When I was in the Philippines during the post-Marcos (it turned out) Philippine Presidential election, the one that brought Corazon Aquino to power, my house girl told me that she’d been offered by a lower-level politician candidate 20 pesos—about a dollar at the time—if she’d vote for him. She then proudly said she’d declined his offer; she’d already accepted another politician’s pesos, and she’d stay with that one.

Voter Fraud

Posted on by
Reply

Let’s collect some data; although, it’ll take State by State legislation to set the capability.

There’s concern about late-arriving ballots, especially in close elections, and their meaning—actual votes cast and why they were late to be found or delivered to the counting facility.

This occurs with in-person voting as voting stations are delayed in producing their results, but it’s mostly a problem with mailed ballots, whether absentee ballots that must be explicitly requested by the voter—who must also prove he is who he says he is and that he’s eligible to vote in that jurisdiction—or universally mailed-out ballots to a voter registration list that is often inaccurate or that has no longer current or deliverable addresses. In both of these cases, ballots must be mailed back to the jurisdiction’s counting facility.

Here are the data to be collected and how they should be collected.

Set a State-wide deadline for State or national elections, or a local deadline for strictly local elections, by which cast ballots must be counted. The vote tally as of that deadline would constitute the official tally that the State’s election official must certify.

Continue receiving and counting ballots after that date, but don’t include them in the official results. Instead, publicize their lateness, why they’re late—or the reasons offered by those who delivered the ballots too late—what the vote count is for each of the candidates in these too-late ballots, and whether any of those ballots would have been disqualified anyway, had they arrived on time (signature mismatch, ineligibility of the voter, incorrectly filled out ballot, etc), and who delivered the ballots—vote harvesters, post office, etc.

These data would be illuminating.

An Objection to a Recall Effort

Posted on by
Reply

There is in progress in Seattle an effort to recall Progressive-Democratic Mayor Jenny “Summer of Love” Durkan. Durkan objects.  A State trial court has said, over Durkan’s objection, that the recall effort can proceed, so Durkan has taken the matter to the State’s Supreme Court.

Remarkably, neither Petitioners nor the trial court identified the particular “policies and safety measures” Mayor Durkan had a duty to implement, but failed to enact.

Here are a couple that were evident to the trial court, are evident to the recall petitioner defendants, and are blindingly obvious to the Seattle residents.

Instead of ordering the city’s police to retreat and abjectly surrender their precinct headquarters and surrounding blocks to a rabble, she could have—should have—reinforced those police with more police, including State police (or at least asked for them; Governor Jay Inslee’s (D) support for police also is an open question) and not surrendered.

When it became obvious that the occupying rabble had no legitimate objective—they engaged in enthusiastic vandalizing, looting, extortion of uninformed visitors, rape, murder—she could have sent in the police to retake the area much sooner instead of wasting weeks, businesses’ lives, people’s lives pleading negotiating with the rabble.

Instead, she declared a Summer of Love while pretending to deal with the…situation.

The residents of Seattle, citizens of Washington and of the United States that they are, deserved, and deserve, better.