Artur Davis at the RNC



 



Artur Davis left the Democrat Party because of voter fraud denial and opposition to Voter ID.  Reflexive racialist opposition to Voter ID caused this.  Being a victim of voter fraud in Alabama caused this.  Davis also left the party because of the failures of the last 3 years and unmet expectations.  Never thought I’d see it happen.  Davis also delivered a fantastic speech at the True the Vote Summit in Houston this past summer.

Lose the battle, win the war?

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is aiming straight for the Supreme Court on the Texas redistricting case.

“Today’s decision extends the Voting Rights Act beyond the limits intended by Congress and beyond the boundaries imposed by the Constitution. The Attorney General’s Office will continue defending the maps enacted by the Texas Legislature and will immediately take steps to appeal this flawed decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

h/t to MS.

“Radical” Brennan Center Data Exposed

 Link:

“A radical group funded by billionaire George Soros that has a history of biased research is primarily behind a national campaign to paint voter ID laws as racist.


The voter ID data collected by the group, the Brennan Center for Justice, has been called into question by experts and has been contradicted by other credible studies. Yet the center’s information is cited widely by news media and even members of the Obama administration.


Besides receiving a reported $7.4 million from Soros’ Open Society Institute since 2000, the Brennan Center was also the recipient of grants from the Joyce Foundation from 2000 to 2003.

. . .


According to the Heritage Foundation report, the Brennan Center used biased questioning to obtain their desired result concerning minority voters – a result that is actually contradicted by footnotes buried in the Brennan report itself.


“By eschewing many of the traditional scientific methods of data collection and analysis, the authors of the Brennan Center study appear to have pursued results that advance a particular political agenda rather than the truth about voter identification,” write Von Spakovsky and Ingram.


Heritage points out that the Brennan Center’s report was based entirely on one survey of only 987 “voting age American citizens.” However the report contained no information on how the survey determined whether a respondent was actually an American citizen.


Heritage found the Brennan survey used the responses of the 987 individuals to estimate the number of Americans without valid documentation based on the 2000 Census calculations of citizen voting-age population. Those Census figures, noted Heritage, “contain millions of U.S. residents who are ineligible to vote, thus contributing to the study’s overestimation of voters without a government-issued identification.”


. . .


The Brennan study is undermined by some of its own footnotes.


One footnote states that “[t]he survey did not yield statistically significant results for differential rates of possession of citizenship documents by race, age, or other identified demographic factors.” That footnote appears to contradict the very premise of the Brennan report.”

Full story.

Forbes Review of Who’s Counting

Doug Schoen, Democrat Pollster, has this review at Forbes:

“In Who’s Counting?, authors John Fund and Hans Von Spakovsky draw upon hard evidence to make the case that there has been an ongoing crisis of voter fraud in the United States. Put simply, our electoral system is broken in a way that makes it relatively easy to steal elections. . . . Who’s Counting? calls attention to the various problems undermining our election system — from voter fraud to a slipshod system of vote counting — not from a partisan or ideological perspective but from an analytical perspective. The authors offer a hard-headed assessment of the ongoing crisis in election fraud in the United States– “whether it’s phony voter registrations, illegal absentee ballots, vote-buying, shady recounts, or old fashioned ballot-box stuffing” — that is threatening the integrity of our electoral process. . . . Together, Fund and Spakovsky bring decades of sophisticated practice, insight, and historical perspective to this crucial moment in American history, and lay out a novel, clear, and decisive strategy to reinstate the integrity of the American voter registration and election process.”

Trial reveals DOJ double standard with South Carolina and other voter ID laws

NPR blog reports that the testimony of the South Carolina elections director Marci Andino has shifted the focus of the South Carolina voter ID trial to the “Reasonable Impediment” affidavit, a sworn statement that voters can use if they were not reasonably able to obtain a photo ID for any multitude of reasons.  The testimony surprised the U.S. District Court and reveals a double standard that DOJ used in reviewing and objecting to the South Carolina voter ID law.  The key paragraph in the post:


Essentially, she said it was up to the voter to determine what was a
“reasonable impediment” and that she was instructing poll managers to
accept the voter’s explanation.

Members of the three-judge panel in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., appeared surprised.

Considering
there’s only a short time before the Nov. 6 election, does that mean
every South Carolina voter without a photo ID would have a “reasonable
impediment” getting one, asked U.S. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh?

“Yes, that’s possible,” Andino replied.

Pressed
by U.S. District Judge John Bates, Andino said that she didn’t think
the law would disenfranchise anyone already legally allowed to vote.

That
might come as a surprise to opponents who argue that tens of thousands
of voters lack the required ID and could have trouble getting one, so
they’ll be unable to vote if the new law is upheld.

While the partisan Department of Justice intentionally ignored this administrative safety net and obstructed to the law’s implementation twice, the clause certainly has the attention of the federal judges.  

Interesting enough, neither of the voter ID laws in Georgia and Virginia, administratively precleared by the Department of Justice, had these safety net features.  DOJ’s flawed analysis is often focused on what demographic group has what forms of ID, not on the system as a whole.  Is there any real difference in the South Carolina photo ID law and the New Hampshire photo ID law (predicted to be precleared by DOJ) as both allow an affidavit to be signed if the voter happens to appear at the polls without a photo ID.

Two Democratic Ohio election officials fired for disobeying directives

UPI reports that: Secretary of State John Husted, a Republican, has fired two Democrats
from a county board of elections because they voted to extend
early-voting hours.

In a letter released Tuesday, Husted notified Thomas Ritchie Sr. of
Dayton and Dennis Lieberman of Clayton they were being fired from the
Montgomery County Board of Elections. He said they “knowingly and
willfully violated Ohio election law” when they voted to extend
early-voting hours on weekends in their county, in contravention of
Husted’s order to cut back on early-voting hours for the November
election.

Husted’s letter said elections board members may speak out against
such a directive “but they cannot disobey them,” WHIO-TV, Dayton,
reported.

“Your dismissal is not about differing views; it is about you
violating the law … ,” Husted wrote. “You were given subsequent
chances to comply and refused to take corrective action.”

“Dead voters and a Dying Democracy?”

Glenn Reynolds in the New York Post:

Americans will fight and die for democracy, but when it comes to the actual business
of elections, stuffed ballot boxes and cemetery voters are the subject
of jokes more than outrage — though a democracy in which elections are
decided by fraudulent votes created by corrupt politicians is no
democracy at all.

That contradiction is the subject of “Who’s Counting: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote At Risk,” by journalist John Fund and former Justice Department attorney Hans von Spakovsky.


Many of America’s largest and worst-governed cities suffer from
entrenched and corrupt political machines that maintain their position
in no small part via voter fraud. Corrupt machines (like that of
Detroit’s disgraced ex-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick) siphon off money that
should go to essential services and instead divert it to political
fatcats and their supporters. Efforts at reform are often defeated with
fraudulent votes.  As we approach a presidential election that may
prove to be as close as 2000’s, Fund and von Spakovsky’s book is a
wake-up call. If democracy in America is to survive, something must be
done. Will we do it?