Thursday, November 3, 2016

Corruption Risk of Early Voting

My best girl and I voted yesterday, which is allowable in the state in which we live.  She was a fan of the idea, despite the piece I wrote this past week condemning the practice and favoring a 24-hour voting window across all jurisdictions in the USA.

It is certainly convenient.  Polls in my district were opened last week, and we went over to our community center where the voting was to be done, at 3:00 pm.  There was one campaign person there handing out literature, and he was a friendly Republican.  Not a Democrat campaign person in sight, friendly or Hillaryesque, which may say something about our state and how it might flip.

There were about five machines and, although they were pretty much all occupied with voters, there was no line and we were able to vote directly without a wait after signing in.  There's no question about the convenience.  But there was a problem I saw, and it was scary.

They did not ask for ID.

Right now, my state does not have voter ID, because the most recent version of our voter ID law was struck down by a Federal court, and hasn't been reinstated in time.  So we just showed up, identified ourselves just by name and address, and were electronically crossed off the list by the nice lady with the laptop.

"Somebody" with my name and my address has now been recorded as having voted here.  That "somebody" happened to be me, but having voted early and without ID, I instantly saw the opportunity for fraud, the kind of fraud that Hillary Clinton and people associated with Hillary have shown that they would be quite comfortable committing.

How so?

Let's say that voting started, say, October 25th.  And let's say that a week earlier, an unscrupulous candidate, let's call her "Hillary" (a made-up name) had her minions drive around and record the addresses of people who had yard signs for her opponent, whom we'll call, oh, I don't know, "Donald Trump."  They then go back to their disposable laptops and google the names of the owners of the properties at those addresses.

Armed with the names and addresses of people who would be expected to vote for "Donald Trump", they hire warm bodies from out of state to go to the polls on October 25th, before the real people of those names and addresses vote, and cast a vote for Hillary.  Since they are not required to have ID, no one will be able to challenge them.

Of course, when the actual people showed up to vote and were told they already had, there might be a little kerfuffle, but according to the Democrats and the Washington Post, we don't have election fraud worthy of actual, reasonable voter ID laws.

This potential for fraud was so apparent to me that I left the building thinking through how easy it would be to do it, and how easy it would be for Hillary Clinton to have already arranged to have done this.  After all, given that she and "ethics" aren't even on the same planet, she would have just said to the toady or lackey who proposed the idea and chuckled, in that funny laugh of hers, "La, la, la, have fun" and bang, 50,000 extra votes.

Do we need to make fraud any easier?

Copyright 2016 by Robert Sutton
Like what you read here?  There's a new post from Bob at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com at 10am Eastern time, every weekday, giving new meaning to "prolific essayist."  Sponsorship and interview inquiries cheerfully welcomed at bsutton@alum.mit.edu or on Twitter at @rmosutton.

1 comment:

  1. It's four years later, and we still have states without voter ID. Moreover, we don't know if Hillary actually pulled that phony-voting trick I mentioned in the article, and STILL didn't win. Amazingly, our legislators and courts haven't been sufficiently motivated to require ID to vote, and don't appear concerned enough to care.

    ReplyDelete