Why is it that any time I read about voter fraud it always seems Democrats fall on the side of trying to protect those committing the fraud?
I would normally not share this article with the readers here as it isn't a NH story, it's about Michigan, but it does tie in to NH politics so I bring it up for that reason.
In Michigan, Republicans have gone through the voter registration list and matched it against lists of foreclosed homes. They are seeking to have these names removed from the registries as these are no longer the valid addresses. Voters who've had their homes foreclosed can register and vote from whatever new location they are living in.
Seems straight forward, after all you don't want someone voting in a tight local race who doesn't even live in that town right?
Democrats don't see it that way. The article title I think says it all concerning their mindset here "Lose your house, lose your vote".
When I first saw that I questioned to myself what makes Democrats think that Democratic party voters would be more greatly effected by loses of their homes then I found the following passage:
The Macomb County party’s plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African-Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans — the most likely kind of loan to go into default — were made to African-Americans in Michigan, according to a report issued last year by the state’s Department of Labor and Economic Growth.
Ah, exactly what I pointed to as the problems leading to the government bail outs of the banking industry. Government is forcing the banks to give loans to each race, gender etc. at equal percentages yet here we see that certain groups are at a higher risk of foreclosing.
Now as I stated this does tie in to NH politics. How you may ask? Because allowing people to vote where they do not live is something we've see NH Democrats support. Maybe not using foreclosed addresses (at least that they've been caught doing) but using addresses they don't live at.
One more infamous case was that of Geoff Wetrosky who used Democrat's very own Cathy Sullivan's home address to register and vote from before leaving to head back to his own home state of South Dakota. Even with over whelming evidence Democrats have prevented even an investigation.
In Manchester's Ward 3, over 21% of the mail sent to "registered" voters returned as undeliverable either due to bad addresses or in some cases addresses that don't even exist. Yet when Republicans attempt in any way to assure people vote where they actually live they are the ones attacked as attempting to "disenfranchise" voters.
My personal suggestion is do what some of us in Merrimack have done. Get a copy of the voter registration and go through it looking for addresses that do not exist either because the house has been since knocked down or it never was a valid address. Look at sale listings and compare those against the voter lists for people who have moved out of town. We found listings which we've then gone back to our town clerk with requesting with evidence supporting why that they be removed from the list as a citizens request. Of course with same day registration we allow these same people to walk up and recreate their entry and vote although it will be interesting to see just how many return.
For now the best we can do is keep looking and publishing it when we find them. Maybe sooner or later the general public will actually want their votes to count without being canceled out by illegal voters. Then again, maybe when the general public wakes up to this they may find themselves in a minority completely overwhelmed with illegal voters and find themselves unable to do anything about it.