It's often hard to find voter fraud (mainly because it's pretty rare for people to risk a jail term for, say, showing up at the polls and pretending to be someone else).

But sometimes it doesn't have to be that hard.

James O'Keefe could do election integrity a huge service by investigating whether Mitt Romney actually lived in California or New Hampshire when he registered to vote in 2010 in Massachusetts.

If he didn't, that's real voter fraud --- James, the people need to know! Brad and Mother Jones and Rachel Maddow have done some of the work already. Come on and investigate further!

http://change.org/petiti...aud-in-the-2010-election

This is what happens when privileged Corporate Aristocrats rig the tax code and hand down looted billions to their ne'er-do-well offspring via unaccountable offshore trust funds.

Decades of Yale Skull-n-Bones inbreeding. O'Keefe smells like rotting teeth.

In most states it is illegal to video tape or audio tape someone without their express permission and knowledge. I suspect this snake used a "pen camera" or some other innocous device to video these election officials. If that is the case, easily determined by contacting the election officials in that office and asking if they knew and agreed to being recorded, our good Mr. James may have committed a crime for which he could and should be prosecuted. Anyone care to look into this just a bit further with a phone call or two?

I swear, his mugshot looks as if you have morphed pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald and Timothy McVeigh.

21 million legal voters lack a photo ID? Bullshit. Watch them go to Blockbuster and rent a video...using their photo IDs.

You sir, are a douche. Nice blog though, love the circa 1998 look. Are you an AOL user?

Very classy, namenick, make sure you attack the blogger rather than stick to the issue. If you doubt Brad's numbers, please tell us how many voters YOU think it IS okay to disenfranchise with voter ID laws for a problem (fraudulent voters) that has been shown over and over to NOT be a significant problem. On the other hand, I surely doubt that you have any interest in hearing ANY FACTS that disagree with your belief system.

Namenick @5--

Are you part of some club? It's a recurring theme here. Clowns like you come in full of self-righteous, degrading, dismissive bullshit, make completely unsubstantiated claims, and than are gone in a puff of elephant droppings.

What's your purpose? Is that how you start meaningful conversations in your three dimensional existence? Do you have a three dimensional existence? Are you looking to join the diplomatic corps in Bizarro World?

The O'Keefe effect within American politics informs those of us, who have our eyes open, that in time even perfect voting systems with paper ballots and open counting will not heal our election system.

The Republican with the least amount of campaign money won in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri last night.

He openly declares that Global Warming is a Hoax that he has never believed.

He also says that the educational system of the U.S.eh? is a left-wing engine designed to keep the left in power.

I'm guessing the rules for commenting is that you have to agree with the nonsense on the blog.

1. You neglect to inform your reader that PF does not advocate policy merely exploits systemic weaknesses.
2. You're correct on the registration; I would presume ID would be required to register as well *duh*
3. The Federal Law doesn't apply to absentee ballots because well they never actually make it to the polls. So you're argument is dumb
4. The penalties are high but the risk is NIL,they have no teeth; that is to say its so difficult to convict someone of voter fraud unless they confess to it (in most cases). So its easy to say it doesn't happen because there's no way to really tell if it happens. Close the holes and it definitely won't happen. Its like having your eyes closed and saying "I don't see anything" duh you re eyes are closed.
5. I can find no arrest record made in New hampshire. Sounds like a lot of hype. When liberals disagree with someone they want them prosecuted and thrown in jail. he truth is James didn't violate any laws. No ballots were taken or cast, there was no provable intent to cast votes, nor did they impersonate people they merely asked if they were on the rolls. In one instance in the NH video a ballot clerk asks one of O'Keefe's peeps if HE IS THAT PERSON, and he says NO, he's actully dead just wanted to see if hes been purged from the list. The truth is they have egg on their face and all the angry libs cry for prosecution but there is no case for it. Face it. James is just smarter than you are.

Silas @ 9--

When you start with..

I'm guessing the rule(s) for commenting is that you have to agree with the nonsense on the blog.

...and then proceed with your own nonsense that will not be agreed with on this blog, you refute yourself right out of the gate.

So just a suggestion, but for greater credibility maybe don't start comments by completely contradicting yourself.

I started working up a point by point refutation of Silas @9 but as I was going through the points I saw that it's all misinformed gobbledygook that makes about as much sense as his opening completely contradictory statement. If nobody else gets to it, maybe I can come back and do it later. Sleep-deprived at the moment and don't have the energy for this braindead O'Keefe supporting bullshit right now.

I know this is not the focus for this article, but you have repeatedly made the claim that elderly voters are more likely to vote Democratic. What is your evidence for that?

This PEW study shows that 65+ year old voters are evenly split between Democratic and Republican, and only 17% identify as liberal, with 40% moderate, and 40% conservative.

Voter ID laws will discriminate against the elderly, and I am against them. I just don't believe the elderly are a natural Democratic constituency.

David @11,

"If nobody else gets to it"

I can offer a study that shows he had a low I.Q. as a youngster:

And in terms of left-right politics, the less they are capable of deductive reasoning and other beneficial thinking skills, the more likely they are to end up as right-wing political voters (Bright Minds, Psychological Science Journal, February 2012, vol. 23 no. 2, 187-195, free PDF download available).

Further, the educational system did not help him much either, and at this point he is not likely to try to shake the problem.

Want to see the sort of persons who are behind the ALEC-inspired "Voter ID" bill/amendment craze? Here's Mary Kiffmeyer:

http://my.firedoglake.co...er-to-disenfranchise-us/

#5 is both sleazy and hilarious, in that specially evil Kiffy sort of way. In 2004, Kiffmeyer, without announcing this to the public, recruited and “deputized” thirty-odd “Election Observers” from relatives and from friends of her staff, and from the archconservative Taxpayers League of Minnesota’s e-mail subscribers’ list. Several non-conservative groups, including the local branches of Americans Coming Together and the AFL-CIO, got wind of what she was doing and sent representatives to her election observer training session; they were told that they could watch, but neither participate in the training, nor serve as election observers.
#6 This one’s a real hoot. In late September 2004, Secretary of State Kiffmeyer wrongly told multiple liberal grassroots groups that the SoS office didn’t have voter registration cards to give out, and said they “hopefully” would have more cards by Oct. 1. This created a delay in distributing cards to the groups. Kiffy’s SoS office later blamed “staff error” for misinformation. Uh-huh.

Namenick @ 5 said:

21 million legal voters lack a photo ID? Bullshit.

Are you calling James A. Baker III (who convinced the U.S. Supreme Court that votes shouldn't be counted at all in the state of Florida in 200) and President Jimmy Carter liars?

You sir, are a douche.

Maybe. But I've got my facts very straight, my head not in my ass, I give a damn about my country and defending it's constitution, and I don't find it necessary to be a coward and hide behind anonymous blog comments when making my point. But keep up your courageous "freedom fighting" there, sexy!

Anonymous commenter Silas de Goute said @ 9:

I'm guessing the rules for commenting is that you have to agree with the nonsense on the blog.

Bad guess. Though as accurate as the bulk of your comments.

1. You neglect to inform your reader that PF does not advocate policy merely exploits systemic weaknesses.

"PF"? What is "PF"? Do you mean "PV"? As in the ironically named James O'Keefe's Project Veritas? If so, apparently you have no idea how propaganda works. More likely, you do. Which is why you are here to share some more of it.

2. You're correct on the registration; I would presume ID would be required to register as well *duh*

If that's what you'd "presume", then I guess you know nothing about how our nation actually works. Registration drives happen all over the country by third party groups who have neither the skills nor resources to validate ID. The good news, as I note in the story, and as pretend cub reporter Jimmy failed note, is that ID is required when such folks vote for the first time at the polling place if they didn't register in person.

I wonder why Jimmy failed to mention that in his "not advocat[ing] policy 'Voter Fraud Investigation' video".

BTW, he also failed to mention, for example, the CA GOP who paid about $10 to $12 per Republican registration to the firm they hired, Young Political Majors, which subsequently went out of business after its CEO pled guilty to multiple registration fraud crimes in 2008.

Of course, I'm sure you realize that ACORN was never found guilty of such a serious crime, right? Even though they managed to legally register millions of legal American voters until Jimmy's fake propaganda videos succeeded in putting them out of business.

3. The Federal Law doesn't apply to absentee ballots because well they never actually make it to the polls. So you're argument is dumb

Um, I think that was my argument. Did you even bother to read the article above before you decide to comment on it???

4. The penalties are high but the risk is NIL,they have no teeth; that is to say its so difficult to convict someone of voter fraud unless they confess to it (in most cases).

Tell it to Indiana's Republican Sec. of State Charlie White (the state's chief election official) who was, himself, convicted of three voter fraud felonies over the weekend.

I have a feeling "NIL" may not mean what you think it means.

So its easy to say it doesn't happen because there's no way to really tell if it happens. Close the holes and it definitely won't happen. Its like having your eyes closed and saying "I don't see anything" duh you re eyes are closed.

No, it's easy to say it doesn't happen, because it doesn't happen. Almost ever. As I noted in the article above, however, it does happen via abseent voting on occassion, though the polling place Photo ID restriction voter suppression policies that James O'Keefe's Project Veritias is supporting do nothing to prevent it. Odd that he wouldn't mention that as part of his "investigation".

5. I can find no arrest record made in New hampshire. Sounds like a lot of hype. When liberals disagree with someone they want them prosecuted and thrown in jail.

"Liberals"? You mean "Liberals" like the Republican Mayor of Manchester, NH who called for O'Keefe to be "arrested and prosecuted"? Really?

When fake "conservatives" (fake, because clearly, they don't give a damn about things actual conservatives care about, like the Rule of Law), disagree with someone, they call them "Liberals", whether they are or not.

truth is James didn't violate any laws. No ballots were taken or cast, there was no provable intent to cast votes, nor did they impersonate people they merely asked if they were on the rolls. In one instance in the NH video a ballot clerk asks one of O'Keefe's peeps if HE IS THAT PERSON, and he says NO, he's actully dead just wanted to see if hes been purged from the list.

You are wrong, as detailed in my original coverage of Jimmy's NH voter fraud conspiracy which details the very specific laws that he broke. And, in case you didn't bother to watch the supposed "full, unedited videos" (which are neither full, nor unedited), at least one of his co-conspirators absolutely identified himself as a recently deceased person, they all received ballots falsely by misrepresenting themselves to election officials, and they all illegally recorded conversations in violation of the state's privacy laws.

Whether they are prosecuted is another matter. We shall see. As you alluded in a different instance, the penalties for breaking the laws that they did are high, but Jimmy happens to have Republican Party superstar attorneys at his disposal, so he's able to avoid prosecution and/or have felony charges bargained down to misdemeanors, as was the case in his failed wiretap plot, as described by the FBI, in a U.S. Senators office.

The truth is they have egg on their face and all the angry libs cry for prosecution but there is no case for it. Face it. James is just smarter than you are.

Yes. He's very very smart. Which one of us is a federal criminal, btw?

But thanks for playing! Give my best to Jimmy!

Randy D asked at @ 12:

I know this is not the focus for this article, but you have repeatedly made the claim that elderly voters are more likely to vote Democratic. What is your evidence for that?
...
Voter ID laws will discriminate against the elderly, and I am against them. I just don't believe the elderly are a natural Democratic constituency.

Thanks for that question, Randy! I'm currently on the road, so unable to spend the time Googling that I'd otherwise like, so this may be an unsatisfying answer for the moment.

Some months ago, Rachel Maddow made a similar assertion (that elderly tended to vote Republican), which led me to dig in and check those stats. Unfortunately, I don't have the cites for you right now, as mentioned. So, in short, for the moment, with the elderly, unlike minorities, it tends to have more to do with where they are located and how elderly they are. For example, the older they are, the more they tend to ally with the FDR error (wherein everybody voted Democratic! )

Also, the elderly are more reliant on social programs, like Medicare and Social Security, which the GOP generally oppose. So they become a Democratic constituency under that basis as well. But, all of that can also be dependent on location where some elderly voters lean more R in some parts of the country, but more D in others.

Again, sorry for the lack of specific cites here. I had tracked all of that down previously after Maddow had made what seemed to be an inaccurate claim. What I had found was that she was right, but only in regard to the specific state she had been referring to at the time, as opposed to the national voting populace at large.

Thanks for looking into my question, Brad. I've found several voter polls from 2008 that show 65+ voted more for McCain than Obama. I'm trying to locate a study that breaks senior voting (or opinion) down by age, gender, and INCOME (which I suspect will have an impact).

In doing so, I stumbled upon the dumbest senior question of all time: "Seniors are the least likely of all age groups in the U.S. to say that healthcare reform will benefit their personal healthcare situation." Gallop, 7/31/09. Well, duh, they ALREADY have access to government run healthcare (Medicare) and it is wildly popular, so of course they are "least effected" by reform.

Vote fraud is a real issue, as listed above by both parties. Every time it takes place someone's legitimate vote is nullified. O'Keefe points out that it is possible to vote fraudulently rather easily. The author states that a voter ID law would do nothing to prevent absentee vote fraud. To that I say it depends on the details within the law. In Wisconsin, which until recently had very lax laws, the new voter ID act requires a copy of photo ID be submitted along with the absentee ballot which substantially tightens that loophole.

BigToe @19--

Not sure what you mean by "vote fraud". Election fraud is and has been a real issue. Voter registration fraud is sometimes a real issue. Voter fraud is a pseudo issue.

Here's Lorraine Minnite author of The Myth of Voter Fraud lecturing on the topic if you're interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7oMjgrPnEE

Had to sign on to say hello to everyone and tell David Las @19 thanks for the link...Didn't think too terribly much about the vid (although voter suppression is a huge problem) until around the 42 minute mark when Crispen-Miller gets to the meat of the problem...HE GETS IT...
Must be hangin around here...
As far as brains in a big toe I think it would be better to use the ones we have upstairs first..

...the only thing I would disagree with on the vid at #19 was they said all people should be automatically registered to vote where I think that leaves the system more open to hacking in to vote for the registered non-voter at the precinct/state level as evidenced by people going to the polls and being told that they already voted by the poll workers.

Crispin Miller read "Truth is all" book
Way to go Richard, you were brought up in the video...

Silas de Goute @9: "Face it. James is just smarter than you are."

Yeah, sure. Smart just like Fredo Corleone:

"I can handle things! I'm smart! Not like everybody says... like dumb... I'm smart and I want respect!"

Big Toe @19 writes:

Vote fraud is a real issue

Actually, it isn't.

If you are not intentionally dissembling, I would encourage you to read U.S. Senate Hearings on New GOP Voter Suppression Laws [Part 1 of 2] - Photo ID Restrictions and the Disastrous Return of Hans von Spakovsky.

The only form of "voter fraud" that can possibly be addressed by the spate of disenfranchising GOP polling place photo ID laws is in person impersonation --- which is virtually non-existent, a point demonstrated by Loyola Law Professor Justin Levitt in sworn testimony before the U.S. Senate:

"the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 already requires those who do not register in person to provide ID when voting for the first time at the polling place."

What about mail-in votes?