Main Menu

Tag Archives | South Carolina

Election fraud

One of the Obama conspiracy theories is that Obama won the presidency through election fraud. Election fraud conspiracy theories are making the rounds again, and an email forwarded to me by Arnold Carl Tapp pointed me to the article, “Illegal Votes could Decide Election” on a website called Patriot Update.1 The article opens up with this statement:

It is sad that liberals fight so hard to enable voter fraud.

In a way this is true. The American Civil Liberties Union, for example, is challenging voter ID laws, laws that help to prevent voter fraud due to someone impersonating a registered voter at the polls. Conservatives argue that in a close election, even a few fraudulent votes could change the result. The problem with that idea is that the actual number of cases of verified voter impersonation is vanishingly small. Before voter ID laws, there were only a handful of cases of proven impersonation cases, for example 4 in the last ten years in Texas, a state with more than the national average, according to the ABC News article “Voter Fraud: Non-Existent Problem or Election-Threatening Epidemic?” Nationwide the number of convictions for impersonation fraud comprise .00000013% of votes.

Various estimates of the number of registered voters without a valid photo ID are put forward. States get these estimates by attempting to match voter registration and DMV records.2 The exact numbers can be questioned, but they are certainly large. For example, North Carolina determined that 138,425 persons participated in the 2012 election who did not have a photo ID, and would have been unable to vote had there been a voter ID law in place. Compare 138,425 real voters in one medium-sized state with 26 fraud convictions nationwide.


My state of South Carolina has a very permissive voter ID law that says that if you have a reasonable impediment to getting an ID, you can still vote (on a paper ballot) after signing an affidavit as to the reason. The voter gets to decide what is reasonable. The problem is that the pamphlets on the new voter ID law say on the front: “VOTERS WILL BE ASKED TO SHOW ONE OF THESE PHOTO IDs BEFORE VOTING IN PERSON.” That’s true—voters will be asked that. But you have to turn the card over to see that you can vote anyway if there’s something that prevents you from getting an ID.

It becomes abundantly clear that liberals would prefer millions of legitimate registered voters to be able to cast their ballots, even if it means tolerating 26 impersonators. So I say:

It is sad that conservatives fight so hard to prevent eligible voters from voting.

I will be serving as a poll manager next Tuesday in a precinct that has about 1,3oo voters. On the morning of the election I will take an oath that says:

We do solemnly swear that we will conduct this election according to law and will allow no person to vote who is not entitled by law to vote in this election, and we will not unlawfully assist any voter to prepare his ballot and will not advise any voter as to how he should vote at this election.

That means that I will be enforcing the South Carolina voter ID law, and I am going to make darned sure that there is no detectible fraud in my precinct, and darned sure that every qualified voter gets a chance to vote.3

1I’m on the mailing list for this guy named Arnold Carl Tapp and most days I receive one or more forwarded RWNJ articles from him (some written in large red letters). I don’t pay much attention, except that the other day I noticed Tapp as a commenter at Birther Report. My view is that Obama won through a grass roots effort to get people likely to vote for him to the polls, and to get new voters registered.

2I have worked extensively in the records matching field, and I know that most efforts are poor.

3It is extremely unlikely that anyone will show up without an ID (according to the county elections commission). Is that because everybody has an ID, or because those without an ID think they cannot vote?

I wrote an article back in June, “Voter Fraud (or the lack thereof),” that talked about the Cochran/McDaniel primary runoff race in Mississippi. McDaniel lost by 7,700 votes and claimed that voters, largely African-American, voted for his opponent. McDaniel alleged that these voters had previously voted in the Democratic Primary, making them in eligible to vote in the Republican runoff. While McDaniel made a big deal of this charge including examination of massive numbers of ballots, he waited 41 days to file his official challenge, after the deadline. The Mississippi Supreme Court rejected his appeal of a lower court decision refusing the challenge because it was late. See Reuters, “Mississippi Supreme Court rejects McDaniel Senate primary challenge.” Part of the controversy involved the actual and alleged errors by poll managers in recording which party a voter had selected in the primary election. I think such issues could be sorted out easily in South Carolina because the voter signs a list under the party heading where they vote (so they will spot an error) in addition to the poll manager recording the party on the electronic voter registration list. An out of sequence page and line number on the EVRL would be easy to spot in an automatic scan.

OR LY for CA AG?

Orly Taitz is seeking statewide office in the postal abbreviation for California, or at least exploring the possibility, as she reports in her article, “Intent to run for state wide office in CA.” After sifting through what’s available for 2014, she came up with Attorney General.

One of her commenters asked:

I don’t know. To be the attorney general, don’t you have to have some qualifications as an attorney that has actually been in practice for a long time and has helped many clients?

Orly replied that all it takes is having been an attorney for 5 years, and she qualifies.

I actually thought this made sense in a way, Orly running for Attorney General. As AG, she would have the power to bring  lawsuits on behalf of the State and gain all sorts of new opportunities in her quest to unseat Barack Obama, which seems to have been her main goal in life for the past 5 years. Surprisingly, her 8-point platform has nothing about prosecuting Obama. Is it possible that she understands that this is a losing issue? The closest she gets is this:

assuring lawful elections with US citizen candidates instead of candidates like Barack Obama who ran for office based on fraud and using a stolen CT SSN and fabricated IDs and aided and abetting by corrupt and criminally complicit officials

The word that appears over and over in her platform is “nullification.” Interested readers can check out the Wikipedia article. Generally it is a legal theory that a state can ignore (nullify) federal laws, a theory that has generally failed in the courts. In response to one comment that nullification was unconstitutional, Orly wrote:

South Carolina is nullifying Obamacare, Western states have nullified multipe (sic) federal mandates which infringed on Second Amendment rights

South Carolina is in the process of considering legislation to nullify the Affordable Care Act. House Bill 3101, the “South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act,” was passed by the House (28-16) last May and is up for consideration by the Senate this month. The bill makes it a crime for any state official to aid the enforcement of any provision of the ACA, provides a tax deduction1 for anyone who pays a penalty for not buying insurance under the ACA, and prohibits any political division of the state from purchasing health insurance from a health care exchange established by a nonprofit organization. I think the law might be better titled: “The South Carolina Insurance Company Profits Protection Act.”

Nullification is a historically-significant term in South Carolina that brings to mind the Nullification Crisis of 1832, which almost lead to armed conflict between South Carolina the federal government.

In her typical way, Orly is asking her web readers to pay the filing fee to run, $3,022, and to foot the bill of $6,000 to get her 250-word platform included in the official state voter pamphlet. Her draft platform is 376 words. She will need to come up with a 5.32 point platform to fit the requirements.

1The top marginal income tax rate in South Carolina is 7%.

SC congressman puts national security at risk

Because he’s an idiot

ThinkProgress reports a talk radio exchange between host Rick Wiles and SC Republican Third District Congressman Jeff Duncan.

WILES: While you guys are rounding up and deporting the illegal immigrants, any chance the House may actually pursue Barack Obama’s phony identification papers? That’s the original scandal, congressman.

DUNCAN: People should have voted against him in November. I’m afraid that that wouldn’t get to the Supreme Court where it ought to get.

WILES: But if we know they’re lying about all these other things, why not go back and say, “well maybe the first scandal was a lie, too?”

DUNCAN: There you go. I’m all with you. Let’s go back and revisit some of these things because Americans have questions about not only the IRS scandal but also about the president’s validity.

What is scary is that this idiot is on the House Homeland Security Oversight Committee. He is not, however, the chairman as stated in the audio clip.

Republican candidates booted from ballot: election canceled

The phone has been ringing a lot lately and the callers are pollsters. I always fail the first question: “are you likely to vote in South Carolina’s Republican Primary next week?”

The problem is that a lot of South Carolina Republicans aren’t going to vote either as candidates are being booted from the ballot right and left. Oconee County had so many candidates removed that Republican Party canceled the primary altogether. Statewide over 200 candidates have been dropped so far. Many removed from the ballot were challenging incumbents. In one Sheriff’s race where the current sheriff is retiring, no one qualified for the ballot. A few Democrats were also affected. Democrats are suing Republicans in one county for ignoring the Supreme Court and certifying candidates anyway.

Candidates can run as “petition” candidates if they can collect signature from 5% of registered voters in the area where they are running, and submit them by July 16.

The problem is that many candidates failed to properly file a Statement of Economic Interest (the rules are tricky). The parties are examining their slates statewide in the wake of a decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court that the paperwork was required.

One GOP candidate call it a “crying shame.”  Ms. Conspiracy aptly observed:

If you don’t follow the rules, you don’t get to play.

Thanks to WSPA TV in Spartanburg for the story.

For more information, check

South Carolina Primary today

VoteHereI invoke my privilege as a blogger to cover an off-topic subject today, namely the South Carolina Republican Primary, which is going on as I type. It’s cold and raining here in the northwest half of the state, great weather for voting because it’s miserable weather for anything else.

There were maybe 2 voters at my local polling place when I and Ms. Conspiracy showed up around 11:30 am. Poll officials asked which primary we wanted to vote in, then laughed. “We have to ask.”

In an unscientific Obama Conspiracy Theories exit poll, 100% of  voters responding said that they had voted for Herman Cain (the poll has a 99.99999% margin of error). Other polls show Newt Gingrich in the lead, threatening to turn Romney’s 3-in-a-row sweep into 1-in-a-row (following his loss to Rick Santorum after a recount in Iowa).

imageWhat I am most interested to see is just how many South Carolina voters will support Herman Cain, whose aborted campaign has taken  on new life since his plastic surgery, skin whitening, and a new message about the influence of Super PAC money in the election. Cain has demonstrated time and time again his ability to draw crowds, such as this appearance on the Washington Capitol Mall. An estimated 3,000 people attended his rally in Charleston, SC, yesterday, compared to maybe 100 who came to hear Newt Gingrich in Spartanburg when I was there. David Horsey of The Los Angeles Times confirms:

Reporting from Charleston, S.C. — Under the looming live oaks at the College of Charleston on Friday, Stephen Colbert delivered a clinic on how to produce a whiz-bang political rally. Significantly, not one of the Republican candidates this year has exhibited the star power to bring off such an extravaganza themselves.

Jon Stewart, director of the Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow Super PAC (informally known as the Definitely Not Coordinating with Stephen Colbert Super PAC), reported a surge in the polls to supporters on Thursday:

LANDLINE COUNTRY, USA – A new poll from The Definitely Not Coordinating With Stephen Colbert Super PAC and Marist College Institute for Public Opinion shows South Carolina voters having a decided interest in undecided potential candidate Stephen Colbert. Potential voters were so electrified by Colbert, 18% gushed they’d be at least "kinda somewhat likely" to vote for him.

Cain’s popularity skyrocketed when it became known that he was the only candidate in the race not to run attack ads or blanket the state in robot-dialed phone messages.

Third Super PAC ad in SC

The Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow Super PAC (that can collect and spend unlimited amounts of money in support of candidates) has released its third ad in the South Carolina primary battle.

I know that the second ad has motivated many South Carolinians who had planned not to vote in Saturday’s Republican primary, to vote. I’m one of them. Here’s the new ad: