"....We’ve been bussing people in ... for 50 years, and we’re not going to stop now. We’re just going to find a different way to do it..."
Democrat Operative Scott Foval Dep. Political Dir. 'People for The American Way' Organization.
According to the Heritage Foundation's Voter Fraud Database there have been hundreds and hundreds of cases of voter fraud nationwide dating back decades. From fraudulent ballots cast, petition fraud, abstentee ballot fraud, vote harvesting-the list goes on and on with the majority of these cases leading to criminal convictions.
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud#choose-a-state
My interview with California Conservative Party Chair and The Election Integrity Project, host of 'That Radio Show' Jon Matthews spoke extensively with me for an hour about how California is voter fraud central. And as I spoke to Jon he mentioned that the Heritage Foundation database only records actual cases brought to light. It does not even begin to scratch the surface of how far this goes.
https://www.spreaker.com/user/ktntradio/m-p-jon-matthews-interview-6-26-19
In Utah the 2016 Presidential Candidate Evan McMullin is now managing a PAC to push Democrat causes and Rank Choice Voting. This from a June 26th article on Capital Research Center, author Hayden Ludwig.
The NeverTrump activist and his running mate, Mindy Finn, run a pair of advocacy nonprofits created in the wake of the 2016 election which claim to "defend democratic norms and institutions,"
But in the two years since McMullin and Finn created these groups—the lobbying shop Stand Up Republic and its fundraising arm, Stand Up Republic Foundation—they’ve only succeeded in taking money from the Left to push its policies.
Stand Up Republic wants automatic voter registration, the backbone of every Progressive effort to shade conservative states Democrat blue.
Earlier this month, Stand Up Republic released its "Electoral Reform Agenda," which reads suspiciously like the Democratic Party’s own notorious electoral wish list, H.R. 1 (also called the "For the People Act").
H.R. 1 goes a step further: automatic and same-day voter registration up to mere moments before Election Day, inviting a maelstrom of voter fraud problems for the estimated 50 million new voters who would be automatically enrolled under the bill, many drawn from databases of state and federal welfare recipients.
And here comes the smoking gun..
But the most egregious "reform" supported by Stand Up Republic is ranked-choice voting, a system of casting ballots heavily favored by the liberals who believe it will favor their candidates.
While H.R. 1 does not explicitly legislate a ranked-choice voting system, a clause in the bill tees it up by enabling the "ability of replacement systems to administer ranked choice elections."
Let us get back to California.
From the Wall Street Journal in 2018;
Voters in a 2017 special election for an open seat in the California state Assembly reported activists harassed them at their doors to fill out ballots for specific candidates and hand them over.
The result: two Orange County Republican congressional candidates—state Assemblywoman Young Kim and Rep. Mimi Walters—saw their sizeable Election Day leads shrivel into multi-point defeats once thousands of mail-in paper ballots were returned and counted, many postmarked on Election Day.
San Leandro California. One of the 12 cities that embraces RCV.
".... San Leandro, like many cities in the Bay Area, is in crisis. About half of our community members are renters and skyrocketing rents are pushing them out of their homes, either displacing them out of the Bay Area or putting them on the streets.....Lack of ethics and integrity is, indeed, a generalized problem in San Leandro city government....The former City Manager, fearing that accusations of sexual harassment by the head of a local nonprofit would become public, sent out a rambling and utterly unprofessional letter to the press...Rather than fire him on the spot for unprofessional behavior, the Council put him on paid leave for months while he looked for a new job and and gave him a $350K parting gift..."
".... What San Leandro needs is progressive and ethical leadership.... Note that San Leandro has ranked choice voting (RCV) for its Mayor and City Council races...."
.. Oh, It gets better!
".... Incumbent Pauline Cutter ....Mayor of San Leandro... Early in her term, her daughter was hired by the City (with the approval of the City Manager) for a highly-paid position in the Parks and Recreation department – despite nepotism being explicitly forbidden by the Charter of the City of San Leandro...."
However San Leandro does not give up it's Leftist/RCV leanings easily. They have another stellar candidate up for election.
"....Fortunately, San Leandro has another choice: Jeromey Shafer. The co-founder of San Leandro for Bernie and leader of Our Revoution San Leandro, Shafer is intelligent, hard working, thoughtful and unapologetically progressive..."
Make sure you click off the proper boxes. "Meet the new boss.. Same as the old boss.." The list goes on. Democrats under RCV.
Incumbent Deborah Cox is another white-moderate who supports police militarization and mass surveillance and opposes rent-control. She drew controversy for not returning the financial contribution of a politician who used the "N" word in a public meeting.
Eva Arce, a newcomer to politics, is a strong progressive
Ken Pon is also a moderate, but to the left of Cox.
You mean there are actual people in California Left of the Leftists?
City Council District 3: Victor Aguilar
School Board member Victor Aguilar was a progressive back when people didn’t want to admit to being progressive.
Margarita Lacabe goes out on a limb in this next statement.
Every once and awhile a Leftist author gets it right.
While I cannot read anyone’s mind, after 8 years in the Central Committee I can guess why most candidates were endorsed. In general, the Committee want to endorse candidates that are likely to win, so we endorse incumbents and clear front runners. We like candidates that bring us money, as a committee and as consultants, so we endorse those with ties to developers and big donors. We want to pretend we support labor, so we often endorse candidates that have labor support – though that alone is seldom enough. We like our friends, so we endorse candidates that hang out in Democratic party circles And we like to play politics – some of us are even in the business of making money from politics – so we horse trade. You’ll note that there is no "I" in "we," not all of us play those games. But those of us who vote on endorsements based on the quality of the candidate or their values are a definite minority.
John Stuart Mill said; "...The majority of the people, through their representatives, will outvote and prevail over the minority and their representatives..."
In a video I produced in Nov. of 2017 Howard Fain of Voter Choice Mass (an RCV activist group) made this statement in front of The Worc. Tea Party about imcumbents under RCV.
It is at the 2:28 mark of my shoot;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4y3tM3EuCE&list=PLU_Z4p-v1UQZSKw62f2lfyrEoRg1xxWNb&index=434
RCV does not.
Will not- change incumbency. In fact? It ensures it.
It is specifically designed to ensure a one party rule. Fain goes on to side-step a former Libertarian VP Nominee about how elections discourages third party candidates at the 2:30 mark. In the second video I shot that night at the 1:45 mark Fain puts up a Powerpoint where Voter Choice Mass lists all the wonderful advantages of RCV.
Unfortunately, each of the statements made contradicts each of the statements made.
- Eliminate spoilers and vote splitting
- Encourage more people to run
- Enjoy more positive campaigns
- Give voters more choice and more voice
- Transform politics in Massachusetts
First of all, if you want to discourage 'spoilers' and 'vote splitting' then don't 'encourage more people to run'. And, if you don't encourage, or, allow more people to run you will not have 'more positive campaigns'. In addition, this certainly does not 'give voters more choice and more voice' by eliminating third party candidates labeling them as 'spoilers'.
The last one should make you pause and ask;
What does it mean exactly to 'transform politics in Massachusetts'?
Well, if the 12 cities that use Rank Choice Voting are any indicator it means to ensure a Democrat win every election season.Teluride Colorado. Basault. (Soon) Pueblo
San Francisco (and I wrote about that in Parts I and II)
Easthampton Mass. 2019
Cambridge Mass since 1941
San Leandro Cal.
Minneapolis/ St. Paul MN.
The list goes on and is growing..!
https://www.newsmax.com/scottrasmussen/daley-fair-vote-rcv-san-francisco/2018/06/01/id/863593/
And my detractors will claim I am wrong on this.
The cities are too many to explain in one short blog post.
DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!
As I have in writing this exhaustive expose'.
I have found the very same stories as I posted above about San Leandro. Each of these cities are staunch Democrat controlled. All of them use RCV. All of them are mired in fraud, waste, over taxation, nepotism and they keep electing the same cast of characters (all from the same party) over and over... And over again.
The Marquis de' Condorcet posited in his paradox that opening elections to a plethora of candidates will yield over a trillion various votes (given today's number of voters). None of them electing a winner by "majority". This defy's Duverger's Law of the best candidate wins. Under RCV you have any amount of decisions and (under Arrow's Impossibilty Theorum) you simply choose the best candidate and rank down to the least favorite to become the winner.
Now I posit to you the reader The Maider Axiom.
You just lost in 2nd place in an election. You may even have lost in 3rd place.
But thanks to RCV every one else who voted for everyone else ranked you as second or third place runner up.
Recounting all those votes (yes, you are voting multiple times) you suddenly become the winner!
You go before the Press to spout your win and the quintessential question is asked:
"... How do account for your win even though you lost in the first round of voting?.."
"... Uhhh.. cuz voters chose me second and third.."
Wow..... Seriously?.. Just... Wow...
Sooo..
When only 10,000 people show up to vote in a district of (say) 200,000 registered voters (Repub/Dem/Lib) and you get chosen 2nd or 3rd and then ranked up to win. How is this offering voters a better choice? How does this open campaigns to more candidates? How does this better represent the electorate?
Oh, but, Wait!
A van just arrived with 1000 ballots just discovered in a school closet four days after polls closed. All of them marked Democrat..
.... Including their rankings..
And now the 2nd or 3rd place loser (Voted..err Ranked) to win gets to represent us...
The Democrat Hegemony
No comments:
Post a Comment