Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Voting’

Americans Just Sent Democrats a Loud and Clear Message About Impeachment: Don’t Do It


Reported By Karista Baldwin | Published April 28, 2019 at 8:01am

Democratic leaders are in a tough spot as their base pushes for the president’s impeachment while most Americans oppose it.

A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll found that the majority of Americans are against impeaching the president following the publication of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report. According to the poll, around 37 percent of Americans are pro-impeachment, a slightly lower figure than last month. Meanwhile, 56 percent of Americans oppose impeachment.

Breaking the results into parties: 62 percent of Democrats responded to the poll in support of impeachment, while 87 percent of Republican respondents opposed to it. Among independents, 36 percent support impeaching the president, showing a drop in the group’s support for impeachment since before the release of the Mueller report, according to January’s Washington Post/ABC News poll. Poll respondents who strongly oppose impeachment also outnumber those who strongly support, with strong opposition at 49 percent and strong support at 29 percent.

According to ABC News, this shows a 10-point rise since August in those strongly opposed to impeachment. It also reflects an 11-point decrease since August in those strongly in favor of impeachment.

The results reveal a dilemma for Democratic politicians at the moment: keeping their increasingly leftist base happy without alienating the majority of Americans who are against impeachment. The impeachment issue has already shown itself to be divisive within the Democratic party. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, both Democratic presidential nominee contenders, are placing their bets on pro-impeachment voters. Both senators have publicly urged Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump.

“I believe Congress should take the steps towards impeachment,” Harris said, reported by CNN. “I believe that we need to get rid of this President.”

Warren has also taken a firm stance in support of impeaching Trump.

“The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty,” Warren wrote on Twitter last week. “That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.”

Meanwhile, old-school Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has taken it upon herself do damage control for her party. Her more pragmatic approach to impeachment has shown itself to be at odds with her younger Democratic colleagues.

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country,” Pelosi told The Washington Post in March. “And he’s just not worth it.”

The public’s views on impeachment may be backing Democrats into a lose-lose situation. While Pelosi is working to appeal to the largest group of Americans on the issue of impeachment, she’s risking angering more leftist Democrats.

And while Harris and Warren cite the Mueller report as grounds for impeachment, 58 percent of Americans say that the results of the report had no effect on their view of the Trump administration, according to the Washington Post/ABC poll. In fact, 46 percent of the poll respondents said they won’t be taking the report into consideration when they vote in the 2020 presidential election.

Democratic nominee hopefuls may have to choose between upsetting their more extreme leftist supporters or alienating the general populace, who obviously aren’t eager to initiate impeachment. Either way could cost Democratic contenders their party’s nomination.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Karista Baldwin studied constitutional law, politics and criminal justice at the University of Dallas and the University of Texas at Dallas.

‘Ballot harvesting’ – a sure-fire way for Dems to win


Reported by Chad Groening, Jody Brown (OneNewsNow.com) | Monday, December 3, 2018

California mail-in ballotsA conservative columnist agrees with House Speaker Paul Ryan in questioning the legitimacy of California’s vote-counting process.

It’s called “ballot harvesting” – and it’s illegal in most states. But the practice was legal for the first time in California this year. It allows a third party to collect completed “vote by mail” ballots from voters and then hand them over to election officials. The legislation states that:

“… A vote by mail voter who is unable to return the ballot [by mail or in person] may designate any person to return the ballot to the elections official who issued the ballot, to the precinct board at a polling place or vote center within the state, or to a vote by mail ballot dropoff location within the state ….” (Assembly Bill 1921)

What’s your reaction to ‘ballot harvesting’?
Just another page in Democrats’ playbookNot familiar with it but sounds legitCalif. deserves it cuz Dems are in chargeThere’s a reason it’s illegal in most statesLeaves door wide open for voter fraudEnsures all votes are counted

That new law has caused Ryan, the outgoing Speaker of the House, to question the legitimacy of several California congressional races last month, adding to the contention of many Republicans that the state’s election procedures are flawed. “We had a lot of wins that night, and three weeks later we lost basically every contested California race. This election system they have? I can’t begin to understand what ballot harvesting is,” Ryan told The Washington Post.

Robert Knight, a conservative columnist for The Washington Times and OneNewsNow, says Ryan has legitimate concerns. “There’s long been a clear pattern across the country that when ballots are counted after a close election, the Democrats invariably win. Somehow they come up with the ballots,” he points out.

Robert KnightThe most suspicious case in California, according to Knight, was in the 39th Congressional District, where Republican Young Kim was vying to become the first Korean-American woman elected to Congress.

“She was up by 14 percent on election night – and then they started all the ballot counting,” he describes. “And a week later they declared the Democrat the winner, Gil Cisneros, by 3,000 votes.

“Now I’m just wondering why it always goes this way. It never goes the other way. Whenever you see a ballot counting, the Democrats always seem to harvest enough votes to get over the top. And so when Paul Ryan suspects something fishy, a lot of us feel the same way.”

Washington Times columnist Shawn Steel puts it this way regarding the ultimate result of the Kim-Cisneros race: “There’s no evidence of ballot box shenanigans. No need. Democrats know it’s easier to erode voter integrity laws than to stuff ballot boxes …. Merciless and unsparing, California Democrats have systematically undermined California’s already-weak voter protection laws to guarantee permanent one-party rule.”

Steel argues his case by detailing how California Democrats have expanded voter eligibility for non-citizens, inmates, and felons, and instituting “motor voter” registration, pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, automatic mailing of absentee ballots to every voter, conditional ballots, ballots accepted up to a week after Election Day, and second chance for rejected ballots.

Dear America: It’s Called ‘BALLOT HARVESTING’ And It’s How The Left STOLE Several Elections

Ever heard of ‘ballot harvesting’? Here’s what you need to know. Notice that a whole bunch of seats that were tilting Red on election night flipped blue a week or so later? What’s up with that? And why was that trend only in one direction?

Carmine Sabia of The Federalist Papers had some interesting things to say about that. Here’s a taste.

California’s most staunchly ‘red’ district went blue in at the Midterms. But why? Was it the ‘blue wave’? Did Republicans stay home? Was there any ‘funny business’ behind the scenes? (Heaven forbid anyone call it ‘monkey business’ anymore.)

This is where ‘ballot harvesting comes into play’.

As the polls closed on election day last month, six California Republican House candidates, including Representatives Dana Rohrabacher, Steve Knight, and Mimi Walters, were ahead in their respective races. However, as the absentee and provisional ballots rolled in over the intervening weeks, all six lost to their Democratic opponents.

The case of Korean-American GOP candidate Young Kim was one of the most prominent examples. On election night, Kim held an 8,000 vote lead over her Democratic opponent Gil Cisneros, and even attended freshman orientation in Washington, D.C. before watching her lead, and her victory, slowly evaporate over the subsequent weeks.

What is it?

“We beat Republicans on the ground, fair and square,” said Katie Merrill, a Democratic consultant deeply involved in November campaigns. “Many of the field plans included (ballot harvesting) as an option to deliver voters or their ballots” to the polls.

Those efforts involved identifying voters who might support Democratic candidates and ignoring those who wouldn’t.

In one Orange County household, for example, both the husband and wife were longtime Republicans, said Dale Neugebauer, a veteran Republican consultant. Democratic volunteers came by the house four times, each time asking to speak only with their 18-year-old daughter, a no-party-preference voter, and asking if she wanted them to pick up her signed and completed ballot.

That’s a perfect example of the “thorough and disciplined” ground game the Democrats used, said Merrill.

“We were not wasting time talking to people who weren’t going to vote for Democrats,” she said.
Source: DailyCaller

It’s not just an offer to drive the voters to the polls, it’s an offer to drop off their ballots. Nope, no way THAT could be misused, is there? There’s no way you could misplace the ‘wrong’ party’s ballots on the way to the polls, right? Or slip in a few dubious ones with the stack of legitimate ones?

So, was this a slick way to make those ‘grey areas’ work in their favor that our side has to implement? Or is it something that needs to be nipped in the bud?

Millennials’ struggle with the faith-politics mix


Reported by Bill Bumpas, Steve Jordahl (OneNewsNow.com) | Monday, November 5, 2018

millennials votingEvangelical Millennials are grappling with how to integrate their faith and their politics, as highlighted by a recent article in The New York Times.

Six young Christians, all raised in evangelical homes and now breaking with their parents over how to deal with issues such as same-sex “marriage,” immigration, and race. Those are the profiles the Times chose to highlight out of about 1,500 responses when young evangelicals were asked about the relationship between their faith and their politics:

“Here’s what we learned,” says the Times. “Young evangelicals are questioning the typical ties between evangelicalism and Republican politics. Many said it had caused schisms within their families. And many described a real struggle with an administration they see as hostile to immigrants, Muslims, L.G.B.T.Q. people, and the poor. They feel it reflects a loss of humanity, which conflicts with their spiritual call.”

Evangelical apologist Dr. Alex McFarland says those same discussions are going on in tens of thousands of Christian home across the country.

“[These young evangelicals] do love Jesus. I don’t dispute that,” says McFarland. “But they don’t understand that Christian love doesn’t mean having open borders. Christian love does not mandate that we have universal healthcare. Christian love does not mean that we allow a secular government – or any government – to redistribute wealth.”

McFarland

And he says it certainly doesn’t mean questioning clear biblical teaching on sexuality.

McFarland – founder and president of Truth for a New Generation – says if these young people want to wear the evangelical mantle, they have to have a high view of scripture. “Young people also need to have maybe a little bit more robust understanding of the fine delineations between church and government, personal piety, and the responsibility of good, ordered civil government,” he adds.

Having spoken in more than 1,500 different churches in North America and internationally, he says churches could be doing more to teach these young people what it means to honor God with both their faith and their politics.

“Seventy-four percent of parishioners want their clergy to speak to moral, social, political issues and how does the Word of God speak about today’s issues,” he notes. “In evangelical churches, roughly only 12 percent do.”

Faith fuels voting decisions

If McFarland is right that churches could be doing more to educate young voters, some of that slack is being picked up by groups attempting to educate Millennials on college campuses. As part of this election season, a campaign has been under way on more than 100 Christian college campuses to encourage hundreds of thousands of students to cast a ballot.

The “Because I Care” voting initiative was collaboratively launched by two organizations with the same goal of encouraging Christians to vote: Im2moro and My Faith Votes.

Audrea Decker, president of Im2moro, says the effort provided Christian universities and Bible college students with all they need to register to vote, request an absentee ballot, and access a full non-partisan sample ballot and candidate information to be fully informed of each candidate’s positions.

Decker tells OneNewsNow that “Because I Care” is the message they want to send to the next generation.

“You don’t need to vote because you like a particular candidate or a particular party,” she shares. “You vote because of your faith and because you care about your community, your nation, and bringing God’s truth, his proven biblical principles, into the public square – because that is where it’s best for our society and our culture and our world today.

“And so it’s really our faith that fuels our political involvement – and we do it not for ourselves, but for others in the way that policies affect people in our country today.”

Decker says 117 Christian colleges have utilized the “Because I Care” materials on campus, reaching a student population of 325,000. In 2016, the group’s materials made in onto 41 campuses and reached 135,000 students.

 

Rigged for Democrats? Voters Purged from Rolls Will Get Ballots Counted Anyway


Reported By Kara Pendleton | November 1, 2018 at 2:21pm

One of the wonderful things about the United States is the right to vote. Because people move and die, voter rolls need to be purged from time to time to help keep things honest and accurate. In some places, to help with this, voters who haven’t been to the polls in a number of years will be purged from the voter rolls. But a federal court ruling just made that more difficult.

According to The Associated Press, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court on Wednesday ordered election officials in the crucial swing state of Ohio to accept provisional ballots from those purged from the voting rolls between 2011 and 2015 if they show up to cast a ballot for this year’s midterms — either as part of early voting or on Election Day itself.

The voters were purged only after failing to vote for six years, and failing to respond to a notice informing them they would be taken off the rolls for inactivity if they didn’t answer.

However, the AP reported, the appeals court agreed with advocacy groups challenging the purge on the grounds that the letters informing voters about it “were too vague on letting recipients know the consequences of not responding.”

According to the Washington Examiner, “the ruling will allow provisional ballots submitted by voters purged from the rolls between 2011 and 2015 to be taken into account in the state’s early voting — as long as they still live in the same county of their last registration and have not been disqualified from voting due to felony conviction, mental incapacity, or death.”

It’s nice to know death is still a disqualifier from voting. Still, the ruling means that, despite the fact they had made no effort to respond to the letter or vote in six years, voters who were purged from the rolls now can vote anyway. Rules don’t matter. It might not come as a surprise to know that, according to the Washington Examiner, the groups challenging the purge included liberal outfits like the Ohio chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and the progressive “public policy organization” Demos.

With that kind of context, it’s not hard to guess which party is likely to benefit the most from low-information, low-engagement voters suddenly deciding to take an interest in the political life of their country. The ruling is a win for Democrats.

In essence, the liberals’ appeal was pushing the narrative that voters who were purged lacked the intelligence to understand the letters that were sent out or to inquire about them. This is the same kind of argument liberals have pushed about voter ID laws: That some groups are too low-I.Q. to know how to do what everyone else does, which is to get identification to function in modern American society.

So what is the big deal if purged voters can now vote? Tom Fitton, president of legal watchdog group Judicial Watch weighed in on the other aspect of the Ohio process that the 6th Circuit’s ruling did approve of — the basic principle that voter rolls need to be purged for accuracy.

His statement answers that question.

“Great news: another federal court turned aside a leftist attempt to dirty up the voting rolls and undermine clean elections,” Fitton stated. “Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections.

“We will keep pushing in the courts to make sure other states take reasonable steps to make sure the names of dead people and people who have moved away are removed from election rolls. After comparing national census data to voter roll information, Judicial Watch estimates that there are 3.5 million more names on state voter rolls than there are citizens of voting age.”

Even though the court ruled that the purge itself was not the problem, you’d never know that based on a statement from the Demos, which claimed Ohio voters who were purged from the rolls had been “unlawfully disenfranchised.”

So if voting in prior elections, a rule that has been upheld as constitutional, suddenly doesn’t matter, and if failing to respond to a notice that states you may be removed from the voting rolls if you don’t vote or respond also doesn’t matter, what exactly is the criterion for voters in the mind of Democrats? Breathing? Apparently, following the rules everyone else can follow isn’t a requirement.

The elephant in the room, of course, is that the left fighting this hard to get around the rules may indicate a belief on their part that the voters who were purged would vote Democrat. By getting those ballots accepted regardless of the rules, this ruling opens the door for the kind of dirty election the voter purge rules were meant to prevent.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Specializing in news, politics and human interest stories, Kara Pendleton has been a professional writer and author since 2002. One of her proudest professional moments was landing an interview that even mainstream media couldn’t get.

Dems Hate GA Voter Law Because They Don’t Think Minorities Can Write Own Names: Hunter


Reported By Bryan Chai | October 15, 2018 at 11:10am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/dems-hate-ga-voter-law-dont-think-minorities-can-write-names-hunter/

Two women, one white and one black, vote at voting booths. An effort to crack down on potential voter fraud in Georgia is being criticized by Democratic groups as “voter suppression.” (Shutterstock)

The Democratic party, and the far left in general, like to paint themselves as the party of tolerance and enlightenment. Obviously, we all know that’s not the case. But every once in a while, the Democratic Party reminds us of just how hypocritical they truly are. The best part is, they don’t even realize they’re doing it.

Case in point, just look at the hysteria surrounding Georgia’s “exact match” law.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the “exact match” law simply states that to be acceptable, a voter’s registration application must exactly match a driver’s license, state ID card or Social Security records.

That hardly seems controversial. After all, voting is such an important American right which helps shape our country, it’d make sense to make sure that all information is accurate and legitimate.

Democrats and the left don’t see it that way. They essentially find that law racist, apparently.

“Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp has been a driving force behind multiple voter suppression efforts throughout the years in Georgia,” said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law said in a statement through Common Dreams.

It didn’t take long for Clarke to throw in a veiled accusation of racism.

“If there is one person in Georgia who knows that the ‘Exact Match’ scheme has a discriminatory impact on minority voters, it’s Brian Kemp because we successfully sued him over a mirror policy in 2016,” Clarke said.

Kemp, who is running for Georgia governor in the upcoming midterms in November, has frequently heard similar complaints from his Democratic opponent Stacey Abrams.

Abrams recently called Kemp “a remarkable architect of voter suppression” according to the The Associated Press.

Apparently, it’s now racist to try and safeguard our Constitutional Republic from voter fraud.

Clarke and Abrams seem to be glossing over the little fact that voters who have been flagged by the “exact match” law can still vote, as the Journal-Constitution notes. Oftentimes, the hold-ups when it comes to “exact match” issues stems from something simple like a missing hyphen, discrepancies between married and maiden names or even clerical government errors.

Even while those issues are pending, flagged voters can vote. Assuming a voter is not actively trying to commit voter fraud, the “exact match” law is a minor inconvenience at worst.

Not only are Democrats being intentionally misleading about the severity of the impact of “exact match,” think about the message they’re sending.

Derek Hunter, an author and contributor to The Daily Caller, summed it up best.

“Georgia Democrats are complaining that the state’s ‘exact match’ law, meaning people have to write their own name accurately on registration forms, is racist,” Hunter wrote on Twitter. “In other words, liberals don’t think minorities can write their own names. That’s pretty racist.”

That scathing take couldn’t be more true. Democrats are no strangers to racial double-standards, but these particular claims of racism go beyond that. At best, it shows a distinct misunderstanding of law, which is a damning sign for a political party. At worst, it shows a distinct willingness to lie and manipulate racial minorities no matter the cost, which should be even more damning.

Based on the Democrats’ track record, I’m inclined to believe the latter.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

If I could have two television shows and two movies on a desert island, they’d be “The Office,” (the American version) “Breaking Bad,” “The Dark Knight,” and “Die Hard.” I love sports, video games, comics, movies and television. And I guess my job, too.

The Value of the Vote


waving flagAuthored by 

URL of the original posting site: http://ipatriot.com/the-value-of-the-vote/

people-vote-hands-raised-crowd

Why is it so important to vote, and is it a moral decision? Sort of.

The constitution declares that this is a nation under the watchful eye of the Creator of the universe. As the author of all creation, He established this nation as a representative republic composed of a free and independent people, and as such, He gave us the right to choose who will represent us through our voting. As a free people, we have a right to choose not to fulfill this responsibility to our government, be disobedient to God, and to suffer the consequences. If we do not vote, then we can not complain about the outcome.

In the past, we have elected a crook and a cheat (Nixon), two Philanderers (Kennedy and Clinton) and none of the presidents for the last century have been particularly religious or even moral, and we have elected them to be leaders and presidents, and not priests or prophets. Our obligation, this election is to determine who will best represent all the people. Let us look at only four major issues that we are all concerned with, the preservation of our form of government, the preservation of our sovereignty, the preservation of our security, and the preservation and advancement of our economy.

Preservation of our form of government – The third branch of our government, The Judiciary, needs to be composed of strict constitutionalists who are not trying to be legislators as well. If we need to change laws, we have The Legislative branch, voted in as representatives of the people to do this. Changing laws is not the judge’s mandate. We do not need to change or reinterpret the framework, and it does not need to be modernized. It works perfectly well the way it is.

Preservation of our sovereignty – Immigration is out of control, and it has been since way before Ronald Reagan. Why are we the only nation on earth that doesn’t even try to control who comes here? Just try to go to Mecca. The solution is simple. Close the borders, then control who we want in. Implementing that is not so simple, but it is necessary to try.

Preservation of our security – Throughout history, there has never been a less imperialistic country than the US. Americans have a desire for peace and a distaste for war, but it is insane not to fight like we are at war with those who war against us. As the most powerful country in the world, we need to fight to win and fight to eliminate future wars. The war in the Middle East has cost the lives of over 370,000 people, over 7million have lost their homes, and we have spent over 61 billion dollars. It is about time to put an end to this swiftly and decisively.

Preservation and advancement of our economy – For the past 8 years the economy has slumped along as the worst recovery in modern times and the government has had no effect on a recovery that naturally would bounce back after all this time, without the government interfering. The do-nothing political posture needs to stop regulating businesses to death and chasing them out of the country with oppressive taxes. Stop this “fair share” mantra and do what is necessary for us all to prosper. If we are arguing about splitting up a piece of pie, bake more pies and we will all have more.

Yes, there are more concerns, but if any candidate will even attempt to tackle just these four issues that the present government has ignored and done nothing about, then it doesn’t matter if they are a saint or a sinner, a professional politician or a novice, or even if you like them. We need to get rid of the do-nothing government we have and elect someone who will at least try to bring this country back on a winning track, winning for all Americans.

ABC News Interview Goes All Wrong… Dem Delegate Goes Rogue on Live TV


waving flagBy: John Falkenberg on July 27, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/watch-abc-news-interview/

In a massive embarrassment to Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton, a delegate to the Democrat National Convention announced on the air that he would not be voting for Hillary come the fall because of her dishonesty.

Speaking with ABC reporter Jonathan Karl in Philadelphia, where the convention was being held, he dropped the bombshell: “As far as president, I will not be voting for Hillary Clinton.”

As you can imagine, Karl was shocked.

“You are a delegate to the Democratic National Convention and you are not going to be voting for Hillary Clinton. Why?” he asked.

And as one might expect, the delegate mentioned her gross mishandling of her private email server scandal as evidence of her dishonesty and impetus for voting against her.

“Well, it’s really just as simple as I feel as if she hasn’t been honest with us, and the fact of the matter is, she said for over a year there (was) no classified information sent or received on her private email server, and the FBI said that’s not true,” he said.

“She wouldn’t even call it an investigation,” he added. “She called it a security review. If she’s not even going to be honest about the nature of that investigation, what else can we expect? I have no love for (GOP nominee Donald) Trump, but I also have no love for Hillary.”

It’s nice to see some delegates with a sound head still on their shoulders, even at the Democrat convention.

Should he be able to withstand the pressure to vote for Hillary Clinton, and if GOP nominee Donald Trump isn’t an option, he will almost certainly fall to one of the two significant party candidates — Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party nominee Jill Stein.

Or, he might just stay home. We’re OK with any of those options.

fight Picture1 true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: