Joe Doakes from Como Park writes:<\/p>\n
Liberals (Dog Gone springs to mind) are fond of citing a 2010 study by the Minnesota County Attorneys saying voter fraud isn\u2019t a problem. Here it is for your reading pleasure.<\/p>\n
It wasn\u2019t a study by the County Attorneys. It was a study by two anti-Voter-ID groups who sent a one-page survey to County Attorneys then \u201csummarized\u201d the results.<\/p>\n
County Attorneys reported 1,531 investigations of felony-level illegal voting in the Coleman-Franken election. 66% of those investigations resulted in Not Chargeable decisions, so 1,010 cases were dropped. Of those dropped cases, between 50-80% were dropped because the state couldn\u2019t prove the felon knowingly voted illegally. Apparently, felons think they can vote despite the law saying their conviction bars them, so we let them!<\/p>\n
Of the remaining 24% of investigations that had been completed and charged (10% remained incomplete at the time of the survey), the survey said:<\/p>\n
outcomes were nearly evenly distributed in the following categories: dismissed due to lack of evidence; heard in court; found guilty; and found to commit election fraud<\/p>\n
So by my math, that\u2019s 1531 cases x 90% complete = 1377 complete x 66% Not Chargeable = 909 Not Chargeable and 468 Charged -:- 4 = 117 in each category = 117 per category x 2 categories of convictions = about 234 total convictions.<\/p>\n
Liberals like to claim that a mere 234 convictions for felony voting out of 2.9 million votes case means there is no real problem with voter fraud. Since there is no real problem, conservatives who push Voter ID must have some hidden agenda. Hey, felons are mostly Blacks, aren\u2019t they? And if felons can\u2019t vote, that law falls disproportionately on Blacks. Conservatives must hate Blacks! That\u2019s it \u2013 this whole Voter ID thing is just cover for racisssss laws.<\/p>\n
Except . . . we know for certain there were 1,531 illegal votes that should never have been counted . . . but they were. How many felons voted for the Republican instead of the Democrat? Half? Not likely. Far more likely that the disproportionately Black felon population voted like the Black non-felon population. In 2008, with Barak Obama at the top of the Democrat ticket, it\u2019s far more likely that the vast majority of felons voted for Franken.<\/p>\n
Counting convictions is the wrong measuring stick. Count illegal votes instead. Take 1\/3 of those 1531 felon votes off Coleman\u2019s pile (510) and 2\/3 off Franken\u2019s pile (1021) and suddenly, Franken\u2019s 312 win becomes a 199 loss.<\/p>\n
Felons for Franken, indeed.<\/p>\n
Now, let\u2019s talk about another thing that conservatives worry about but Liberals don\u2019t. In that same election, there were 2,000 votes cast by Dead people, which is plainly impossible and should not have been counted . . . but they were. Whose pile should they come off? Which party historically depends on the \u201cdead vote\u201d to win elections?<\/p>\n
Headlines are easy. Math is hard. Democrats know that which is why they incessantly confuse the issue. That\u2019s why this report matters.<\/p>\n
Felons for Franken. Stiffs for Stuart Smalley. Fair elections. Pick one.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
That’s the big fallacy of the status’ quo’s defenders; it defends on a bit of legal circular logic. \u00a0They only count convictions – but convictions are driven down by the fact that “I didn’t know”\u00a0is\u00a0<\/em>a defense in the vast majority of ineligible voter cases. \u00a0And they ignore the dead voters, and the thousands of provisional ID cards that are returned to the SOS with “nobody at the address”, and the absurdly false addresses (nine people<\/a> listed a small town laundromat as “home”) – because there are no convictions. \u00a0And there never can be. \u00a0Because the system doesn’t find them. \u00a0So there can never be any. And the wheel goes ’round.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Joe Doakes from Como Park writes: Liberals (Dog Gone springs to mind) are fond of citing a 2010 study by the Minnesota County Attorneys saying voter fraud isn\u2019t a problem. Here it is for your reading pleasure. It wasn\u2019t a study by the County Attorneys. It was a study by two anti-Voter-ID groups who sent […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[119],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29604","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-election-integrity"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29604","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=29604"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29604\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":29607,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29604\/revisions\/29607"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=29604"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=29604"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=29604"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}