AIM Claims Voting Rights Are 'The Voting Version Of Reparations For Slavery'

Yesterday, Accuracy In Media published a report by James Simpson alleging that voter fraud is a massive, “existential threat to our American Republic,” and the result of Democratic election tampering. Like other right-wing reports on voter fraud, the article is highly speculative and fails to offer any actual evidence of large-scale fraud.

In fact, legislative “fixes” to combat the non-existent voter fraud epidemic recently lost in courts in PennsylvaniaArkansas and Wisconsin due to the inability to find any actual evidence of voter fraud.

The only “proof” of voter fraud that Simpson lists is college students voting in the state where they attend school, which is legal, and the findings of the extremely unreliable “crosscheck” system, which checks to see if voters in more than one state have similar names and birthdays. He writes said that the campaign to replace the electoral college with a national popular vote and efforts to restore felons’ right to vote are will also increase voter fraud, mainly because he thinks such steps will benefit Democrats.

Simpson alleges that “Democrats’ attitude toward voter fraud is the voting version of reparations for slavery,” pointing to a case in Port Chester, New York, where the town switched to a new voting method following a court case on lack of Latino representation in government.

He claims that “Hispanics were allowed to cast six votes” in Port Chester’s council races.

However, the method known as cumulative voting (where each voter can cast multiple votes, including more than one to the same candidate), applied to all voters, not just Hispanic voters as Simpson suggests.

The Brennan Center notes that “the Department of Justice filed a complaint alleging Port Chester’s at-large system of electing its board of trustees diluted the voting strength of its Hispanic citizens” in 2006, under the Bush administration.

Democrats’ attitude toward voter fraud is the voting version of reparations for slavery. Some Democrats have even said that because minorities and the poor have little influence, “extraordinary measures (for example, stretching the absentee ballot or registration rules) are required to compensate.” Democrat election officials do this all the time, and a form of it has actually become official Justice Department policy in its effort to boost Hispanic representation.

Hispanic voters in Port Chester, New York were allowed to use something called “cumulative voting” in an election for village trustees. There were six trustee seats and Hispanics were allowed to cast six votes in any way they chose, for example, casting one vote for each of six candidates or all six for one candidate. Cumulative voting has also been used to elect a school board in Amarillo, Texas, the county commission in Chilton County, Alabama, and the city council in Peoria, Illinois.

Having rationalized the moral high ground with their “voter suppression” charge—Democrats go on the warpath. In recent years this has involved lawsuits, organized slander and a nationwide campaign to resist election reform. Under the Obama presidency, it has also included using federal agencies to attack private citizens and organizations.



So who is doing the suppressing? By thwarting efforts to clean up the voting process, Obama and the Democrats are suppressing every single legitimate vote stolen by voter fraud. By cheating conservatives of their ability to organize and communicate with the voting public, Obama’s IRS is denying their rights to free speech. By denying conservatives’ right to educate the public, for example, regarding candidates’ records on Obamacare, the IRS is preventing voters from being informed. Obama and the Democrats are not battling voter suppression, they have institutionalized it.



Voter fraud, and the corrupt political infrastructure that facilitates, or at best ignores it, is an existential threat to our American Republic. The only answer is to elect principled conservative leaders willing to recognize and confront this threat.

Filed Under

Organizations:

Accuracy in Media