Voter Fraud Deniers Resurface Just in Time for the Midterm Elections

The left insists that those who do not buy into its agenda regarding global warming are “deniers” – ignoramuses who refuse to acknowledge facts thanks to a political agenda. But when it comes to voter fraud, it is the left that lives in the realm of fantasy. Rachel Maddow, the heavyweight over at the pseudointellectual sewage tank of MSNBC – complete with nerd glasses for everyone but Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz! – says that voter fraud doesn’t exist.

“The scourge of voter fraud,” Maddow writes at, “is largely imaginary.” Her source for this extraordinary claim: a study by Loyola University Law School professor Justin Levitt, who claimed that he had found just 31 instances of voter fraud out of “more than 1 billion ballots” cast. Of course, Levitt’s study looked only at in-person voter fraud. It didn’t look at absentee voting; in the 2010 midterms, 15.6 percent of all ballots cast were absentee. As Philip Bump of the Washington Post acknowledged, “there have been examples of fraud, including fraud perpetrated through the use of absentee ballots severe enough to force new elections at the state level.” And the study itself looked only at active legal investigations into voter fraud – a dubious measure, given the lackadaisical enforcement of voter fraud generally.

As Hans Von Spakovsky has written, voter fraud is quite real. In the Wall Street Journal this week, Von Spakovsky wrote:

In the past few months, a former police chief in Pennsylvania pleaded guilty to voter fraud in a town-council election. That fraud had flipped the outcome of a primary election. Former Connecticut legislator Christina Ayala has been indicted on 19 charges of voter fraud, including voting in districts where she didn’t reside. (She hasn’t entered a plea.) A Mississippi grand jury indicted seven individuals for voter fraud in the 2013 Hattiesburg mayoral contest, which featured voting by ineligible felons and impersonation fraud. A woman in Polk County, Tenn., was indicted on a charge of vote-buying—a practice that the local district attorney said had too long “been accepted as part of life” there.

In all likelihood, Obamacare would not be the law of the land today if not for voter fraud: the 60th Senate vote for that monstrosity came from newly-elected Senator Al Franken (D-MN), who won his election against Republican Norm Coleman by 312 votes in a race in which 1,099 felons allegedly illegally cast their ballots (opponents claimed that they didn’t do so purposefully, or that the number of felons voting was significantly less). Of course, Coleman wasn’t the only Republican to lose a major race thanks to voter fraud – in 2004, Republican Dino Rossi lost the gubernatorial race to Democrat Christine Gregoire by 129 votes, and more than 1,600 illegal votes had been cast, including hundreds of felons. The courts decided that since there was no evidence to suggest which way those votes went, however, they couldn’t give the election to Rossi.

Political scientists Jesse Richman and David Earnest wrote in the Washington Post recently, explaining, “Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010,” a percentage “large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections.” Media members claimed that the results were skewed, and that incorrect response to questions about citizenship status played a role in those numbers.

It is no coincidence that those most likely to suggest that voter fraud is purely imaginary are proponents of Democratic nominees. Maddow’s fellow MSNBC host, Al Sharpton, cheered on and even hugged voter fraud convict Melowese Richardson in March – Richardson worked at the polls in 2012 and voted both early and often for President Obama.

Voter fraud has long been a part of American life – local elections throughout American history have fallen victim to various schemes by power players. For anyone to oppose common sense measures designed to stop such voter fraud smacks of friendliness toward such fraud.

Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the new book, The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). He is also Editor-in-Chief of TruthRevolt.orgFollow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.


Source: Breitbart Feed

Scott Walker up 7 in Wisconsin

It might be too early to describe this as the epilogue of the Scott Walker vs. Chris Christie funding spat from earlier in the week, but the final Marquette University poll of the Wisconsin gubernatorial race has Walker leaping out to a commanding 7-point lead over Democrat Mary Burke.  The two candidates were dead even in the same poll two weeks ago.  This puts Walker’s lead outside both the poll’s margin of error, and the percentage of undecided voters remaining in the race.  

Those figures use the most reliable “likely voter” screen; the more vague “registered voters” screen cuts Walker’s lead to 1 percent, so a thorough tea-leaf reading would have to account for the possibility that some unprecedented surge of registered voters who haven’t voted in the past few elections could roll into this race at the last minute and shake things up.  

It’s interesting to note that Republican voter enthusiasm seems considerably higher in Wisconsin, despite the desperation of Democrats and their Big Labor bosses to take one last shot at bringing Walker down: “In the current poll, 93 percent of Republicans say they are certain to vote, while 82 percent of Democrats and 75 percent of Independents say the same.  Two weeks ago 82 percent of Republicans, and 80 percent of both Democrats and independents, said that they were certain to vote. By comparison, in the final Marquette Law School Poll before the 2012 gubernatorial recall election, 92 percent of Republicans, 77 percent of Democrats and 84 percent of independents said that they were certain to vote.”

Those looking to get to the bottom of whatever went down between Walker and Wisconsin Republicans, versus Christie and the Republican Governors Association he heads, may wonder if Walker’s camp had internal polling that showed a comparably large lead, and were complaining about RGA neglect to set up a post-election narrative in which Governor Walker doesn’t have to share too much of the credit for his re-election.  This polling swing could also be a pleasant surprise for Walker’s team, given how close the race has been.  If his lead holds through Election Day, it will be interesting to go back and piece together the reason why so many voters broke for the incumbent Republican so suddenly, and so late in the game.  Perhaps it was nothing more complicated that a fair number of Wisconsin residents tuning in the election for the first time, realizing that the Governor was in trouble, and resolving to vote for him because Burke didn’t close the deal as a replacement.

Update: I doubt this story broke in time to account for Walker’s surge, but it’s not good news for Mary Burke that the one endlessly touted entry on her resume, her time as an executive for the Trek bicycle company her family owns, has been called into question… as other Trek employees are coming forward to say she was essentially fired by her own brother for ineptitude.  

It’s a fairly brutal late hit, from a combination of named and anonymous sources (the latter claiming they fear retaliation from the Burke family for speaking up), difficult to Burke to deal with because the privately-held company prefers not to disclose specific sales and earning figures.  

Source: Breitbart Feed

British Energy Minister: Government Has Slowed Global Warming

Baroness Sandip Verma, a member of the House of Lords and a minister in the Department of Energy and Climate Change, said global warming has slowed because of measures taken by the government. Verma’s remarks came in response to Viscount Ridley, a Conservative peer who has questioned government efforts to slow global warming. 

Ridley asked: “The fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change has confirmed in the same words that there has been a hiatus in global warming for at least the last 15 years. Would you give us the opinion of your scientific advisers as to when this hiatus is likely to end?”

Verma answered, “You raise a couple of issues that we would dispute in a longer debate, but what we do recognize is that there a change in weather patterns happening across the globe, that climate change is occurring. It may have slowed down, but that is a good thing. It could well be that some of the measures we are taking today is helping that to occur.”

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a creation of the U.N. in 1988, issued a report last April asserting that it was “95 per cent” certain that climate change is man-made, that sea levels have risen by seven inches since 1901, and that the sea levels would rise 10 to 32 more inches by the 22nd century.

Yet that same report conceded world temperatures have not risen noticeably in the last 15 years. That estimate was further strengthened by evidence gleaned by Ross McKitrick from the University of Guelph in Canada, who examined  average land and ocean temperatures from the Hadcrut4 temperature series all the way back to 1850. Hadcrut4 is derived from mixing sea surface temperatures with land surface air temperatures. McKitrick said global warming has been at a plateau since 1990.

The IPCC is suspect; its 2007 assessment was riddled with errors, including the assertion that Himalayas glaciers would disappear by 2035. 

Source: Breitbart Feed

Oxford Prof Shreds Government’s Green Energy Policy

An Oxford University Professor has torn the UK government’s energy policy to shreds in his appearance before the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee.

Speaking to the Lords yesterday, Professor Dieter Helm said that the “Miliband-Huhne-Davey” policy (referring to the last three energy secretaries), which is based on an assumption that fossil fuel prices would rise, was “dramatically wrong”. (h/t to Bishop Hill, where the full exchange of views can be seen).

The Lords Committee gathered to hear evidence from a range of energy experts including power companies and the National Grid to determine whether there was indeed a risk of the lights going out this winter, as has been widely reported (including on Breitbart London).

Opening the second session, Professor Helm gave his name and title, before delivering a short two minute speech lambasting the governance of energy policy in recent times.

“It is a quite extraordinary state of affairs for a major industrialised economy to find itself even debating whether there is a possibility that the margins may not be sufficient of electricity to guarantee supply,” he said.

“If it was achieving carbon objectives and if it was producing low prices there might be some consolation. The wholesale price in Great Britain is twice that of northern Europe and on a CO2 front we’ve been switching from gas to burn as much coal as possible, and our emissions are actually rising on a production basis and of course on a carbon consumption basis which is the basis that matters for decarbonisation.

“For a major industrial economy to fail on one of the three objectives is a serious problem. But to fail on security and on competitiveness of price, and on decarbonisation is a sad state of affairs. And it’s even sadder in the context of which the problem isn’t fundamentally particularly difficult.

“It’s ultimately about having enough power stations and enough wires to supply the needs of the population. It’s a problem that’s been with us for a century. Many other countries solve these problems and it’s, as I say, rather sad that we’ve got to this particular point.”

The Committee probed the professor on a range of aspects including “resilience”, which the Professor explained was a matter not just of physical capability, but also the price which people are asked to pay for the energy supplied. If prices rise above people’s desire or ability to pay, people simply “turn themselves off, as happened in California”, he pointed out.

“The kit is there. If the will is there to do it, and the expertise and capacity of the grid I think is up to it, they will manage to make supply equal demand. The question is: how much higher will the price go as a result, and how long will Britain carry on having such high wholesale prices with all the consequences there are for British industry and also consumers?” he asked.

When questioned about medium term threats to resilience, Prof Helm was particularly scathing. Pointing to the fact that “the commodity super-cycle is over” and that gas, coal and oil prices are all falling, he blasted energy secretary Ed Davey, saying “We have a policy with the secretary of state repeatedly reminds us is based on the idea that gas prices are rising and volatile. Well, they’re falling and the volatility is something that we don’t want to protect customers from. [That is, downwards volatility is good for customers who want the benefit of cheaper prices immediately].

“Should we worry about resilience of fuel supplies? No, I don’t think so. The world is awash with gas. Unconventional gas is popping up all over the place America is no longer importing, plenty of supplies around, plenty more being discovered.

“The one medium term ‘risk’ that I would pay much less attention to but clearly the government thinks they should pay much more attention to is whether or not we’ll get enough supplies of fossil fuels. We have enough fossil fuels in the world to fry the planet many times over.”

He then set his target wider, laying into the “Miliband-Huhne-Davey policy”, so called “because it’s very consistent through that period”, as a whole. Successive energy secretaries had based their policy on the assumption that fossil fuel prices would continue to rise, making renewables comparatively cheaper by the 2020s and allowing subsidies to fall away; an assumption that the professor said  “[doesn’t have] any part in energy policy.

“That fossil fuel prices are going to go up. … That’s an outcome of the market, not a policy assumption to make. … If your bet turns out to be dramatically wrong, you’re going to have lots of technologies which are ‘out of the market’ for some considerable period to come. We will have to subsidise those technologies right through the 2020s and beyond. 

“This knowledge that politicians have, that politicians know what the winners are, we’ve been there so many times before.  It usually turns out badly and it has done this time.”


Source: Breitbart Feed

Bill Clinton to Rally for Ami Bera in California Congressional Race

With less than one week until the midterm elections, Former President Bill Clinton will be in Sacramento County on Wednesday, rallying support behind Democrat Rep. Ami Bera who is seeking reelection in California’s 7th district.

Clinton will be appearing with Bera and Rep. John Garamendi of the 3rd congressional district on the campus of University of California, Davis, just as he did in 2012, according to the Sacramento Bee. The event will be taking place at 12:30 pm.

The 7th district has proven to be one of the most contentious and expensive House races in the nation, with spending exceeding $10.5 million to date, notes the Bee.

Clinton is seen as a favored alternative for many Democrats, who have been desperately attempting to distance themselves from President Obama out of fear he will drag down their chances at winning reelection.

Bera is finding his reelection particularly challenging against former Republican Rep. Doug Ose, a businessman who served six years in Congress until 2005, when he stepped down to honor a term-limit pledge, the Bee notes. Ose defeated a Tea Party opponent in the June primary.

Garamendi, who served as Clinton’s deputy Secretary of the Interior between 1995-1998, is being challenged by Republican Assemblyman Dan Logue. Garamendi, like Bera, is in his first term.

Source: Breitbart Feed