False Claims of Voter Fraud by the GOP, the Tea Party, and other Conservatives, Part I

I sit at the computer writing this post, so angry I have tears in my eyes. 

I have been reading about the claims of voter fraud this election.  They are the same as the unsubstantiated claims of the last election alleging theft of the elections in various races by widespread voter fraud.  These false claims are based on not legitimate, they are not true, they are not accurate, they are not valid.

But they ARE repeated, over and over and over, so as to appear to have substance, so as to persuade they are true.

Last week, I was very angry with a friend of mine, a conservative blogger for writing this. 

"Mitch, in 2008 my mentally incompetent mother at an assisted living facility in St. Paul probably voted. We never had her declared incompetent, but the staff knew she was completely out of it. They also knew she was so afraid of being kicked out of a place she liked she would do whatever the staff person told her to do. She literally didn’t know what day of the week it was let alone who was running for office."

PROBABLY voted?  This fool makes a claim of 'probably' voted, but apparently is too bone ignorant to know that voter registration and actual voting records are that RECORDS.  PUBLIC RECORDS!

As someone who has had two family members who have been afflicted with Alzheimer's, I question ALL of the details in this 'anonymous' recital of the situation.  Apparently the idea of investigation, of obtaining oh......FACTS before making accusations is an unfamiliar idea to the right.  I make that observation based on the utter lack of proof, the total failure of substantiation that has been offered at every step of these claims.  This is no exception; more wild accusations, but no checking, no verification FIRST.  For the record, if someone is proven to have voted illegally, I hope they receive the appropriate legal proceedings, and if convicted, that they receive the appropriate penalty.  But in this state, in all 50 states, there is NO problem with rampant voter fraud and there are no investigations which have supported these claims of voter fraud in numbers sufficient to alter ANY election.  Much less is there ANY indication whatsoever on which to base the allegation that either the Democratic party, or any Union, is organizing, executing, or benefiting from any such voter fraud.  It is the nature of actual efforts to carry out plans with multiple people that information leaks out, that people become disgruntled and tell, that mistakes happen, any and all of which lead to discovery --- at least SOME discovery.  MORE discovery than has emerged from any election so far.

And we are to believe this man allowed his mother to be bullied, terrorized, by the staff, but did not move her, and did not file a complaint of any kind.  A place apparently his mother LIKED?  A place where they just 'knew' how his mother felt? And cruelly exploited that knowledge? Really - based on ........what? Given the dubious value of the other statements made in this, I wouldn't put any faith in that assertion either.

" I was the responsible party. I never changed her voter registration when she moved."

The thing about this sentence which troubles me - you cannot change voter registration for another person.

" Somehow she registered to vote at her new address. "

This is not established from oh.........actual VOTER REGISTRATION RECORDS. This is an assumption based on the presence of widely distributed voter information available throughout any and every assisted living facility in the state --- OLD PEOPLE VOTE MORE THAN ANY OTHER GROUP.  The material to do so is artificial hip deep; it is not proof of voter registration, it is not proof of voting.  It is proof that a lot of old people who are determined to vote live in the building.  But don't let lack of proof stand in the way of a good accusation when you can whip up hysteria on behalf of voter fraud, oh no!

"I found absentee ballot application information in her apartment as well as an I Voted sticker on her walker."

Anyone can get an I Voted Sticker.  The last two general elections and the last primary election, I got handfuls for the asking --- and then I put them on my clothing and on my computer - mostly my computer.  It was fun.  Toddlers accompanying their parents were given them like candy, in hopes, so the election staff told me, of creating "a positive experience for them to help them grow up to be voters like their parents."  The toddlers had stickers, they didn't vote.  I had multiple stickers; I only voted once -- legally.  That an elderly woman has an 'I Voted' sticker on her walker means........someone put an "I Voted" Sticker on her walker.

" I was livid, but it was after the election so there was nothing I could do."

Yes, there was plenty you could do.  You could talk to the staff; you could see if she left the building on election day or any time prior --- staff knows these things.  Staff is paid to know these things, because if mom gets lost because of her mental status, staff is held responsible. Staff knows when the residents leave, staff knows when they come back, and they know with whom residents leave too -- and if they are going somewhere like a voting poll, that is also noted.  And if there was an actual record of mom voting when she should not have voted -- there is that pesky thing A PUBLIC RECORD.  If mom should not have voted, and you could prove that mom voted contrary to law by virtue of being legally incompetent, THEN you would have a basis for this;  BUT NOT FOR SUPPOSITION WITHOUT FACTS, not for guessing, not for being so livid........you were to lazy or too stupid to look it up.  IF Mom ACTUALLY HAD VOTED, the correct thing to do would be to take it to the appropriate District Attorney or the Secretary of State, and complain.  NOT WAIT TWO YEARS UNTIL THE NEXT ELECTION AND COMPLAIN -- ANONYMOUSLY -- TO A CONSERVATIVE BLOGGER TO PUBLICIZE AS IF IT WERE LEGITIMATE WHEN IT IS ANYTHING BUT SO.

"Before senile dementia had set in she adored Norm Coleman but you can bet her vote went to Franken.I suspect a lot of this goes on. After all, SEIU represents a lot of nursing home staff."

Now, it is not evident that Mom voted.  It is certainly not evident that Mom cast a vote for Franken.  It is not evident that SEIU represented the staff in the facility where his mother resided.  And in fact, SEIU represented relatively few facilities in 2008 -- the time frame when this is alleged to have happened, or 'maybe' happened, where this writer believes it happened ALL the TIME.

In my experience with two relatives who had to have their efforts to remain independent cut short involuntarily, the people in the various facilities as my relatives condition worsened, were wonderful.  They did a very difficult and demanding job, for relatively low pay, and did it with kindness and compassion and accorded them every possible dignity.  So for this offensive, inaccurate fool to make such vicious claims about the care his mother received without a more legitimate basis for the criticism deeply offends me.

The explanation offered me in defense of publishing this was that.....it could happen.  It doesn't matter if it DID happen - no need to check it out to see if anything actually happened.

Yeah. No need. Because I am confident it did not happen.

The reason I'm so confident is that voter fraud leaves a trail, it leaves signatures, it leaves witnesses.  IT LEAVES RECORDS.  It is a serious crime, a felony, that puts people in jail, for no effective personal reward.  If this woman HAD voted absentee ballot - there would be HER signature, which could be verified; and there would be witness signatures.  If she voted in the court house, instead of by mail, that information would be available too.  This is NOT a common crime because it has little or no motive compared to the potential penalty, and because it is a potential crime that produces a solid trail of records.  It is no accident, no result of sloppy investigation that is the reason this is such a rare crime.  It is the mechanics of the crime itself that prevents it; it is the method of cross-referencing that has been effective.

IF and WHEN there is something other than this garbage that is offered as a serious case of actual voter fraud, only when it has been investigated and proven is it acceptable to be free with the claims of voter fraud.  This 'maybe' stuff is crap; identify it as supposition, as allegation if you must, but not as fraud.  It insults our very process of representative government.

But THIS is not the worst -- there is more.