While Republicans see the administration of elections as a non-partisan process to be performed in accordance with the rule of law, we have long contended that some far left Democrats see election administration as a way to race bait and fear monger in a desperate effort to scare the liberal base into voting.  The leaders in this effort include the Brennan Center which has recently been rebuked on the left by the likes of liberal law Professor Rick Hasen and the New York Times.

The New York Times today in a piece that at least in parts is refreshingly honest (at least by their standards) dispels some of the myths perpetuated by progressive opponents on the impact of photo ID laws. The true believers on the left refuse to accept the true reasons for their crushing defeat. Instead, groups such as the Brennan Center in its most recent piece of propaganda strongly insinuate photo ID laws may have made the difference in favor of Republicans in close midterm elections.

We have seen many different ideas from the Democrats on how to conduct vote fraud. Political chameleon Charlie Crist, who ran unsuccesfully for Governor in Florida as a Democrat, did not disappoint. Crist attempted to keep the polls open in Broward County once he learned he was not doing as well as he hoped, nor as well as he needed to in order to win.

In the wake of last Tuesday’s disaster for Democrats, the Brennan Center was quick to argue (or at least strongly insinuate) that newly implemented photo ID and ballot integrity laws were to blame for some key Democrat losses. Wendy Weiser, writing for Brennan, wrote about North Carolina, Kansas, Florida, and Virginia and how the “margin of victory came very close to the likely margin of disenfranchisement.” Weiser’s proof consists of anecdotal reports from the volume of calls to the “Election Protection” call center and already discredited cherry-picked statistics. Weiser strongly insinuated that these laws may have made the difference and, as usually what happens with Brennan Center’s propaganda, the argument is now being regurgitated by press outlets such as the The Washington Post, Columbus Dispatch and pundits likeAndrew Sullivan. For example, the Post writes that “[v]oter suppression laws are already deciding elections.” Fortunately, at least one national press outlet is pushing back. Francis Berry writing for Bloomberg and who is admittedly against these laws writes:

The Daily Caller has an interesting article whether Loretta Lynch is the choice of vote fraud committer Al Sharpton.  Sharpton is arguably the leading vote fraud denier on the left and even has provided standing ovations to those who are convicted of vote fraud.  Regardless of whether this is Sharpton’s pick or not she has some potentially troubling views on voting as disclosed in a recent video that has surfaced.   At a minimum she should be thoroughly questioned on these matters.  Those views are:

James O’Keefe has a new video that once again shows the attitude on the left toward vote fraud, this time on non-citizen voting.  O’Keefe has been attacked for his methods and his results are ignored by the left wing media; but the videos speak for themselves.  That is the pattern from the far left vote fraud deniers.  Ignore or attack the people who expose the vote fraud instead of address the underlying problem exposed.

In Shakespeare’s The Tempest, a conspirator discusses murdering a King, “And, by that destiny, to perform an act, Whereof what’s past is prologue; what to come, In yours and my discharge.” The immortal line reminds (or warns) how past events direct the present and predict the future.

As you may recall, Colorado passed a law in 2013, the Voter Access and Modernized Elections Act, which made it the third state with all-mail elections. (Washington and Oregon are the other two).

Matthew Vadum wrote an article in the most recent issue of Foundation Watch, discussing the Democracy Alliance – an organization put together by George Soros –how it is continuing to grow and the levels of irony behind it.

On October 16, 2014, Hans von Spakovsky spoke at the National Press Club on the impact of state voter ID laws on the 2014 midterm elections, as well as recent court rulings on the laws.