September 15, 2005
At a news conference in Trenton, Republican officials said their analysis found:# 54,601 people were registered in more than one county, and 4,397 appeared to have voted twice in the 2004 presidential election.
# 170,558 people were registered to vote in New Jersey as well as other states. Of those, 90,025 voted in New Jersey last year, and 6,572 appeared to have voted in two states.
# 4,755 individuals listed in county records as deceased also were listed as voting last year.
Voting from the grave has long been the stuff of Jersey lore, especially in Hudson County. But the GOP analysis found matches between the lists of the dead and the lists of the voting in all 21 counties around the state.
The highest number, 609, was found in heavily populated Bergen County. Monmouth (450), Camden (430), Essex (354) and Union (325) all had more than Hudson, which tied with Morris at 298.
How serious do the Democrats take documentation of such voter irregularities?
Richard McGrath, spokesman for the Democratic State Committee, reacted skeptically. "If the Republican Party conducted the investigation, it's safe to assume the facts and figures are wrong and the findings are suspect," he said.
Given that response, it is safe to assume that the fraud benefits the Democrats and they will fight solving the problem tooth-and-nail.
America, it is time to ask a pointed question.
How much more evidence is necessary to force a complete purge of the voter rolls, the implementation of mandatory photo identification on election day, and other common-sense voting reforms in this country?
Posted by: Greg at
11:10 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 297 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: at Sat Sep 17 08:56:49 2005 (Sfcu+)
But I will concede one thing to you -- historically, the dead have been more likely to vote in Chicago.
And in both places, they vote Democrat -- hence both locations have bad government, corruption, and are places no one with any sense wishes to live.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sat Sep 17 14:22:00 2005 (nkD2p)
I don't doubt there's considerable voter fraud all across the country -- and I think it's completely insane that we don't require photo ID at the polls, and have some sort of national database to prevent voting in multiple jurisdictions. (The concern that poor voters don't have driver's licenses could easily be handled with need-based fee-waiving, using the same data now collected for need-based waiving of utilities fees.)
But... some reports of this specific study have indicated some methodological problems. (Specifically, all they matched was first name, last name and phone number -- and there's a "default" phone number for the large minority that supply no phone number. Thus, all the "Bob Johnson"s who didn't supply a phone number would show up as fraudulent multiple voters...) Doesn't mean the result is wrong, but it is subject to some question.
My favorite voter-fraud story continues to be San Francisco, CA, where no form of ID is required to vote AND a list of eligible voters is posted outside every polling station, with the names of those who have voted crossed off. Thus, if you wanted to, in the early afternoon, you could spend a few hours driving from poll station to poll station choosing names off this list, walking in and voting fraudulently. And as long as you didn't giggle while you were doing it, or otherwise act guiltily, there'd be zero chance you'd ever be caught.
Posted by: Clint at Mon Sep 19 06:13:46 2005 (v9PD0)
21 queries taking 0.0093 seconds, 32 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.