I can pretty much tell what political party/ideology you belong to by how you answer this question: Which is more important: That everyone who is eligible votes, even if it means that some votes will be cast illegally? Or that all votes that are cast are cast by legal voters, even if that means some legal voters will be prevented from voting?
In my view, both are unacceptable, but, what I find interesting, and a little bit disturbing is that the liberals absolutely freak out whenever anyone suggests that we ought to make sure that people who are voting are: 1) legal residents of the jurisdictions where they are voting, 2) able to prove it.
They are so unhinged on the subject that one is tempted to say that they actually would prefer that the system make it relatively easy for people who aren’t really citizens to vote. Why would they do that unless they suspect that most people who are here illegally will vote for Democrats?
This week the DNC’s Commission to Protect American Democracy from the Trump Administration issued a statement that the Orange One’s Voter Fraud Commission “Make no mistake: this isn’t a war on voter fraud, it’s a war on voters.” They added, “We want to make it easier for people who are eligible to vote, not harder for them to vote. And that means fighting voter suppression tactics to create free, fair, and accessible elections. We must protect the one right that preserves all others—the right to vote.”
If you make it easier for people to register to vote, but make it harder for the authorities to determine if they are registered legally, there cannot be any other logical result except an increase in fraudulent voters. In that case, who benefits?
Explain to me, if you will, how it is a “war on voters” to examine the voter rolls in the 50 states and try to figure out if there is a significant percentage of them that are fraudulent? For instance, if people who live in, say, New York, but have a vacation home in Florida manage to be registered to vote in both states, and maybe vote for president in both states, thus doubling their franchise?
Do we want people to vote early and often? Who benefits if they do?
If Tom Brady, to use a hypothetical example, were to complain bitterly because someone wants to check the text messages on his cell phone to see if he was discussing deflating footballs before an important game, would we think that he: 1) wants to keep his text messages private because he is a shy guy? Or 2) that he doesn’t want anyone to know he was deflating footballs?
Now, if that is true, and the Democrats want anyone who walks through the door to be able to register to vote almost as soon as they cross the international border, then we understand the true nature of their fight to make the border so porous that with a little ingenuity and luck just about anyone can penetrate it and be on the road to voting—perhaps not all that long from now.
I think it is quite revealing that the usual suspects among liberal organizations go absolutely bonkers on the subject of President Trump’s election commission. And try to employ vote stealing tactics that are so tried and true that Boss Tweed used them in the 19th century, that LBJ may have used to win his first Senate race and which may very well have led to the election of John F. Kennedy in 1960.
So, what’s so threatening about letting in a little light on the election process? What have we got to lose and what have THEY got to hide?