Neil Simon, director of communications for the OSCE’s parliamentary assembly, agreed the U.N. does not have jurisdiction over U.S. elections but noted all OSCE member counties, which include the United States, have committed since 1990 to hold free and democratic elections and to allow one another to observe their elections.
Originally posted by AuranVector
Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by vkey08
What you fail to see is that it's a very good idea to have outside observers in American elections.
It may lessen the chances of the Romney camp stealing Ohio and the rest of the country.
And don't lie, Romney supporters. You know damn well that he would do something as despicable as this.
It's far more likely to have the Chicago thugs from the Obama camp steal votes and suppress Republican votes.
Romney is basically a decent man. Obama is not.
Originally posted by vkey08
United Nations-affiliated election monitors from Europe and central Asia will be at polling places around the U.S. looking for voter suppression activities by conservative groups, a concern raised by civil rights groups during a meeting this week. The intervention has drawn criticism from a prominent conservative-leaning group combating election fraud.
UN Monitors Story
Uh... really? Both sides have engaged in some sort of voter manipulation over the years, last time I seem to remember the Black Panthers being involved in a row about voting in Pennsylvania. But the bigger question is, is it legal for the United Nations to have a presence in our elections? Personally I think this is a very bad sign of things to come, but I'd like to hear others thoughts...
Originally posted by badgerprints
It's pretty sad when we have military all over the world and spend trillions on the rest of the planet but the UN is monitoring our elections.
Just another small step in the effort to eventually subjugate US citizens to UN rule.
Chaotic voter registration rolls make it too easy to commit voter fraud. A February study by the non-partisan Pew Center on the States found one in eight voter registrations were inaccurate, out-of-date or duplicates. Nearly 2.8 million people were registered in two or more states, and perhaps 1.8 million registered voters are dead.
Critics of voter ID laws also fail to note they are designed not just to stop voter impersonation but also multiple voting, non-citizen voting, people voting in the wrong precinct, out-of-state voting and voting in the names of fictitious people.
Examples of fraud are plentiful. Three non-citizens were arrested in Iowa last month for voting illegally in the 2010 general election and 2011 city election. A Democratic nominee for Congress resigned in Maryland last month after allegations that she had voted in two states at the same time. A 2004 New York Daily News study found that 46,000 people were registered to vote in both New York City and Florida, and that 400 to 1,000 had voted in both states in the same election. Florida decided the 2000 presidential election by 537 votes.
Former congressman Artur Davis says he stopped opposing photo ID laws because of too many instances of voter fraud in his Alabama district, some of which have been prosecuted. "The most aggressive voter suppression in the African-American community ... is the wholesale manufacture of ballots," he says.
A 2012 Rasmussen poll found that 64% of Americans think voter fraud is "very" or "somewhat" serious. Blacks (64%) and those earning under $20,000 a year (71%) agreed.
The Supreme Court has backed that concern. In 2008, it found states have the right to pass photo ID laws; the majority included liberal Justice John Paul Stevens. In a unanimous 2006 decision reinstating Arizona's voter ID law, the court stated: "Voter fraud drives honest citizens out of the democratic process. ... Voters who fear their legitimate votes will be outweighed by fraudulent ones will feel disenfranchised."
We can make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. We should keep trying.
The Obama campaign, while leading in most September polls, took out a $15 million loan from Bank of America that is due to be repaid on Nov. 14, or eight days after the 2012 elections, according to a report in The Blaze published Saturday.
The campaign will owe a 2.5% interest rate plus the current Libor rate, according to a report by The Blaze. Meanwhile, pundits are asking why Obama’s campaign, the only candidate to ever pledge to raise a billion dollars, needed to run out and get a $15 million loan with the election close at hand.
While campaign loans are not unusual, Obama’s connections to Bank of America are politically charged. Warren Buffett, Obama donor and namesake of the infamous “Buffett Rule,” invested $5 billion in Bank of America, ostensively to help the ailing financial institution recover from a bad economy.
In September, two weeks after OFA took out the loan, Bank of America announced a plan to lay off 16,000 workers by the end of the year.
Also, Bank of America contributed $20 million toward the cost of the Democrat National Convention in Charlotte while Bank of America stadium, home to the Carolina Panthers, was scheduled to host Obama’s acceptance speech.
The campaign switched to a significantly smaller venue days before the DNC convention, citing concerns about the weather, however bad weather never materialized.
The Democratic National Convention was hyped as the first campaign “to make history” by pledging to only use money donated by private individuals.
However FEC reports caused problems for the Obama campaign and for Democrats when it reported the DNC received no less than $5 million in corporate donations to conduct its convention.
Originally posted by neformore
reply to post by vkey08
Which part of "observer" suggests interference? Paranoid much?
Did you read the article and the history of this organisation? The US is a part of it.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), a United Nations partner on democratization and human rights projects, will deploy 44 observers from its human rights office around the country on Election Day to monitor an array of activities, including potential disputes at polling places. It's part of a broader observation mission that will send out an additional 80 to 90 members of parliament from nearly 30 countries
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by vkey08
I don't know if it is illegal, but it certainly speaks volumes of the state of our nation. Having the UN monitor makes me uneasy.
Originally posted by ganjoa
Voter fraud is rampant in my community and throughout the county.
Republican election officials who promised to root out voter fraud so far are finding little evidence of a widespread problem.
State officials in key presidential battleground states have found only a tiny fraction of the illegal voters they initially suspected existed. Searches in Colorado and Florida have yielded numbers that amount to less than one-tenth of 1 percent of all registered voters in either state.
Especially telling, critics of the searches say, is that the efforts are focused on crucial swing states from Colorado to Florida, where both political parties and the presidential campaigns are watching every vote. And in Colorado, most of those who received letters are either Democrats or unaffiliated with a party. It's a similar story in Florida, too.