Saturday, 19 April 2014 18:00

The Democrats’ Plan to Destroy Our Electoral System

Written by 

While most people aren’t aware of it, there’s a movement afoot to completely change the way we elect our president — and its success would have serious consequences for our nation’s future.

The plan is a National Popular Vote Interstate Compact that would neuter the Electoral College and give the presidency to the winner of the popular vote. Under this agreement, your state would award its electors to the candidate winning the most votes nationally — even if a majority of your state’s residents voted for a different candidate.

The compact will take effect once enough states ratify it to constitute at least 270 electoral votes, a majority of the total 538. And with Governor Andrew Cuomo having signed a bill on April 15 making New York the 10th state party to the agreement (the District of Columbia is also on board), its 29 electoral votes bring the compact’s total up to 165, well more than halfway to the goal. The other signatory states are California, Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Rhode Island.

Moreover, over the past several years the compact has been passed by one house in Nevada, Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina, Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan, New Mexico, and Oregon. While in some states, such as North Carolina, the measure has died in the other legislative house, if it were to eventually pass both houses and be ratified, these states would represent 78 more votes, bringing the compact’s total to 242 — just 28 shy of activation threshold. At that point the agreement would conceivably be just one state away (Florida) from taking effect.

To many people the compact is an easy sell. What’s wrong with a popular-vote system? But as political consultant and pundit Dick Morris explained recently in a Newsmax article, there’s a reason why virtually all the compact’s proponents are leftists, with every ratifying state — and 80 percent of the one-house states — having voted for Obama. The movement is also receiving funding from radical leftist George Soros’ Center for Voting and Democracy. Morris writes:

Democrats usually see a smaller percentage of their people go to the polls than Republicans do.

Under the electoral vote system, they figure why beat the drums to get a high turnout in New York City when the state will go Democrat anyway? But, if its [sic] the popular vote that matters, the big city machines can do their thing — with devastating impact.

And think of the chances for voter fraud! Right now, the biggest cities, the ones most firmly in Democratic control (e.g. Washington DC, New York, Detroit, Chicago, San Francisco, etc.) are all solidly in blue states. Not only does this make it unnecessary to maximize turnouts there, but it also makes it unnecessary to promote double voting, fraudulent voting, and all the other tricks of the trade at which Democrats excel.

Morris is not exaggerating. Criminality is most prevalent in inner cities, and the criminality known as vote fraud is no exception. We’ve all heard stories about illegal aliens casting ballots and precincts in which Mitt Romney received not even one vote in 2012, but perhaps the most significant vote-stealing method is surrogate voting.

I was contacted in 2005 by a local Washington, D.C., community leader (who wished to remain anonymous; I dubbed him “Deep Vote”) who had “done some computer work for several candidates over the years in DC,” as he put it. He also had conducted his own study of surrogate voting and related the mechanics of how it’s perpetrated. As I wrote at the time:

Experience has taught Deep Vote that it is transiency which provides Democrat political operatives with the most golden of opportunities to steal votes. In depressed urban areas an inordinate number of residents move in and out every year, with some taking up residence for only a brief time.... [This] inevitably leaves a large number of people who no longer live in an area on the voter rolls. The local authorities, says Deep Vote, 'are always somewhat late on removing non-residents.' All the Democrat operatives need do then is ascertain who these people are and vote for them.

... [T]he Democrat operatives who are central to this fraud are known as 'block captains' and 'apartment captains.' Deep Vote tells us that a captain is a GOTV (Get out the vote) term for a campaign volunteer who knows the territory and is given a list of voters on his block or in his building who are believed to be sympathetic to his candidate. He is then charged with the task of driving these partisans to the polls.

... Deep Vote then explains that since captains are usually 'local/neighborhood leaders' or in the least have 'been there for a while,' they 'would know who has moved out.' It is then that the captains examine the voter rolls and 'vote those people.'

This type of vote fraud can’t nearly as easily be perpetrated in more rural, Republican areas; this is not only because there’s relatively little transiency but because everyone tends to know everyone else, making it harder for a surrogate to masquerade as a given, but now gone, voter. Not only are local poll workers in monolithically Democrat inner cities often sympathetic to these schemes, however, but big-metropolis anonymity usually ensures that they wouldn’t detect the deception, anyway. As an example, when I lived in the Bronx, I never had to show identification to vote despite the poll workers’ not knowing me at all. Consequently, after I moved away, anyone who knew I was gone could have voted under my name simply by claiming to be me.

Critics say that this is why Democrats steadfastly oppose voter ID laws. They also say this explains why, as Larry Clifton at put it, “The Obama administration, through [Eric] Holder, has been relentless in trying to block Florida and other states from purging illegal and dead voters from state voter rolls.”

To understand the severity of this problem, consider Democrat-leaning swing state Ohio. As the Columbus Dispatch’s Darrel Rowland wrote in 2012:

More than one out of every five registered Ohio voters is probably ineligible to vote.

... Of the Buckeye State’s 7.8 million registered voters, nearly 1.6 million [most of which bear Democrat registrations] are regarded as “inactive.” That generally means either they haven’t voted in at least four years or they apparently have moved.

In other words, there were conceivably 1.6 million opportunities for surrogate vote fraud in Ohio at the time. Note that just 10 percent of that figure accounted for Obama’s margin of victory over Mitt Romney in that state in 2012.

After being sued by the organizations Judicial Watch and True the Vote, Ohio finally agreed in January to participate in a program called Cross-Check and take other measures designed to purge the voter rolls of ineligible voters. Whether such initiatives survive the inevitable Democrat court challenges, however, remains to be seen.

Regardless, scrapping the Electoral College would tilt the scales further in favor of the vote hustlers. It would also, warn some critics, move us further from being a republic and closer to being a democracy, a system of glorified mob rule that, to paraphrase James Madison, is in general as short in its life as it is violent in its death.


  • Comment Link Michael Dalene Thursday, 29 May 2014 21:14 posted by Michael Dalene

    PS: Not only should the Fed officials be Appointed by a lower level of government, but they should be paid by them!

    What's the old saying? "My boss is the guy that signs my paycheck? Well, hen Uncle Sam is signing their paycheck then Uncle Sam, and NOT their respective State, IS THEIR BOSS...

    Accountability? Being Appointed they would be DIRECTLY accountable to those that appointed them, and those that appointed them would be DIRECTLY accountability t those whom Elected them...

    Instead of having to March to Washington (DC) to "call someone on the carpet" you'd simply walk to your local city/town/State government (a literal 'hop, skip, and jump' away) and DEMAND that those YOU elected answer for the actions of those they appointed...


  • Comment Link Michael Dalene Thursday, 29 May 2014 21:02 posted by Michael Dalene

    Is was a MISTAKE to ever have the Office of the president, or any federally (even State?) elected position, in the first place... even today, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE for the general public to know enough about any Candidate running for US office to cast an INFORMED and COMPETENT ballot.

    In a nation where a great majority of voters and their elected officials believe the average person is too incompetent to make a "fair and just" award in medical malpractice and other suits IT IS INSANE to think the same juror, as a would-be voter, is capable of making a competent 'vote' for a person whom they know very little if anything about!

    THINK ABOUT IT? They are considered too incompetent to make a fair decision regarding an Award in a case where they sat and Heard "(presumably) all relevant facts BUT "Competent" of voting for someone for whom they know very little if anything about EXCEPT what they have been told by those whom have a vested interest?...


  • Comment Link Nora Tuesday, 22 April 2014 13:18 posted by Nora

    Paper ballots end voter verification and fraud, even Soros can't rig that. Who counts the votes is more important. We need an old fashioned election board manned by liberty minded teams of constitutionalists and oath keepers!

  • Comment Link Bruce Tuesday, 22 April 2014 12:05 posted by Bruce

    Don't worry about the Electoral College. Worry about the software in ALL the electronic voting machines in the US. ALL use the same software, owned by a Spanish company (that's as in Spain, a foreign country). Now, just in case you MIGHT have a question about the ownership of that Spanish company, well, it's none other than George (I bought me a president) Soros. NOW, begin to sweat (and swear) some!!

  • Comment Link Old Mullet Tuesday, 22 April 2014 06:36 posted by Old Mullet

    While all of us have our "preferences" in how our nation should elect a President, it would be a help if we better understand what the "Electoral College" is and stands for. It was established in the Constitution (not a new concept) to allow prompt and fair results to be communicated to Washington, D.C. at a time when there was no concept of the speed we communicate today. As for the fairness or the buffer against fraud at the polling places, the College members have little loyalty to the public. Please read the info at the government site and you may be startled and amazed at how this is run: There are few if any checks and balances or loyalty to the citizens wishes by this group. Time for them to go.

  • Comment Link Dick Tuesday, 22 April 2014 06:20 posted by Dick

    The Electoral College is desperately needed now more than ever. As long as there is resistance to a system to positively identify voters put in place in every state, voter fraud will be used extensively by the democrat machine. I live in a state where this is very evident. There are basically two counties in the state that drive all elections. The rural areas have little or no say in general elections with the exception of the election of their local representation to the legislature. But, because the population centers in the two counties allow for the majorities to be maintained in the legislature, their votes are canceled out. Studies of the voter rolls have indicated that there are a very large number of "inactive", dead, and "no longer resident" voters that continue to vote. Efforts have been made in recent years to purge these names from the voter rolls, but until there is proper funding to do the research and purging, votes will continue to be rigged in favor of democrat candidates, which are better organized to steal elections. You may ask, what does this have to do with the Electoral College, truthfully, not much. But it does give slim hope to so called minority voters that can muster enough voters to pull an electoral vote or two away from the tyranny of the "popular" voting block, which has proven time and time again to be dubious at best. Give me a positive voter ID system, and I'm on board with a popular vote system.

  • Comment Link Pete Bennett Monday, 21 April 2014 22:02 posted by Pete Bennett

    Andrew...a casual scrutiny of your remark shows it to be ... Gibberish. Currently, every vote counts. Some races are won by less than 10 votes, and get all the electoral votes. So, whether winning or losing, your vote counts...unless you don't cast it. It would cseem you haven't won in a while. Rigging elections this way is not the way to change that.

  • Comment Link Frank M. Pelteson Monday, 21 April 2014 21:58 posted by Frank M. Pelteson

    I heartily support Mr. Tobey's assessment of the situation. It supports the historical precedent set by our Founders and the reasoning behind it.

    Anyone who claims that the electoral system is an anachronism is either ignorant, a dupe of the INSIDERS, or an INSIDER.

    For more on the INSIDERS, please view the YouTube at .

    Education without action leads to frustration. Action without education leads to fanaticism.

    Less Government, More Responsibility, and, with God's help, a better world.

  • Comment Link Pete Bennett Monday, 21 April 2014 20:13 posted by Pete Bennett

    Next to unlimited voting by immigrants, legal or otherwise, the popular vote technique being planned by this 'compact' would not rely on an accurate definition pf 'popular', rather that the majority of votes cast by all the states would cause the electoral votes of EVERY STATE would go to that of the holder of the majotity of all votes cast. This would result in a dictatorial form of third-world election...winner gets 100% of the 'vote' !
    WHAT A DEAL !!
    Everyone's on the winning side! Regardless if their vote in their state is different.

    It's bad enough for this program on a statewide basis, as many states have permitted it. Its called a 'winner takes all' program. Guess who usually wins? Those from the more populated districts. this is defeated by the present form of electoral college vote.
    Interstate compacts are not legal unless approved by Congress.

  • Comment Link Diana Monday, 21 April 2014 20:10 posted by Diana

    If my memory serves me, wasn't it the Democrats who started the electoral system to get Clinton in?

  • Comment Link Andrew Monday, 21 April 2014 18:56 posted by Andrew

    Sorry, but the electoral college is an anachronism whose time is long past. The current system means that the presidential campaign happens only in the purple states. The solid red or blue states are ignored in the presidential contest. If we want elections where everyone's vote counts, we need to base elections on the popular vote or come up with an entirely different system.

  • Comment Link S. TOBEY Monday, 21 April 2014 17:55 posted by S. TOBEY

    The Electoral College was put in place so that the less-populated rural states would not fall prey to the tyranny of the masses in states with high population densities in their cities. It is well known that the worldview of the rural people in this country tends to be overwhelmingly conservative, NOT statist and collectivist. If this abomination is allowed to become law, those who are not of the liberal/leftist, statist, collectivist mindset would have absolutely NO voice in the politics and policy making of their country. Those who wish to adhere to constitutional principles should fight this with every fiber of their being!

Please Log In To Comment
Log in