Voter Fraud in California documented . . .

Election monitors in California have released video that documents the Democratic Primary was stolen from Bernie Sanders by altering ballots after the votes were submitted.  In the film, a monitor reports that almost half the ballots in the box of ballots she witnessed had been so altered, always against Sanders.

http://hubpages.com/politics/Election-Monitors-in-San-Diego-Catch-Whited-Out-Sanders-Votes-on-Film

 

California Ballots altered

Voter nullification needed . . .

“Voter turnout in last week’s midterm elections was terrible. How terrible? Just 36.3 percent of eligible voters cast votes — the worst turnout in 72 years, the New York Times reports. Only the 1942 election (33.9 percent) had a lower rate of voter turnout.” – This was in a report I read on Yahoo! News early this morning.  Unfortunately, anyone who reads online news is likely going to confirm that the articles are poorly written even when they get the facts right.  I could not figure out, in this case, who to attribute the quote to.

But if it is telling the truth, we need to do something about it.  When people go to the voting booth, they pick whichever candidate they feel will do the best job.  Presumably, the major reasons for not going to the booth when you legally can would be that you either don’t think your vote matters, or you think there is no good choice.  Instead of allowing our country to be run by people who barely get the majority of the votes of 36% of the voters (which in theory could be as little as 13% of the eligible voters, with 3 candidates on the ballot), making the choice not to vote should in itself be a form of voting.  Either all ballots and all contests should include a “None of the Above” box, or any contest that fails to attract at least 65% of the electorate should be considered invalid.

Leaving things as they are now really does leave those who consider themselves “the elite” of our country in charge, and we’ve all seen how that is working out.

My thoughts on voting . . .

The very first time I voted in an election, the Presidential candidates were incumbent Jimmy Carter against California’s Gov. Ronald Reagan.  This was only 5 weeks after I turned 18.  I have not missed a national election, not even a mid term election, since.

I don’t need to tell you how I voted then, because it does not matter.  Ronald Reagan won, and became the commander-in-chief of the military I was serving in at the time.  He made us proud to serve him and our country.  That is all that needs to be said.

However, in being a voter who tried to be conscientious and informed about the candidates and the issues from one election to the next, I have noticed an upsetting trend.  More and more often, I hear of large blocks of voters who are voting against candidates, or to put it another way, they are selecting the least of two evils.  I have, myself, felt that way about more than one election.  I’ve also heard lots of voters say that if you don’t vote for someone in one of the two major parties, you are wasting your vote or helping the other guy win.

You want to know what over 30 years of voting and observing national politics has taught me?  Even the least of 2 evils is still evil.  If you want my vote, give me someone worth supporting.

I’m sitting this one out.  There are no candidates on my ballot worth voting for, and I’m sick of voting against.  What I think we really need is a national referendum on a change to voting laws that would invalidate any election in which at least 65% of the eligible voters do not participate.  See how the Washington fat-cats deal with that one.