Massive Voting Fraud Reported in Massachusetts

Community organizing group Neighbor to Neighbor was seen violating laws at numerous polling sites, with the apparent blessing of the poll-watchers.

Martin Solomon
Pajamas Media
11/9/2010

…General Law chapter 54, section 65 prohibits within 150 feet of a polling location, among other things, the posting, exhibition, circulation, or distribution of material — including pasters, stickers, posters, cards, handbills, placards, pictures or circulars — intended to influence the action of the voter. G. L. 54, 65 (2002 ed.). Consistent with the activities restricted by statute, the implementing regulations prohibit the solicitation of votes for or against, or any other form of promotion or opposition of, any person or political party or position on a ballot question, to be voted on at the current election. 950 C.M.R. 54.04(22)(d). Accordingly, a person standing within 150 feet of a polling location, including observers in the polling location, may not: hold any campaign sign; hand any person literature intended to influence the voter’s action at the polls; wear any campaign buttons or identifying signage; solicit a person’s vote for or against a candidate or question on the ballot; or, distribute stickers ….

– From “Election Day Legal Summary,” Massachusetts Secretary of State’s Office

The ballot box is one of American democracy’s secular sacred spaces, where the fact that you voted may be public, but whom you voted for is your own private business.

Unless, that is, you happen to be in one of the low-income communities targeted for “help” from the community organizers of Neighbor to Neighbor Massachusetts, where individuals may just need a little extra guidance to ensure they vote the correct way.

While conservatives in most of the rest of the country woke up to a celebration last Wednesday, those of us marooned in Massachusetts found ourselves left high and dry by a red wave that didn’t have quite enough oomph to overcome the leftist machine our home state is so infamous for. In spite of a number of good candidates and a palpable level of Republican voter enthusiasm, most of the races weren’t even close. Many pundits have ascribed this surprising finish in large part to the effectiveness of the organized get out the vote effort that the Democrat establishment, along with their community organizer and union allies, were able to bring to bear. Even the best and most well-funded candidates versus the most scandal-ridden incumbents are hard-pressed to overcome the extra percentage points this structure is able to set into gear on election day.

In general, this problem is a political one. As long as the requisite laws are obeyed, fair enough. We can debate the matter, try to bring a level of fairness to the system, and make an effort to expose the excesses while our side tries to do better next time.

But what if existing laws and mores were, in fact, violated? That’s where what went on at the polls on Tuesday comes in. I have heard from multiple poll watchers who noted apparent or possible irregularities at the voting places they were stationed, and Neighbor to Neighbor Massachusetts takes center stage…

A Neighbor to Neighbor interpreter “assists” a voter with a bilingual ballot.

Read the rest at Pajamas Media

Comments are closed.