Data from 2025 show that a whopping 83 percent of Americans support voter ID. This is bipartisan, too, including 95 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Democrats, according to Pew Research. It also cuts across demographics, with men, women, whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians all supporting voter ID. So why is the Democratic Party establishment adamantly opposed to the people’s will here, swearing that ID requirements are “racist”? Some Democratic figures have given us the honest answer.
“I think there is a lot of voter fraud,” said Democrat Alan Schulkin, who was New York City’s election commissioner. “They get buses and they move people around.”
“Yeah, they should ask for your ID,” Schulkin confessed.
Then there’s Democrat Scott Foval, who was national field director for left-wing group Americans United for Change. He was on board with the shenanigans, but no less forthcoming.
“It’s a very easy thing for Republicans to say, ‘Well, they’re busing people in,’” he stated. “Well, you know what? We’ve been busing people in to deal with you f*****g a******s for 50 years, and we’re not going to stop now.”
Returning to Schulkin, he had something to say about mail-in voting, too. “Oh, there’s thousands of absentee ballots,” he noted. “I don’t know where they came from.”
Imagine that: He was the election commissioner — and he had no idea where the ballots came from.
The effect these ballots can have, however, is clear. An example was the May 12, 2020 special election in Paterson, New Jersey, between two Democrats. The mail-in vote fraud was so extreme, a judge found, that he ordered a new election be held.
It was likewise in Bridgeport, Connecticut, in 2023. After ballot stuffing was exposed, a judge had to order a new election for the Democratic mayoral primary.
No Mystery
Now, note what Schulkin and the hyper-partisan vote fraudster Foval didn’t say. They didn’t claim voter ID is “racist” or that requiring it constitutes “voter suppression.” And why were their answers so different from the official Democratic line?
Well, you see, they made their comments to an undercover journalist while on hidden camera in 2016.
The official Democratic line is what’s presented when the cameras are rolling and not hidden. The former is the truth — the latter is marketing.
The marketing is on full display, too, with the debate over the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. This legislation would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. And about it, asks USA Today’s Nicole Russell, “Americans want voter integrity. Why don’t Democrats?”
We now already know the answer: Democrat-orchestrated vote fraud is institutionalized. This is why, too, the SAVE Act has stalled in the Senate.
It passed the House with some bipartisan support. But the Republicans require 60 votes in the Senate to invoke cloture and conclude debate. And since there are only 53 GOP senators, they’re having trouble reaching that threshold. As to remedy, Russell writes:
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, said Feb. 3 that he was open to pushing Democrats who oppose the bill toward the “standing filibuster,” a seldom-used interpretation of the rules to require that senators actively hold the floor with continuous debate to delay or block a vote. As of this writing, Thune hasn’t yet decided if he will do that.
Russell insists that the GOP must play hardball — or reconsider their raison d’être. “What’s the point of having power in Congress,” she asks, “if Republicans don’t use it to pass legislation that the American people overwhelmingly support?”
Ratcheting Up the Propaganda
The GOP is balking, points out Russell, because they fear they can’t muster the votes. The Democrats, however, actually oppose the SAVE legislation in principle out of preference. As Russell relates:
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, hates the SAVE Act so much that he called it “Jim Crow 2.0.” [Is Schumer implying that he thinks black Americans are too stupid to acquire ID?]
The Brennan Center for Justice has said that the bill would “undermine Americans’ freedom to vote,” noting: “Roughly half of Americans don’t even have a passport. Millions lack access to a paper copy of their birth certificate.”
Russell makes the common point that ID is required for multitudinous things today. Boarding airplanes and purchasing alcohol are examples. Why, you even must verify your identity to get food stamps. As important as voting is, too, isn’t eating even more so? After all, you can’t vote if you starve to death.
(Actually, strike that. Chicago’s infamous voting from the grave proves otherwise.)
Governmental Incongruence
On a different note, some may wonder about the SAVE Act’s constitutionality. Abiding by the supreme law of the land surely is important, too. Yet the reality is that there’s an incongruence today.
For much of American history, the federal government (and state ones as well, really) remained largely within its constitutionally mandated bounds. It was a distant entity and wasn’t involved in very much. Consequently, a couple of states 2,000 miles away could perhaps swing a federal election via electoral shenanigans. But it wouldn’t really affect your life.
Those days are gone. Today federal laws and regulations cover everything from soup to nuts (and nuttiness). They affect your health insurance, what light bulbs you may use, your appliances’ effectiveness, your Second Amendment rights, and more. In fact, economist Dr. Walter E. Williams estimated decades ago already that there’s no constitutional basis for two-thirds of what the federal government is involved in. It’s surely even worse today.
So when a handful of corrupt states swing federal elections now, it affects all our lives — profoundly. Conclusion:
Strict state control of elections only works when you abide by constitutionally mandated state control of most everything else. Otherwise, ballot fraud takes boneheaded blue-state bushwa national and makes its tyranny universal.
A Record of Fraud
What’s also certain is that Democratic Party vote fraud is, again, an institution. Just consider the following articles:
Then there are the pieces here and here about all the 2020 election anomalies. They were so numerous that Joe Biden’s “victory” was akin to pulling an inside straight — three hands in a row.
Finally, below are the videos featuring the aforementioned “honest” Democratic responses from Schulkin and Foval (note: language warning).
The irony is that those committing and facilitating the vote fraud bloviate much about “democracy.” But there is no “democracy” when you’re perpetrating election theft. There is only a government of, by, and for the small minority who’ve mastered the art of the steal.
