Can – and should – the 2016 New Hampshire elections be nullified?

I note with anger and frustration that illegal voting may have changed the result of the 2016 Presidential and Senatorial elections in New Hampshire.

Newly available data is casting doubt on the integrity of the presidential election in New Hampshire in 2016, which Hillary Clinton won by just over 2,700 votes.

Over 6,000 voters in New Hampshire had used same-day voter registration procedures to register and vote simultaneously for president. The current New Hampshire speaker of the House, Shawn Jasper, sought and obtained data about what happened to these 6,000 “new” New Hampshire voters who showed up on Election Day.

It seems the overwhelming majority of them can no longer be found in New Hampshire.

. . .

The Public Interest Legal Foundation received information that 70 percent of the same-day registrants used out-of-state photo ID to vote in the 2016 presidential election in New Hampshire and to utilize same-day registration.

Gov. Maggie Hassan, a Democrat, also defeated incumbent U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte by only 1,017 votes.

There’s more at the link.

The question then becomes:  if those 6,000-odd voters can’t be proved to have been New Hampshire residents, and thus eligible to vote, why are their votes still counted in the election result?  Surely the only fair and reasonable solution would be to delete them from the results altogether?  Some may argue that such votes can’t be identified.  If that’s the case, why not?  Surely, if there’s doubt over whether or not someone’s eligible to vote, their ballots should be sequestered or segregated in some fashion until it can be proved that they are eligible?

This whole thing smells to high heaven.  One of New Hampshire’s two Senate seats may, as I write these words, be filled illegally by a candidate who won it through electoral fraud.  How can that possibly be allowed to stand?  It’s dishonest, plain and simple.

I submit that, if same-day voter registration is allowed, there should be some way to clearly identify all such voters, and segregate their ballots from the others cast on election day until such time as their eligibility to vote can be proved.  If it can’t be proved within a reasonable time – which should be before the result is officially ratified – their votes should not count towards the result.

What say you, readers?



  1. Sadly, not a huge surprise. New Hampshire has a small population, so it doesn't take many votes to swing a change. The natives are pretty conservative, but there are lots of people from Greater Boston living along the border, and Boston is as leftist as it gets.

    I can easily imagine some leftists groups getting together and deciding to swing the New Hampshire elections.

    Re those border crossers: typical leftist hypocrites. They love the low taxes and property costs that come from libertarian politics. But they keep voting leftist, which leads to higher taxes and more regulations.

    I remember a case from when I lived in the area 30 years ago: In NH there was a little girl who would die without a liver transplant (which, at the time, was even more expensive and risky than it is today). NH said: Uninsured? Nope, sorry, that's not normal indigent care, and it would totally bust our budget health care budget. The uproar from the Boston area was huge. Sadly, NH caved, and paid for the operation. Of course, the girl died anyway, but that never made the news. It's so easy to spend other people's money…

  2. I don't see any justification for same-day voter registration. I don't want important political decisions made (or influenced) by people who can't plan 24 hours ahead.

  3. Clearly, the biggest problem here is demanding ID to register.
    If you didn't require ID, then none of this would have been discovered, so no problem.

    Oh, and demanding ID is racist. I know this from democrat thinkers. The obvious conclusion is that Black people can't figure out how to get IDs.

  4. I'm with Don (from Oregon); I don't believe same day registration has any justification at all. A prospective voter doesn't have a community interest until they've lived among their neighbors for at least a month (or maybe six?).

    (more than meets the ear)

  5. Voter fraud is a reality, has been occurring for decades, is almost entirely the D party, and they factor that into their political calculations.

    It is orchestrated and coordinated by multiple D orgs, and it has a large component present within the government education complex (Big Ed).

    Nothing will happen with this; anyone obtaining the slightest bit of traction with the story will be immediately subjected to pressure from the GOP, and the communists will activate the kryptonite "RACIST" ray beam that causes all politicians to immediately wither and slink away.

  6. Has voter fraud occurred in this election? Certainly. Will anything be done to rectify the past election, or to prevent voter fraud in future elections? No, and no.

    Anyone who runs for office knows the system isn't perfect, and they also know that voter fraud happens on a regular basis. What no one knows for sure is how effective the fraud might be in a given election.

    Technology being what it is today, there is no reason that fraud cannot be eliminated.

  7. Most of the states that turned over voter information had some degree of fraud.
    This makes it most likely that all states did.
    And while it is pretty obvious that the fraud was in favor of Dems, they will probably claim it was Russians.
    They seem unlikely to change the outcome. Would even National Voter IDs help?

  8. Do what they did in the first iraqi elections. Make them stick a finger in indelible ink. That's your vote. Done. Forget absentee and mail in voting.

  9. Stop early voting, stop motor-voter laws, stop same-day registration/voting, stop mail-in ballots except for the disabled or the military serving away from their voting locations.

    Open the polls for a 24 hour period. No poll results allowed to be released until after the last poll closes. Require photo id proof. Prosecute severely anyone involved in shenanigans.

    That is the only way to stop voter fraud, maybe.

  10. How do you think we got Obama twice. Luke warm candidate on the right and 3-4 million votes fraud.

    When use deplorable's show up in force we still get the election we want, otherwise it goes to the dems every time.

    Course now we need to kick all the reps out as well. bunch of crooks

  11. And the US has the audacity to send in Jimmy Carter and the state department to criticize elections and plebiscites in other countries. That's rich.

    Back when I lived in a union controlled county it was common for the democrats to glean votes from nursing home absentee ballots. In a county that size with a large senior community it was plenty to tilt an election. When rules changed that a republican and a democrat had to be present in trips to do absentee balloting the republican was often a plant. The republican party was so weak locally it was simple enough to put a member of the opposition into strategic positions in the party. I had also heard several stories of shenanigans in the recorders office on election nights. The democrat machine was so entrenched in county government that it wouldn't surprise me. If you weren't a democrat you didn't get hired on with the county government unless it was on the road department or sheriff's office.

  12. NH requires photo ID, but it also requires submitting an address in order to vote. Using an out of state photo ID is legal, and it is legal to have your driver ID and car from out of state in NH, as specifically pointed out in the (mysteriously unlinked by PJM) official letter. No effort was made by the rumormongers pushing this to check whether the voters using out of state drivers licenses had valid residences and no effort ever will be made by those people – they exist on the border between propagandist and huckster.

    The official letter does mention about 130 voters whose address could not be verified by mail, and 196 names that appeared on a multistate voting list and were referred to the attorney general for investigation. Historically, virtually all of these cases amount to clerical error or laziness on the part of the voter. So don't hold your breath on those.

  13. @Shoe: I'd be very interested to know more about your political views and/or any political activity. Every time you comment here, you seem intent on debunking an article or a viewpoint that's unfavorable to the left, and often deliberately ignore the facts as presented in order to advance an alternative viewpoint that doesn't address those facts – merely bypasses them by putting forward alternative "facts" that don't address the issues raised.

    Fair criticism is fine with me. I've said repeatedly on this blog that I distrust both the Republican and Democratic Parties, regarding both as pushing their own partisan political perspectives at the expense of the country as a whole. I welcome comments that are thoughtful, informed and educational. However, a knee-jerk response defending only one perspective, ignoring evidence and history to the contrary, doesn't do anything constructive. It generates heat, not light; noise, not signal.

    I hope you'll think about that.

  14. I believe that we owe a sincere debt of gratitude to the mainstream media.
    If they had not convinced just about everyone that Trump could not possibly win the Dems would have been much more aggressive in their fraud and ballot stuffing.
    I personally will always believe that Trump won not only the electoral college, but also the legitimate popular vote as well. Were we able to eliminate the fraudulent votes from just California and Illinois the totals would switch over to Trump, or so I feel confident would be the case.

  15. Shoe's link pontificates that voter fraud is rare and wouldn't swing elections. I disagree because of watching the fraud go on right before my eyes for decades.

    In the 1990's, a Colorado congresswoman was elected for years with the same ratio of votes. Until she had a strong opponent, no one questioned the elections. When it was pointed out that the ratio was the same even though the number of voters changed, she declined to run again.

    Years ago in Ohio Federal court, it was proven in the court room that the percentage of votes on a particular voting machine could be changed to whatever percentage was desired. This was accomplished quickly without opening the machine or otherwise looking suspicious. The election was not overturned and Ohio kept using the same machine.

    In my home state, I was in line behind some college students exiting the polls. They were bragging about voting absentee at home and registering the same day to vote in the college town. The girls were pointed out to the clerk but nothing came of it.

    The Brennan Center article did not address illegals voting at all. Washington state discovered an illegal lady who could not vote, but had voted in multiple elections. There is only a guess as the how many illegals in California and Florida vote in elections.

    Voter fraud is a huge problem and as Old NFO pointed out . . . nothing will be done.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *