(Via Atlas Shrugs) For the next time somebody tells you that Democrat/ACORN/WFP election registration fraud does not equal election fraud, feel free to point this story coming from Troy, New York, where the one led seamlessly to the other.  Feel free to also point out that it doesn’t take all that much to flip some races:

Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out — enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the city council and county elections in November to the Democrats. Candidates would have been able to run both on the Democratic and Working Families Party lines in two weeks, and that could have given the Democrats the general election.

A special prosecutor is investigating the case and criminal charges are possible. New York State Supreme Court Judge Michael Lynch ruled that there were “significant election law violations that have compromised the rights of numerous voters and the integrity of the election process.”

[Bolding mine.]

Read More →

Via Jen Rubin:

Wall Street money rains on Schumer

Wall Street has showered nearly $11 million on the Senate since the beginning of the year, and more than 15 percent of it has gone to a single senator: Democrat Chuck Schumer of New York.

[snip]

Of the $10.6 million the industry has given to sitting senators this year, more than $7.7 million has gone to Democrats. Schumer got his $1.65 million; his New York colleague Kirsten Gillibrand took in $886,000; Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada received $814,000; Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut scored $603,000; Colorado freshman Michael Bennet got $401,000; and Agriculture Committee Chairman Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas— who will have a big say on the derivatives portion of regulatory reform — got $336,000.

Mind you, it’s a perfectly rational decision on Wall Street’s part: paying protection money often is. Despite Yahoo/Politico’s somewhat disingenuous suggestion of ‘Stockholm Syndrome,’ what actually is happening here is a trade. Wall Street gives Schumer - and his new junior partner Gillibrand* - money, and Schumer makes sure that all those potentially fatal regulations and restrictions and investigations that Schumer says and talks about never happen.  Remember, this is the guy who declared that the American people don’t care about “little porky amendments:” he’s about as populist as T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII.

Read More →

Take this one with all the usual caveats - the election is far away, who knows if this is a good sample, Gillibrand has months to improve her name ID, etc. Still, Carolyn Maloney has the ability to raise lots of money and there is no doubt that her views are more in line with the extreme leftist views of New York Democrat primary voters. Given those facts, Gillibrand ought to be extremely concerned that she already trails Maloney in a trial heat for the 2010 Senate nomination:

The 2010 Democratic primary for U.S. Senator remains in play as 27 percent back U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney and 23 percent back U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, with 4 percent for Jonathan Tasini and 44 percent undecided…

Voters know little about the possible Senate candidates: 63 percent don’t know enough about Gillibrand to form an opinion; 67 percent don’t know enough about Maloney and 66 percent don’t know enough about King.

Read More →

This only encourages them.

On the other hand, her party does have a problem with this sort of thing, and I guess that she may need the campaign contributions for next year after all - so now would be a good time to reach out to the base.

But really, madam: Infowars?

Moe Lane

PS: The New York Observer: “The video is already in wide circulation on 9/11 conspiracy web sites.”

I imagine that it must be.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Worst possible news, in fact:

April 6, 2009 - Voters Say 3-1 Paterson Does Not Deserve Election, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; Most Say He Should Announce Now He Won’t Run

New York State voters disapprove 60 - 28 percent of the job Gov. David Paterson is doing, the lowest approval ever for a New York Governor, and say 63 - 22 percent that he does not deserve to be elected to a full four-year term, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

With numbers like that, it’d take a special miracle from God to convince the man to run for election next year; more to the point, even if Paterson refuses to admit to the inevitable the rest of the NY Democratic Party won’t be quite so stubborn. Hence, the use of the word ‘depressing.’ I much prefer to see the Other Side engage in rather vicious primary battles. Like the one that may be happening with Gillibrand:

Read More →

New York is a deep blue state, with a populace that says the nation is on the right track, and which gives Barack Obama high marks. That should be the perfect setting for Democratic incumbents to cruise to re-election, right?

Not so much:

…If a Democratic primary for Governor were held today, [incumbent Dem Governor David] Paterson would lose to Attorney General Andrew Cuomo by nearly four-to-one, and Paterson would be easily beaten in a general election by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani…

In a hypothetical 2010 Democratic primary for Governor, Cuomo leads Paterson 67-17 percent, up from last month?s 53-27 percent. In December Paterson led 49-26 percent. In a potential general election matchup, Giuliani beats Paterson 56-33 percent, up from 51-36 percent last month. Paterson led 51-38 percent in December. Cuomo leads Giuliani 51-41 percent, similar to last month?s 51-38 percent…

“New Yorkers, who give the President a 70-23 percent favorable rating, believe the country is headed on the right track, however, they say the Empire State is headed in the wrong direction,” Greenberg said…

Read More →