WorldNetDaily has its voter fraud story and is sticking to it, no matter how discredited.
A Dec. 10 WND article by James Simpson purports to examine possible evidence of voter fraud in the presidential election. He begins by ranting that "members of the president’s team did everything possible to rig the game in their favor" while "Democrats and their media allies also engaged in what has fairly been described as a dishonest and 'vicious' campaign to discredit the Republican nominee while steadfastly shielding the administration from its many scandals." So Simpson is clearly predisposed to declare anything and everything as evidence of "voter fraud."
He begins with the already-discredited claim about precincts where Obama won nearly all of the vote. Unsurprisingly, Simpson fails to note the precincts where Obama received no votes as evidence of voter fraud.
After running through a laundry list of items that are mostly isolated examples of things, some of which have nothing to do with the election like bashing Motor Voter laws, Simpson concluded:
So is vote fraud real? Yes. Did it occur in this election? Yes. Was it enough to steal the election? In reality, although no single instance or aspect of vote fraud was likely enough to tip the election for Obama, the aggregate of their corrupt activities – including illegal campaign donations, taking advantage of states without voter ID requirements, military ballots delivered too late, as well as the laundry list of elements identified in this report, may well have been.
Election 2012 provides a powerful justification for, at a minimum, enacting strong voter ID laws throughout the nation and a repeal of the most anti-Democratic voting legislation ever written, the National Voter Registration Act.
In short, Simpson found what he wanted to find, thus fulfilling his preconceived notions.
Meanwhile, Molotov Mitchell's weekly WND video repeated many of the same allegations, ignoring exculpatory evidence as Simpson did. He added a couple new ones though, such as complaining that some Colorado counties had more registered voters than residents -- which, of course, proves nothing except possibly an out-of-date voter list. Mitchell thundered, "Counties like San Miguel reported that they had 140 percent voter registration. It's a miracle. Just guess who won San Miguel County."
That allegation is bunk as well. Mitchell is referring to a RedState article on the subject; the response from county officials was that “San Miguel County is a resort community. Many young people come here to work for a season or two and then move on," as well as "senior citizens who “leave during large parts of the year, causing a (non-forwardable) mail ballot not to reach them."
RedState sums it up this way: "San Miguel County has a total population of 7,359 with 19.2 percent of the population below the voting age, making the highest possible number of registered voters 5,946. If the census numbers are to be trusted, that results in the possibility of up to 2,390 individuals on the voter rolls who should not be."
But let's look at the vote totals for San Miguel County: Approximately 4,100 people voted, far short of both the number of voters on the rolls as welll as the number of possible voters.
So, no voter fraud. But claiming that it happened, regardless of the facts, is what WND is paying people like Simpon and Mitchell to do.