Pretty easy, as it turns out, and made even easier by Bernie Sanders campaign staffers. Four years after Project Veritas Action first exposed the ease by which voter fraud occurs and New Hampshire attempted to toughen its laws, James O’Keefe and his team returned to “stress test” the system. They didn’t actually cast votes, which would have been a crime, but they clearly had the opportunities to do so:

Poll worker, Nashua, New Hampshire: So they will allow you to sign an affidavit saying that you live in the state of New Hampshire.

Journalist:  But, I’m not living here, I am just trying to vote here.

Poll worker:  Do you have an intention of living here indefinitely?

Journalist: No not indefinitely.

Poll worker:  If you want to vote today, you might want to tell them that you’re staying with a friend. And you’re here indefinitely, because it sounds like it’s true.

PVA:  Ok, yeah.  Not 100% true though.

Poll worker: Right, but you’re here indefinitely, and you’re staying at your friend’s house, and you’ll be about to vote.  Otherwise, I don’t know.

It wasn’t just the poll workers, either. The Sanders campaign took a rather broad approach to their get-out-the-vote mandate:

Mariel Brown-Fallon, Bernie Sanders Field Organizer:  Ummm…could you say you’re staying at 345 Cilley Road?

Journalist:  Could we?

Field Organizer:  Yeah.

Journalist:  That’s, that’s this address.

Field Organizer:  Yeah.

PVA’s rating of New Hampshire’s voter-ID laws: A for intent, D for effort.

“While we’d like to applaud some legislators for trying to strengthen New Hampshire’s voter ID laws, obviously the end result wasn’t good enough,” said Project Veritas Action President James O’Keefe. “Banks, airlines, and even corner grocery stores have long figured out how to quickly and easily confirm identity with photo IDs. Perhaps government is incredibly incompetent, alternately the intent is far more nefarious.”

John Fund notes that PVA isn’t the only one appalled by the outcome:

GOP state representative Bill O’Brien, who was the speaker of New Hampshire’s house when the voter-ID bill passed in 2012, is appalled by just how porous its enforcement was in this year’s primary. “It’s an embarrassment this should happen in a state that is accorded the right to the first primary,” he told me. “More of this and people from outside the state will start to question that status, which would be very sad.”

O’Brien points out that the state constitution clearly says that the right to vote in New Hampshire is connected to someone’s actually living in the state. “But the local courts have basically reinterpreted that to mean you have a state of mind that you intend to live in New Hampshire and that should be enough to allow you to vote.” Even so, he says that some of the activities seen in O’Keefe’s video are clearly fraudulent. “We once had 50 voters use the administrative office of a local college as their legal address in New Hampshire,” he recounted. “They were clearly out-of-state campaign workers voting.”

The whole point of a primary is to get the sense of that state’s citizens. If a system doesn’t protect the integrity of that distinction, then why bother to have state-by-state primaries at all?