quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Cap, pay Orincoro no mind.
Anything that proves his point is just fine, but anything to the contrary it is just anecdotal. It has always been that way. You will eventually get used to it.
I noticed that a while ago yet still I try. Once I saw that he didn't mean anecdotal in the (common) sense of "substantiated" I realized I was being sucked into a word game and that real conversation had been shut down. For him, no amount of substantiated and credible claims will suffice. The quantity will always be too small.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Interestingly enough, if you register to vote in person you don't need to show ID, but if you do by mail then you have to show proof of identification. A picture ID as well as utility bills are needed.
This varies state by state.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anecdotal does not mean substantiated. Anecdotal means, surprisingly enough, means that it is made up of one or several anecdotes.
No one thinks that falsifying voter registration is a good thning. But actual data shows that it isn't a significant problem.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: Cap, pay Orincoro no mind.
Anything that proves his point is just fine, but anything to the contrary it is just anecdotal. It has always been that way. You will eventually get used to it.
I noticed that a while ago yet still I try. Once I saw that he didn't mean anecdotal in the (common) sense of "substantiated" I realized I was being sucked into a word game and that real conversation had been shut down. For him, no amount of substantiated and credible claims will suffice. The quantity will always be too small.
Seriously? Anecdotal, in this context, refers to a small sample of sources, presented to lend weight to a claim. In this particular case, the question: who does what more, and to what degree more (or less), is a large scale question. Answering it requires that you examine the systematic processes and trends within the parties that indicate which, if either, tends towards a certain behavior. a list of cases, even a long list, does not answer this question.
I find it interesting that you feel "anecdotal" means something like "substantiated". In this context, again, statistics are substantive. Particular stories, many of which you could collect and represent as "proof," of some level of equivalency are not very useful in divining the answer to the question. We assume, when talking about a nationwide trend, encompassing many years and many different people and groups of people, that we can and will find individual accounts of all manner of behaviors, from many sources. This does not help us much in divining the relevance of these stories to the trend. Are they exceptional? Are they typical? We do not know.
In Samps earlier post, from last year, he gave a list of stories that do not strongly substantiate the thesis he has about Reublicans. You countered with a longer list of similar stories. The effect was the same- this was not effective substantiation of *your* thesis, that the two groups are equally guilty of these behaviors. It is also a poor challenge to the claim that Republican political culture is geared towards disenfranchisement of undesirable voters- evidence of Democratic malfeasance does not address that claim in the slightest. It has no bearing on an argument about Areubkicsn political culture, except to establish an equivalency in degree of culpability for perceived rings (which it fails to do).
As for geraine, you are crossing a line in telling others to pay me no mind. You can disagree with what I have to say, but I have every right to be heard, and others can decide for themselves whether they care to interact. You have no business saying otherwise.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Seriously? Anecdotal, in this context, refers to a small sample of sources... I find it interesting that you feel "anecdotal" means something like "substantiated".
As I alluded to above, the context in which you used the word wasn't clear. You can see in my response that I understand anecdotal to mean (correctly, according to one definition of the word) "un-substantiated." Yes, anecdotal, in the sense you intended it, can refer to a small sample of sources, which is a different argument than the one it appeared you were making.
quote:...the question: who does what more, and to what degree more (or less), is a large scale question. Answering it requires that you examine the systematic processes and trends within the parties that indicate which, if either, tends towards a certain behavior. a list of cases, even a long list, does not answer this question.
Answering the question requires a reversal in the procedure you stated. One must build a set of data out of a substantial collection of a certain behavior and then identify systemic tendencies and trends which correlate with that behavior. A list of cases, especially a long list, would greatly increase one's chance of accurately identifying trends and patterns within a nationwide group of individuals.
The list wasn't presented as some bomb-proof, definitive answer to the the question. The point of presenting a list with a small selection of examples was to show that there have been cases of Democrats engaging in voter fraud in recent years. No one claimed the list was comprehensive or statistically significant. In fact, no one, on either side of this discussion, has presented any scientific research or information on the subject.
quote:In Samps earlier post, from last year, he gave a list of stories that do not strongly substantiate the thesis he has about Reublicans. You countered with a longer list of similar stories.
This issue is becoming tedious. I didn't counter with a list. If you reread my response to his list you will see my only contention was that the cases he claimed to be examples of voter suppression, weren't.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: This issue is becoming tedious. I didn't counter with a list. If you reread my response to his list you will see my only contention was that the cases he claimed to be examples of voter suppression, weren't.
You're changing your story. You contended additionally that the first story seems like it is intended to rile liberals and make news. And you even admitted that the fourth article seems to have the spread of voter misinformation in it. I guess over time your view has evolved from "I'm sure there are BETTER examples" to "why, those aren't examples at all!"
I guess we could check back in four additional years — if all of the links have died by then, you can change your position again to say "Samprimary only gave us four dead links!"
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Last presidential election there was some pretty high profile (to people on the right, anyway) voter fraud allegations going on in PA, mostly involving ACORN if I remember right. At a guess, he's referencing that.
If he's referencing that then he doesn't understand what happened with ACORN or is hoping that his constituents don't.
*All* of the ACORN-related allegations were regarding registration fraud (NOT vote fraud) - the submission of false or duplicate names for registration. This was generally done by overzealous canvassers trying to boost their numbers and it was often ACORN that reported the offenders.
Registration fraud does not lead to vote fraud. It leads to unscrupulous canvassers stealing money from organizations like ACORN.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: This issue is becoming tedious. I didn't counter with a list. If you reread my response to his list you will see my only contention was that the cases he claimed to be examples of voter suppression, weren't.
You're changing your story. You contended additionally that the first story seems like it is intended to rile liberals and make news. And you even admitted that the fourth article seems to have the spread of voter misinformation in it. I guess over time your view has evolved from "I'm sure there are BETTER examples" to "why, those aren't examples at all!"
I guess we could check back in four additional years — if all of the links have died by then, you can change your position again to say "Samprimary only gave us four dead links!"
My bad. Let me rephrase it. My only contention was that most of the cases you claimed to be examples of voter suppression, weren't. So I called the list weak. But good job, man. Way to be fastidious and catch my "changing story"... And I'm sure the one broken link was an incredible case of serious, serious voter suppression on the part of Republicans. God help us if your other amazing examples disappear..
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:House Republican leader Mike Turzai acknowledged the law's political implications at a Republican State Committee meeting last month.
"Voter ID - which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania - done," Turzai told the crowd, which burst into applause, as he listed legislative accomplishments under GOP control.
See at least they're straightforward and honest about it. I am sure this will curb all the no issues of voter fraud that Pennsylvania has, so as to keep it from being any more transparent. Oh!
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:In her 2010 book, The Myth of Voter Fraud, Lorraine Minnite tracked down every single case brought by the Justice Department between 1996 and 2005 and found that the number of defendants had increased by roughly 1,000 percent under Ashcroft. But that only represents an increase from about six defendants per year to 60, and only a fraction of those were ever convicted of anything. A New York Times investigation in 2007 concluded that only 86 people had been convicted of voter fraud during the previous five years. Many of those appear to have simply made mistakes on registration forms or misunderstood eligibility rules, and more than 30 of the rest were penny-ante vote-buying schemes in local races for judge or sheriff. The investigation found virtually no evidence of any organized efforts to skew elections at the federal level.
quote: In the deposition, released to the press yesterday, Greer mentioned a December 2009 meeting with party officials. “I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting,” he said, according to the Tampa Bay Times. He also said party officials discussed how “minority outreach programs were not fit for the Republican Party,” according to the AP.
posted
There are some mumblings that this may backfire, as a large portion of those with expired IDs are likely to be elderly - pretty reliable voters that tend to lean Republican.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted announced Tuesday that the state would not comply with a court ruling and restore early voting in the final weekend before the election until an appellate court rules on the matter.
posted
I'd be happy to give the GOP the benefit of the doubt and assume they're seeking nothing more than fair and legal voting. Except...
- They only seem to care about it in swing states, where most of those laws were passed (and are being fought, and often overturned or blocked, in the courts).
- They don't seem to be working nearly as hard, or really at all, to increase voter education measures or to make sure every legal voter has the ID demanded.
- Limiting early voting hours and shutting down early voting locations has no justifiable reason other than limiting access to voters. In my state (Florida) in the last presidential election, 54 percent of black voters voted early, twice the number of white voters who did so. The last governor increased the early voting times to handle the crowds; this one severely cut them back.
- The harsh anti-registration law which required a mountain of paperwork and a strict 48-hour turnaround for voter registration (and heavy fines for missing the deadline) seemed almost comically aimed at discouraging groups like the League of Women Voters and Rock the Vote. This was also blocked in Florida.
- Oddly enough, voter purge laws seem to happen most often when a presidential election rolls around and a Republican governor is in charge. Florida's recent voter purge attempt was opposed by the Justice Dept. and many of the local elections officials, about half of whom are Republican.
- I'd also be more open to the idea if politicians like Mike Turzai didn't open state that these laws would help Romney win. I notice none of the defenders here have addressed that quote yet.
Registration fraud involves thousands of cases. Voter fraud much less than that.
Voter suppression may keep millions of legal voters from exercising their constitutional right. Laws passed in Pennsylvania may prevent up to 750,000 legal voters -- almost 10% of the population -- from voting. Number of incidents of voter fraud? 0, according to the state of Pennsylvania.
And in-person voter fraud is a stupid way to rig an election. Much easier is sending in fraudulent absentee ballots, but I don't see any laws targeting those. And I won't, since that might impact military voters who might be inclined to vote GOP.
No. If these laws were intended to improve the electoral process, rather than just making sure one side won, they would be focused on increasing the legal vote. Not a single one of these laws does that.
[ September 08, 2012, 12:11 AM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
An (intentionally anecdotal) personal comment about Voter Registration:
I ended up finally registering to vote again, after moving, mostly because I had an app that allowed me to fill out the information, which then sent me the registration form that I could print out.
Even still, it took me well over a week and a half to print it out, sign it, do the folding, and get it to the post office, along with my wifes. Part of the issue was that after you print it out, you have to tape the bottom so it can be mailed in its own "envelope" that it turns into.
Now while there is obviously nothing difficult about what I mentioned, the truth is, it took so long simply because we didn't have scotch tape in our house. Scotch Tape.
If I didn't care so much to go out and vote, I would have probably just put it off like I do other things if they're not deemed "That important." (Even still, I live in a state that isn't a swing state, will vote heavily for Romney, and my vote won't even show up as a blip on the 1000 people in Oklahoma that vote for Obama.)
So the point of this story: Anything that adds an impediment to make it more difficult to vote will "Suppress" the vote. You can argue all day on whether or not it's intentional, but the fact remains - it will suppress it. My story is not unique to how people tend to act.
If I had to go get a new ID, pay $10, sit around for an hour or more at the DMV.. Even though I want to vote, I would probably deem that it was too much of a waste to go down and waste an entire afternoon + money so I can vote in an election. And I have a car, and the extra money to pay, and time to "Waste." There are many many people that don't.
There are a lot of people that vote that don't drive, don't use Credit Cards (Or only use them at small shops that don't ID) etc. and don't carry around a Valid State ID. A percentage won't be able to afford it, a percentage won't be able to get to the DMV, a percentage can't take off work.
The "early voting" restrictions are just asinine as early voting is only set up to make it easier to vote, but it appears when people noticed only minorities really utilize it, they wanted to get rid of it. That's just sad. Many working class people can't take off work to run down to the voting center on a specific day, early voting allows them a way around that.
You can say this is all baloney if you want, but I do remember in my days in the Military, I didn't vote "Absentee" mostly because it was a hassle. But also, because I was younger - not very political, and didn't have any candidates I actually liked anyways. But I knew lots of military that didn't vote for the same reason. I also have a friend living in Japan that won't vote in this election, just because to him it's too much trouble to get his Absentee ballot and send it in.
Posts: 164 | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote: Conservative anti–voter fraud fervor first arose around the same time as two turning points in American politics. The first was John F. Kennedy’s narrow presidential win in 1960, which many Republicans attributed to voter fraud in Illinois and Texas. The second was the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which, by banning discriminatory voting practices, stoked fear in some quarters about the rising power of black voters. During the run-up to the 1964 presidential election, the Republican National Committee launched Operation Eagle Eye, the nation’s first large-scale anti–voter fraud campaign. As part of the program, the RNC recruited tens of thousands of volunteers to show up at polling places, mostly in inner cites, and challenge voters’ eligibility using a host of tools and tactics, including cameras, two-way radios, and calls to Republican-friendly sheriffs.
After this, anti-fraud campaigns became commonplace, but they could backfire, as the RNC learned in 1981. That year, the party hired a swashbuckling 29-year-old named John Kelly to organize “ballot security” for New Jersey’s gubernatorial election. Kelly, who turned up in the state wearing cowboy boots and a 10-gallon hat, arranged to have hundreds of thousands of sample ballots mailed to voters in black and Latino neighborhoods. His team then compiled a list of people whose ballots were returned as undeliverable, and allegedly tried to have them struck from the rolls. This technique, known as caging, is controversial because it can purge eligible voters. In this case, an outdated address roster was used—meaning that an unusually large share of the people on Kelly’s list may have been wrongly targeted.
Kelly and his associates also recruited squadrons of men—many of them off-duty police officers—to descend on black and Latino precincts around New Jersey on Election Day. Wearing National Ballot Security Task Force armbands, walkie-talkies, and in some cases guns, the men posted signs warning in large red letters that the areas were being patrolled. They then stationed themselves around polling places and allegedly tried to stop those whose names appeared on the caging list from voting.
According to a Republican Party lawyer who was on the scene that day, before the polls closed, Kelly hightailed it out of the state in a Chevy Impala, armbands and signs stuffed in the trunk. When the Essex County prosecutor’s office launched a statewide criminal investigation the following week, he was nowhere to be found.
In the end, prosecutors didn’t bring charges—no would-be voters stepped forward to say they had been blocked from casting ballots—but the Democratic National Committee filed a federal lawsuit accusing Kelly and the RNC of violating the Voting Rights Act. To settle the case, in 1982 the RNC signed a consent decree, agreeing to end all “ballot security” programs targeting minority precincts. Four years later, the RNC was caught caging minority voters in Louisiana, an effort that was intended to “keep the black vote down,” according to an internal RNC memo. The DNC filed suit again, and a chastened RNC agreed to a modified decree requiring it to submit all plans for anti–voter fraud campaigns to the court for approval.
At which point, the RNC mostly abandoned its anti–voter fraud programs. While state parties and individual candidates continued to launch scattered ballot-security efforts, national attention to voter fraud faded. That is, until the 2000 presidential election. Tova Wang, who was on the staff of the 2001 National Commission on Federal Election Reform and is now a fellow at the public-policy think tank Demos, says that after Bush v. Gore, political strategists took a new interest in the mechanics of elections. “Partisan activists began trying to alter the rules and tinker with election administration to gain partisan advantage,” she told me recently.
Some liberals began pushing for measures (such as Election Day registration) that would lower barriers to voting. Conservatives, on the other hand, took a renewed interest in fighting voter fraud. A raft of new state legislation followed, including voter-ID laws (now on the books in 33 states) and laws requiring people to show proof of citizenship before registering to vote. It’s not clear what problem these measures solve, however. Several exhaustive studies have found that voter fraud is exceedingly rare.
Meanwhile, the RNC has tried to get back into the ballot-security game. In 2008, the party asked Dickinson Debevoise, the New Jersey federal judge who presided over the two 1980s cases, to abolish or modify the decades-old consent decree barring certain anti–voter fraud activities. The RNC argued that the ban had outlived its purpose, but Debevoise was not persuaded, and denied the RNC’s request. (The party appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which affirmed Debevoise’s ruling.) “Minority voters continue to overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates,” Debevoise wrote in his 2009 decision. “As long as that is the case, the RNC and other Republican groups may be tempted to keep qualified minority voters from casting their ballots, especially in light of the razor-thin margin of victory by which many elections have been decided in recent years.”
Or at least having folks committing registration fraud--in many ways similar to what ACORN was doing, except that ACORN officials admitted their mistakes and reported themselves, while this Republican group said "Its just one guy and we fired him." which doesn't explain the multi-county wide fraudulent forms.
Of course what might explain it was that the Republicans hired the same guy who, in 2008, led their registration drive organization that was caught illegally disposing of Democratic registration forms.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't get too fussed about extra registration forms as the incentive for that is generally that people get paid by how many people they register. It is not generally about skewing elections. The only "victim" of the ACORN problem was ACORN.
Disposing of registration forms is serious voter fraud with the intent of denying someone their vote. Much like the voter "purges" that continue to go on.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Literally the only thing about this that surprises me is that they actually fired Strategic Allied Consulting this time around.
Like, I remember them. They have been shady evil dicks since forever. when their founder guy fled state in a loaded car, and all that, that was tops
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anybody have any good idea about what to do about voter suppression and voter fraud? Would volunteering to poll watch help?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There needs to be rules against that sort of thing Samprimary. There would be a fire storm if President Obama was investing in or had family that were board members of a company producing voting machines, no matter how hard they worked to ensure impartiality.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously? How much more of this crap are they going to do?
Ohio County Gets Election Date Wrong In Notices To 2,200 Voters
quote: The notice also included an incorrect listing for the location of a polling place. Election board director JoAnn Friar, a Republican, blamed the mistake on a computer glitch and told the Washington Post that new notices would be sent out to the voters affected. The county is on Lake Erie near Toledo and voted 52 percent for Barack Obama in 2008
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Seriously? How much more of this crap are they going to do?
I'm assuming by "they" you meant, in this case, the computer glitch. Well, it's hard to say. Computers are complex machines and prone to the occasional error. Plus, their output is affected by the input received.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You want to explain the computer glitch that changed Tuesday to a Thursday and Nov 6 to Nov 8? Do you think it was sthe same glitch that glitched just the Spanish voter cards in AZ?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whether or not there was a computer glitch (which, frankly, just sounds like plausible deniability to me), someone should have checked the notice before it was sent out.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmm. The problem in question-actually there are two-is that a single digit was used incorrectly-an 8 instead of a six. It didn't, for example, say 'Thursday November 8th', which would be tougher to swallow.
But there was also an incorrect location given, which I'm not sure is being defended as a 'glitch'. Some unanswered questions would seem to be: why did only about 7% of the county's 30,000 voters get these incorrect postcards? Was there some reason why these particular postcards were, in the usual course of creating and posting them, their own group and thus potentially subject to glitch? How likely *is* it that a computer glitch would misplace a digit like that and what is the reasoning for the incorrect location? If that too is a glitch, how likely is it that a glitch would swap a digit and then select an entirely wrong address, presumably chosen from a list of addresses?
Here's one thing that's straightforward, though: it's unwise to simply credit a politician's excuse of unforseen random accident when that politician stands to benefit from said accident. Those who assume she is telling the truth are thus partisan hacks.
Conveniently, this story *does* further illustrate that problems with voting are hugely unlikely to be the sort that could be thwarted by greater ID requirements. It's past time the GOP establishment stopped treating people like they were freaking idiots with that line of bull, though I suppose that won't happen until their base insists upon it.
An anecdotal sign of hope for me: my father, who has never ventured closer to voting Democrat in a Presidential election than leaving it blank (that is, only once-the last election) is seriously considering voting Democrat this time, he who has voted Republican on that at least 8 times. He's willing like many Americans to stomach a lot in terms of the usual political truth-stretching, but this particular decades-long Republican voter sees more than he can stand in Romney. It's nice.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just looked at the postcard, and I'm wondering how a glitch could produce that error. I edit and lay out documents for a living, and I've never seen a digit randomly change itself between layout and printing. Careless typo? Absolutely. "Computer glitch"? I highly doubt it.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Glitch, I think, is a convenient way for the Director of the Board to waylay blame for an error on the part of his staff. I'm not credible of the idea that such a person would risk a federal prison term for organizing such a scheme as sending false reminder postcards to voters (voters of all parties, it seems)- particularly given that it would be likely to be covered in the news, and would present more risk than reward for whomever organized it.
It is reminiscent of the deeply cynical "reminders," that do circulate among voters giving them incorrect information intentionally, but it doesn't seem to be in that vein.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Anybody have any good idea about what to do about voter suppression and voter fraud? Would volunteering to poll watch help?
Is this a serious question? I can't tell.
If it is, I'd just like to point out that there were only like eleven known cases of voter fraud last election. The sentence for getting caught is jail time and a lofty 500 dollar fee (or more, depending on the state). And for what? A single extra vote? I don't think people are generally stupid enough to waste their time. The benefit simply doesn't outweigh the risk. Not by a long shot.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Anybody have any good idea about what to do about voter suppression and voter fraud? Would volunteering to poll watch help?
Is this a serious question? I can't tell.
If it is, I'd just like to point out that there were only like eleven known cases of voter fraud last election. The sentence for getting caught is jail time and a lofty 500 dollar fee (or more, depending on the state). And for what? A single extra vote? I don't think people are generally stupid enough to waste their time. The benefit simply doesn't outweigh the risk. Not by a long shot.
It was a serious question. I am not concerned with the kind of voter fraud you are talking about. I am concerned with the kind of voter fraud and suppression as practiced by folks like Jon Husted in Ohio (illegal purges, shortening polling hours, sending out incorrect information, throwing out absentee ballots). What can be done to stop this kind of thing?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
ATTENTION HATRACKERS. IF YOU INTEND TO VOTE REPUBLICAN ESPECIALLY IN A SWING STATE: Please know that your vote date has been changed to November 8th in order to alleviate overworked ballot areas. Straight-ticket and primarily conservative voters will receive their own polling locations on that date after everyone else has voted. Free coffee and pastries will be provided. Failure to vote appropriately on the 8th rather than national election day based on your straight-ticket post-polling analysis is a federal offense and can result in fines and jail time.
MEMBERS OF THE MORMON CHURCH: Your votes have been moved to the 9th and will take place at a temple closest to your place of residence. Please do NOT contact church officials for information about this change, they are very overburdened with making sure that they have ballot equipment and staff for these events and cannot field information calls. Poll instructions will be provided by mail.
LIBERTARIANS: please vote for gary. He totally stands a chance and will actually hand his position over to ron paul the second he is elected. Ron paul revolution 2012 end the fed.
REPUBLICANS IN GENERAL OTHERWISE: Unskewedpolls.com has the right of it and Romney is totally a shoo-in for the election, don't worry about it. You all have jobs anyway right, don't lose your coveted status of Productives just to go vote in a silly election, its okay don't worry about it you got this.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I recently read "The Stainless Steel Rat For President". It was written in the early 80's. It described how computerized voting machines would be sold as "cheaper and more accurate" to the voting public, and would then be used to steal elections. Sometimes the Sci-fi guys get it right.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:A new Florida law that contributed to long voter lines and caused some to abandon voting altogether was intentionally designed by Florida GOP staff and consultants to inhibit Democratic voters, former GOP officials and current GOP consultants have told The Palm Beach Post.
Republican leaders said in proposing the law that it was meant to save money and fight voter fraud. But a former GOP chairman and former Gov. Charlie Crist, both of whom have been ousted from the party, now say that fraud concerns were advanced only as subterfuge for the law’s main purpose: GOP victory.
Former Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer says he attended various meetings, beginning in 2009, at which party staffers and consultants pushed for reductions in early voting days and hours.
"The Republican Party, the strategists, the consultants, they firmly believe that early voting is bad for Republican Party candidates. It’s done for one reason and one reason only. … ‘We’ve got to cut down on early voting because early voting is not good for us.’ They never came in to see me and tell me we had a (voter) fraud issue. It’s all a marketing ploy."
quote:Wayne Bertsch, who handles local and legislative races for Republicans, said he knew targeting Democrats was the goal.
“In the races I was involved in in 2008, when we started seeing the increase of turnout and the turnout operations that the Democrats were doing in early voting, it certainly sent a chill down our spines. And in 2008, it didn’t have the impact that we were afraid of. It got close, but it wasn’t the impact that they had this election cycle,” Bertsch said, referring to the fact that Democrats picked up seven legislative seats in Florida in 2012 despite the early voting limitations.
Another GOP consultant, who did not want to be named, also confirmed that influential consultants to the Republican Party of Florida were intent on beating back Democratic turnout in early voting after 2008.
In 2008 Democrats, especially African-Americans, turned out in unprecedented numbers for President Barack Obama, many of them casting ballots during 14 early voting days. In Palm Beach County, 61.2 percent of all early voting ballots were cast by Democrats that year, compared with 18.7 percent by Republicans.
In 2011 Republicans, who had super majorities in both chambers of the legislature, passed HB 1355, which curtailed early voting days from 14 to eight; greatly proscribed the activities of voter registration organizations like the League of Women Voters; and made it harder for voters who had changed counties since the last election to cast ballots, a move that affected minorities proportionately more than whites. The League and others challenged the law in court, and a federal judge threw out most of the provisions related to voter registration organizations.
Do tell me who here still believes that these measures were there to combat the Looming Menace of Voter Fraud.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:epublican campaign consultant Scott Tranter appeared on a panel Monday hosted by the Pew Center on the States to discuss the long lines and voter ID controversies that plagued the 2012 election. In his comments, Tranter seemed to imply that he believed these issues were helpful to Republicans and should be pursued for that reason.
"A lot of us are campaign officials -- or campaign professionals -- and we want to do everything we can to help our side. Sometimes we think that's voter ID, sometimes we think that's longer lines -- whatever it may be," Tranter said with a laugh.
Can we take this as given from now an and lose the notion that voter ID is about fraud?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
and the same republicans will gleefully and racistly pack minorities into minimum-damage districts while gerrymandering
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Crist testifies in Senate that there was voter suppression in Florida
quote:It showed that the Republican attorney who engineered the 2000 Florida felons list, which African American leaders said purged thousands of eligible blacks from voter rolls, drafted Florida’s controversial law that restricted early voting and voter registration campaigns in 2012. Nelson also included into the Congressional record a story by The Palm Beach Post on so-called voter suppression efforts. In a written statement to the committee, he said: “For me it’s pretty straight-forward: Florida’s 2011 election law changes were politically motivated and clearly designed to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters – and, not, as its Republican sponsors contended, to prevent voter fraud.”
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
And I'm sure the one broken link was an incredible case of serious, serious voter suppression on the part of Republicans. God help us if your other amazing examples disappear..
