New Barriers to Voting

By TChris, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:05:30 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The Help America Vote Act turns out to be the Stop Americans From Voting Act as it's being administered by some states.

[S]ix swing states seem to be in violation of federal law in two ways. Michigan and Colorado are removing voters from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election, which is not allowed except when voters die, notify the authorities that they have moved out of state, or have been declared unfit to vote. Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina and Ohio seem to be improperly using Social Security data to verify registration applications for new voters.
In addition to the six swing states, three more states appear to be violating federal law. Alabama and Georgia seem to be improperly using Social Security information to screen registration applications from new voters. And Louisiana appears to have removed thousands of voters after the federal deadline for taking such action.

[more...]

In three states — Colorado, Louisiana and Michigan — the number of people purged from the election rolls since Aug. 1 far exceeds the number who may have died or relocated during that period.
States may be improperly removing voters who have moved within the state, election experts said, or who are considered inactive because they have failed to vote in two consecutive federal elections. For example, major voter registration drives have been held this year in Colorado, which has also had a significant population increase since the last presidential election, but the state has recorded a net loss of nearly 100,000 voters from its rolls since 2004.

The Times article suggests that some of the problem results from misunderstandings about how the federal law works. But Republicans hope to exploit the law to prevent voters from showing up to cast ballots for Democrats.

On Monday, the Ohio Republican Party filed a motion in federal court against the secretary of state to get the list of all names that have been flagged by the Social Security database since Jan. 1. The motion seeks to require that any voter who does not clear up a discrepancy be required to vote using a provisional ballot.
Republicans said in the motion that it is central to American democracy that nonqualified voters be forbidden from voting.

Actually, the Republicans who filed the motion got it backwards, as they often do. It's central to American democracy that all eligible voters be allowed to vote. Votes cast by ineligible voters are a negligible problem, not one that has even a remote chance of affecting a presidential election. Preventing thousands of eligible voters from casting ballots could, however, affect the outcome of the election in closely contested states.

This is yet another Republican-created problem that Democrats will need to fix next year. They should start by reforming the Help America Vote Act so that it actually helps Americans vote, rather than burdening their right to vote.

< Helping Homeowners For The Common Good | Obama v. McCain on Family Planning >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

New Barriers to Voting | 49 comments (49 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I'm really worried about this - 290,000 in Ohio (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by sallywally on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:49:14 AM EST

whose registrations don't match the records or something. That could give Ohio to McCain even though Obama is ahead in the polls and likely to win here if eligible voters are allowed to vote.

I don't downplay the Repubs' ability to use any of these means to take the election away, and the article is talking about the swing states. If Obama is ahead by, say, 6 points, they are fully capable of taking him down.

Maybe it's just watching Ken Blackwell take the state away from Kerry, who almost certainly would have won here without those dirty tricks, all designed to disqualify eligible voters or prevent them from voting, as well as the strong possibility that the Repubs changed vote totals here.

These little machinations of theirs are extremely dangerous and should be taken seriously.

It's good The Times is bringing this out, maybe the media darlings will make it an issue and some light and possible corrections may reach these underground Repub tactics.

Cuyahoga County (none / 0) (#7)
by Fabian on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:24:00 AM EST

has more registered voters than the census estimate showed! Something is seriously off there. Rumors are circulating that there were quotas involved.

We'll see how many of them actually vote. This is going to be a strange year because the sheer number of newly registered voters. I'm not at all sure how it will play out. An influx of new voters who actually vote could play havoc with polling.


That's not uncommon, actually (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:55:47 AM EST

and especially as we near the end of a decade aka a census "decennial cycle." Consider that the census of 2000 is already eight years behind. Even a mid-decennial census could be behind by now -- it's a count accepted in 2005 but begun as much as four years ago now. In my state, data collected for the census but not yet officially accepted counts more than 300,000 newcomers since 2000. Unless and until the census accepts it as the official count, I'm sure that some counties here will have more registered voters than "residents" by outdated numbers.

This also happened in a fast-growing country in my state in 2004.


Cuyahoga County (none / 0) (#23)
by Fabian on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:01:40 PM EST

has been historically losing population, not gaining it!

CC is not some booming suburb - so either the census stats are way off or those voter registrations are suspect.


Ah, yes -- then (none / 0) (#31)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 02:26:59 PM EST

we have a problem. As you say, it could be the census, too -- it's amazing how flawed those can be (sometimes for the same reason, i.e., payment incentives to censustakers). But overall, the census process is more reliable than the voter registration process, because at least censustakers are officially trained and certified. The voter registration process is, frankly, an embarrassment.


My brother did census last time. (none / 0) (#36)
by Fabian on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 03:19:54 PM EST

Yes, in Cuyahoga County, no less.

Some people will just not fill out the forms. They won't reply through the mail. They'll pretend not to be home even though it's obvious the building is occupied. It's a shame, because it adversely affects resources and representation to a region.


: Yes -- I've read histories of the census (none / 0) (#40)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 07:41:26 PM EST

as a friend of mine is one of the leading historians of the census. Fascinating stuff.
And I tried to find in the census data, for years, the grandma for whom I am named -- until I finally figured out that censustakers then were probably as bad at spelling our somewhat unusual name (although it was more popular then, a century ago) as they are today. So I looked for her sister and voila, there was my grandma with our name misspelled.
One study I found especially fascinating was of census data from then on women. The censustakers were almost all men and very reluctant to ask questions about women's health. So they created the all-encompassing category of "female complaints"!

There is an excellent (none / 0) (#34)
by standingup on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 02:59:30 PM EST

article from Steven Rosenfeld last year on this topic.

My state, Missouri, is one that was sued by the DOJ for not enforcing the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The actions on the part of the DOJ to go after states for this sort of violation have been part of the Bush administrations politicization of the DOJ. Some of the problems with the number of registered voters exceeding the number of voter age residents were simply a problem of the county clerks mistakenly counting people twice.

While the DOJ was worried about the voter rolls not being purged, they neglected a problem with the state not complying with the portion of the NVRA requiring state public assistance agencies to provide registration assistance to their lower income clients. So ACORN with the assistance of Project Vote, Demos: A Network for Ideas & Action and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law took action after the MO Department of Social Services refused to do anything to remedy the problem.

In addition the plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction that would require the DSS to come into compliance with the NVRA as soon as the court can set a hearing date. "Our investigation revealed that DSS is failing to provide hundreds, if not thousands, of low income residents the opportunity to register to vote each day," says Brian Mellor, Senior Counsel for Project Vote. "State officials have the legal responsibility to offer these citizens
the opportunity to participate in the democratic process and should be doing so immediately."
The NVRA is commonly known as the "Motor Voter" law, due to its requirement that states provide voter registration opportunities at motor vehicle
departments. The NVRA also requires that voter registration be offered at public assistance agencies when citizens apply for benefits, recertify their eligibility and change their address.
Low-income citizens are among the least likely to own a car and therefore are less likely to register to vote at motor vehicle departments, making the public assistance agency requirement crucial in reaching these citizens. Only 66 percent of adult Missouri citizens in households making less than $25,000 a year were registered to vote in 2006 compared to 85 percent of those in
households making $100,000 or more.

The allegations of "voter fraud" from fraudulent voter registrations has been investigated by the Election Assistance Commission and others. The studies have not found anything to substantiate the claims. But keep this from Rosenfeld's article in mind:

Voter roll purges, if incorrectly done, can be a factor in determining election outcomes -- particularly in tight races. Unlike most of the "voter fraud" cases cited by GOP activists, where a handful of registrations -- usually in the single digits -- from big voter registration drives are found to be erroneous, purges can affect thousands of voters. In Florida and Missouri in 2000, a total of 100,000 legal voters were incorrectly removed, according to academics and local election officials. In Cleveland in 2004, voter purges were a factor behind long lines and people leaving without voting as poll workers dealt with people who did not know they had been removed from voter lists, various media reported.

Unfortunately none of the systems are perfect but we should be cautious and balance the concerns with the outcomes.


is there any way to verify whether (none / 0) (#35)
by of1000Kings on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 03:18:11 PM EST

or not your vote was counted...

I've often wondered how many times I've voted and it hasn't counted considering I move a lot and don't really have a permanent address most of the time..


There's a fascinating Youtube (none / 0) (#41)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 07:44:20 PM EST

on this that I found on some site and wish I had saved -- a long report from two guys, just regular guys, in a state where they could look up online their voting records. They were stunned, first, to find that the records illegally showed for whom they voted -- and it was not for whom they voted.

They pursued it and got nowhere for ages. . . .


May be this (none / 0) (#45)
by Lora on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 08:31:17 PM EST

Cream City,

This may be the video you're looking for (2nd one down on the website):

Construction Workers Discover Their Secret Ballot Invaded

A must-see for anyone who thinks that voting by mail is the answer.

Also included on this web page are many other excellent videos of election issues.


: That's it -- yes, a must-see (none / 0) (#47)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:31:30 PM EST

that may give voters some sleepless nights.
Those guys are great, their devotion and determination in trying to get to the bottom of this.

I think you (none / 0) (#44)
by standingup on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 08:22:54 PM EST

might be able to go back to rolls to see if you were counted as having voted but should not be able to tell how you voted. So technically you could check to see if your vote was counted but not if it was counted correctly.

It also depends on the laws of the state where you reside. If you are moving within the state, most will allow you to file a provisional ballot if you arrive at the polls and your name does not appear on the roll. Every state has there own election laws but those do have to be in compliance with the federal statutes on elections.

The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) was passed after the 2000 election problems in Florida to help keep people from being denied the ability to cast a ballot by providing a process for provisional ballots to be cast. There were still problems in a few states with the interpretation of the federal law. Ohio's Secretary of State wanted to use as narrow an interpretation as possible and the whole matter ended up in court before the election.


See the video above (none / 0) (#48)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:32:09 PM EST

to see how well we're doing with the "secret ballot."


: Why can't (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by standingup on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:37:55 PM EST

our civil servants understand how important it is to not have a conflict of interest with a vendor when it comes to our elections?

Here we go again (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Dadler on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:49:58 AM EST

I know I've harped on this before, but, let's wake up, we are in for election fraud of unprecedented proportions. It will make 2000 and 2004 look like Mr. Clean elections. We'll be lucky, IMO, that the fiasco this election is almost certain to become does not finish off our economic demise with an ugly flourish. Confidence in almost everything is at a low point right now, and another, even more fraudulent, election will further destroy if not finish off completely, what the economic crisis hasn't already laid low.

But I hope I am very wrong. And laughably so.

: I agree, the past is prologue (none / 0) (#32)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 02:28:22 PM EST

but also hope I'm wrong, of course. However, having read massive studies on the history of voter fraud, vote suppression, etc., and seeing so many recent reports -- I think every attempt to plug a hole has created new and remarkably creative loopholes.

Something Very Troubling in Virginia (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by daring grace on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:58:17 AM EST

The New Republic web site has an article about the ways that numerous local registrars (134!) are enacting arbitrary individual standards for accepting college students' registrations.

The Obama campaign and the ACLU are vigorously objecting and have had some success, but it sounds like it might have some effect on the youth turnout in VA--and Obama's chances of clinching the state.

Remember Jerry Falwell's son was mounting an aggressive GOTV registration drive with the students at his (and his father's) college, Liberty University in Virginia, musing they might manage to swing the election.

I wonder if Richmond is one of the spots where the registrar is acting balky?

This will be interesting (5.00 / 0) (#10)
by blogtopus on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:33:09 AM EST

If Obama goes into the election with an average of 10-12% points ahead of McCain and STILL loses... there will be people in the streets. I'm not kidding; people love this guy and he represents so much to them, to see him defeated in such an obviously undemocratic way would cause even the most complacent citizens to run angrily into the pathway of moving vehicles.

Perhaps the GOP is planning on this? What better way to keep Bush in power than to invoke Martial Law on an angry population.

/tinfoil

10 - 12? (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by CST on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:37:32 AM EST

Carville said 5 - 6.


Didn't say those were the numbers now (none / 0) (#14)
by blogtopus on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:18:31 AM EST

But as the economy keeps tanking, and we haven't seen the post debate numbers yet either. Worst case scenario think. It probably will be closer to 6-7% as it comes down to the wire.

Any new numbers out there, post debate?


: I didn't mean that's where we'll end up (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by CST on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:28:35 AM EST

I was just pointing out that Carville said if Obama goes into the election up by 5-6 points in the polls and loses it will mean terrible things for the country. I think he was talking more about the Bradley effect than voter fraud but it could be applied either way.
Post-debate - some polls seem to be tightening, others, like Gallup, seem to be breaking away.

There are two key things we need to do this month: (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by Newt on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:58:20 PM EST

Initiate lawsuits immediately in areas that are currently in violation of HAVA.
Be prepared with lawsuits in swing states such as Ohio and others that have potentially already experienced massive election fraud in 2000 and 2004. Expecting election fraud and filing lawsuits the day after the election might be our only chance to save our democracy this year.

In 2004, precincts in Ohio that had paper ballots exactly matched the exit polls. I'll say that again: the election results actually matched the exit polls where there were paper ballots that could be verified in a recount. Election results from precincts without paper ballots were exactly opposite the exit polls. I believe that the difference between paper vs. non-paper ballot precincts would convince a judge that electronic tampering has occurred. We should be prepared to argue that point as well as voter suppression strategies, and the time to prepare these lawsuits is now.

Good to see (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by Lora on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 07:22:19 PM EST

Excellent questions and comments here. People are taking notice of some of the many threats and obstacles to a fair election in this country; something we once thought we could take for granted. We cannot.

I have to credit the Bush (none / 0) (#1)
by Fabian on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:15:23 AM EST

years for one unintended benefit - the sharp focus on voting laws and the voting experience. Ohio is still wrangling with its voting process, including Republicans objecting to the enforcement of legislation that they helped to draft and voted for!

Amusing, no?

It's still a tangled mess, but at least we are attempting to move in the right direction. Perseverance furthers.

Colorado does not automatically purge (none / 0) (#4)
by rdandrea on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:51:14 AM EST

in the way the Times article implies.

If a voter fails to vote in a general election, they are flagged as inactive. If they fail to vote in two general elections, they are sent a postcard asking them if they want to stay on the voter rolls. If the voter fails to return the card, only then are they purged. Yes, it happens in January, but it's not an automatic purge. They have to skip voting for two straight elections and then not return a postcard. I think it's quite fair. If they've been purged in error, they can re-register. They can quickly find out if they're registered online or with a simple phone call.

It's a decent system of housekeeping. Although our County Clerk coordinates with the Health department to remove dead voters from the rolls, that system doesn't catch all of them. The counties in Colorado also share information on who moves within the state (it's virtually impossible to register in two counties at the same time), but that system does not catch people who move out of state.

The Times article quoted a statistic that there are 100,000 fewer voters in Colorado than there were in 2004. That's pretty common after the purges. It depends on when you tally the numbers. The registration always comes back up by Election Day. Registration for 2008 closed here Monday. I talked to the Elections Director Monday and she told me they are so backed up with data entry from all the new voters that they won't be able to give me precinct/party registration statistics until at least next week.

When I track registration from year to year, I am careful to compare apples to apples. I look at the official numbers used in the canvass after the election. You can't compare a January report, or even an August report, with a November report. You can't compare an odd-year report with an even-year report, and you especially can't compare a report from a presidential year with one from a non-presidential year (the Times did not do the latter two things, to its credit). Still, it's premature to compare 2008 to 2004 because the 2008 numbers are still being tallied.

I'm not saying not to be vigilant, I'm just saying that the Times article confused correlation with causation.

Registration is very cyclical. I've been tracking it locally since 1988. I wish I could post a graph here, because a picture is worth 1000 words.

I appreciate your input on this... (5.00 / 0) (#8)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:24:03 AM EST

...however, I'm not totally convinced that Mike Coffman and his staff aren't actively looking for ways to surpress the vote. The shenanigans that have taken place in the Sec. of State's office over the past few months doesn't exactly instill confidence in the process.

Things like this little "problem" in September...

http://tinyurl.com/4mbxr5

...tend to make one wonder what is truly going on at the SOS office.


I am not as suspicious of Coffman's staff (none / 0) (#19)
by rdandrea on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:52:02 AM EST

as I am of some of the county clerks. Not ours. I verified today with our Clerk that my county hasn't purged anyone since the last mandated purge in January 2007.

The way I understand our state's system, it's the counties who are responsible for maintaining their own voter lists; they just roll up electronically to the state system.

I'd be very curious to see county-by-county numbers. They might tell us which counties were purging. Not hurling an accusation here, but Google "Bob Balink" (El Paso County Clerk) to get a flavor of what things are like in Colorado Springs...


Oh, I've got a real good idea... (none / 0) (#26)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:08:01 PM EST

...of what does on down in the land of Dobson. Not a pretty thing.

I found it interesting that Mike Coffman refuses to comment on this story.

There's a post up on this over at ColoPols that could use your thoughts, if you have to time.


: I've read it (none / 0) (#27)
by rdandrea on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:14:45 PM EST

I'm waiting for a couple of couple people to check into that thread who are a whole lot smarter than I am about what's going on over on the Eastern Slope.
I live out here in the hinterlands. It's a lot simpler to keep track of what's going on. I can just phone up the County Clerk and call her by her first name. And she recognizes my voice LOL.
I really think it's a county-by-county thing, and I'll bet there are just one or two counties at the core of it.

Got a good website? (none / 0) (#9)
by Fabian on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:25:19 AM EST

What you say makes sense, but it's nice to see it all laid out - with graphs and everything. :-)


: I can show you for my county only (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by rdandrea on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:47:18 AM EST

Blog wh*ring might be against the rules here, but last year when my county was fighting about the cost of voting machines, I did a five-part series on how to estimate the number of machines we needed. (The County Commissioners didn't want to spend the money, which would have been a complete disaster this year.) Obviously, registration and turnout are big factors in how you calculate the number of machines you need.
The series starts here with an article that shows the effect of NVRA, HAVA, boom, and bust on local registration. The next article discussed turnout The third article dealt with the impact of early and absentee voting on election-day turnout. Part four dealt with voter throughput (not so interesting); then there was a summary and conclusion that did the final estimate (even less interesting if you don't live here).
Remember this was done purely from a local perspective and deals only with one county in Colorado. Every county is unique; extrapolate at your own risk.

Republicans fear the voters ... (none / 0) (#6)
by Doc Rock on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:06:25 AM EST

. . . because of the power of each single vote!

Yesterday's NYT included an (none / 0) (#13)
by oculus on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:00:07 AM EST

article about voters registered through the efforts of ACORN in Missouri and other states. Flip side of the coin in some respects. Some fake names, such as entire starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys.

Ben Smith (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by Steve M on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:50:48 AM EST

of the Politico discusses a key distinction here.

Some folks will try to insinuate that putting a false name on the voter rolls is equivalent to striking a real voter from the voter rolls. If you think about it, anyone can send in a voter application that says "Mickey Mouse," but unless someone is actually going to show up on Election Day and vote as Mickey Mouse it has no impact on the election at all.


: Try explaining (none / 0) (#30)
by standingup on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:55:56 PM EST

that to a Republican. I have never run across a group so easily manipulated by fear and incapable of applying logic. The Republican politicians in Missouri are some of the best at playing up the "Democrats are stealing elections with voter fraud" meme. We have it every election cycle. They even have many of them convinced that homeless people should not be allowed to vote. As if not having a permanent address should terminate your right to vote?

Crickets (none / 0) (#16)
by Wile ECoyote on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:30:53 AM EST

about ACORN and their registering of the front line of the Dallas Cowboys in Vegas, and the raid on their offices in Indy.

None of that (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by TChris on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 11:50:27 AM EST

has produced a single ineligible vote, nor does it have a chance to influence the election, even though it is a prime GOP talking point, designed to distract attention from the active voter suppression schemes that could influence the election.


The danger, to me, is the (none / 0) (#22)
by oculus on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:01:22 PM EST

description of ACORN in the NYT as a community organizing/activist group. Does the negative publicity for such a group spill over on Obama, former community organizer?


: Yes, as he worked for ACORN (none / 0) (#25)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:06:02 PM EST

You've caught on to a couple of conservative agendas going on with this.

So (none / 0) (#38)
by Wile ECoyote on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 06:15:04 PM EST

ACORN is aiding the evil GOP by committing fraud and diverting attention from the real fraud?


: No (none / 0) (#46)
by standingup on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 08:57:51 PM EST

ACORN is not committing fraud. A person or persons working or volunteering for ACORN have submitted applications that were faked or duplicates. Are you capable of understanding the difference?
From ACORN's press release:

While the vast majority of our voter registration canvassers do a great job, there have been several times over the past ten months that our Las Vegas Quality Control program has identified a canvasser who appears to have knowingly submitted a fake or duplicate application in order to pad his or her hours.
Anytime ACORN quality control staff has identified a suspicious application, we have separated that application out and flagged it for election officials. We turn any suspicious applications to election officials separately, along with a cover sheet identifying the nature of the problem and an offer to provide election officials with the information they would need to pursue an investigation or prosecution of the individual. (Note that civic organizations are required by law to turn over ANY signed voter registration applications even when they are known to have problems). We immediately dismiss any employees we suspect of submitting fraudulent registrations.
It was surprising that law enforcement officials appeared suddenly at our Las Vegas offices Tuesday, because ACORN and its attorneys have already been proactive in providing information about problematic cards and any employee suspected of misconduct. In July, ACORN staff and our attorney set up a meeting with Clark County elections officials and a representative of the Secretary of State's office to urge them to take action on information ACORN had provided. Since then, and as recently as September 29^th , ACORN has provided officials with copies and--in some cases--second copies of many of the personnel records and the "problem card packages" and cover sheets with which we originally identified the problem cards.

Hold the individuals responsible but quit smearing the organization. And I can find actual examples of voter suppression on the part of the GOP. How many examples of voter registrations submitted by ACORN's drives resulting in election fraud by an illegal ballot being cast and counted?

There have been cases, if few (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:05:00 PM EST

to our knowledge, of people being told to go vote under fraudulent names previously registered. Cases in my city. So not entirely "crickets."

All of this costs us all a lot in election offices, hard-pressed for time right now to get the rolls ready for all to go well for the legitimate voters. Last time, such last-minute nonsense contributed to such chaos in my city that every city worker available was pulled in to pull all-nighters to get the rolls ready. That shorted a lot of other city offices trying to get their work done, too.

And all this crap supports the argument of the Repubs trying to push voter ID and take away same-day voter registration and more. We get nowhere by entirely dismissing voter-registration fraud, and it could cost us a lot more at the polls.


Like I said in another thread... (none / 0) (#21)
by Thanin on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:00:06 PM EST

Im expecting a loss now because I dont think enough will be done about this to counter it.

Faux News is really harping (none / 0) (#29)
by of1000Kings on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:46:45 PM EST

on Accorn today...it's a big story for them...

also, McCain came out and talked about it today mentioning something about how bad it would be if voter fraud decided the election...(the quote was much better, but I can't quite remember it, maybe someone can help me out...it was dripping with hypocrisy)

I couldn't help but spit my soda out...this coming from a Republican, and a Rove Republican at that...

The Republicans are going to use this, they don't feel poor people should vote, and they don't feel that people without a permanent address should vote (poor people)...

It's going to be their battle cry for the rest of the month leading up to the election, and could very well be because they already know that they are going to work on throwing out hundreds of thousands of votes (and I bet we can guess which side those votes will come from)...

And if they do lose in November it gives them a talking point for the whole of Obama's tenure as president...

and knowing the Republicans and how sleezy they can be when it comes to finding the means to an end they'll probably be able to work this over a lot better than the Democrats were able to with Bush (in both elections, in fact)...

We'll be hearing about this for years, and at the least it gets the Republican base outraged enough through all the stuff they'll hear on Faux News that I'm guessing we'll have ID cards by the 2010 elections, or the 2012 elections at the latest...

the future elections could be locked up for the Republicans for years because of the outrage they can produce today...

Rove, the mad-genius...
man, if only I were a world-class assassin....

3/4's of the stories on Faux News today (none / 0) (#33)
by of1000Kings on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 02:39:15 PM EST

have been about voter fraud...

I still want someone to answer the question of who is going to show up in Vegas with Tony Romo's ID and vote for him...

I mean, voter registration fraud isn't the same as voter fraud...

I guess Obama is in his basement right now printing up fake ID's for dead people....


: Ya gotta admit that voter Jimmy Johns (none / 0) (#42)
by Cream City on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 07:45:11 PM EST

at the address of a Jimmy John's sub shop is sorta funny. :-)

The problem is "registration" (none / 0) (#37)
by samtaylor2 on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 05:25:20 PM EST

Democrats need to push for bipartisan voting laws that make ID required for voting, but allows same day voting/ registration as well. It might hurt Democrats in one election cycle, but if we had a massive drive to get people their ID, progessives could have a permanent majority.

This voter Fraud stuff is a joke. The true fraud is the voter suppression stuff that we need to push the media to cover. In my mind the strongest evidence that Republican/ right leaning ideas are weak, is that they want fewer voters. If there ideas were strong, they would want every voter to get to the polls on election day.

ACLU sues swing states for election probs (none / 0) (#43)
by sallywally on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 07:52:56 PM EST

Whew!

i hope this helps. I do agree people in these states need to get lawsuits ready. I don't know if anyone is doing that here in Ohio, but I'll be contacting folks around here to see what's going on.