Vote Suppression vs Vote Fraud

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Varitek

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
16,861
Location
on borderland we run
The whole to-do about Acorn and vote fraud by the GOP and McCain really ticks me off ("threatening to topple our democracy" or whatever? please). Here's a link to an excellent article on the topic. Believing in vote fraud may be dangerous to a democracy's health. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine

The gist is that
a) Acorn as an organization isn't seeking to fraudulently register voters although there are some poor incentives in place for some of their workers to do so, and then they try and flag these bad registrations
b) it doesn't matter if Mickey Mouse is registered to vote because he still can't show up and vote, and it doesn't matter if Joe Carpenter registers 70 times, he still can only physically show up and vote once, and
c) actual vote fraud means somebody voting under someone else's name or who shouldn't be voting, and this has been documented very, very rarely in modern history and isn't worth the risk to the individual to get caught on a felony for one vote that won't make much of a difference anyway.


Meanwhile, the GOP is up to some really dirty schemes that are depriving people of their constitutional right to vote. WV electronic vote machines swap votes from Obama to McCain, MN and other states have done ballot purges that are completely illegitimate and over the top (people getting thrown off the rolls for middle initial discrepancies or typos that were some clerk's fault and not theirs), threats that cops will arrest you for outstanding warrants in Philly and other Dem-leaning areas... Then there were the stories in the news a few weeks ago about how some people whose homes have recently been foreclosed on will not be allowed to vote due to their changing addresses. (I am pressed for time so no links now, but I have read about all of these cases in major newspapers.)

Some of these are old tricks which have in the past influenced results of elections (see: FL in 2000). This year the Republicans seem to be ramping up the ol' voter suppression/disenfranchisement, all the while going on and on and on about the non-existent threat of vote fraud (which is really just harmless registration fraud).

A few of my thoughts -

-We know the republicans thrive on fear-mongering, which this obviously is, and that some of the base are selective about what they fear: they are fine with some poor black citizens not getting to vote, and even actively try to achieve this, while running around scared about the outside chance of illegal immigrants or whoever getting to vote. Cognitive dissonance anyone? How the hell is this possible? (yes, I know these people thrive on doublethink in all manner of areas of politics/life.)

-Why haven't the democrats, after seeing vote suppression work in the GOP's favor for the last two elections, been more effective at drawing attention and outrage to the issue, at countering false threats that keep people home on voting day, at challenging the vote purges in the courts more vehemently? This should have been and should be a major focus of financial, legal, and PR resources. It's getting some attention, but I don't feel like enough, given that it could be a major factor in deciding the election or results in some states.

-And even if it doesn't alter the final result, it still sickens me that our democracy can be allowed to be so broken, and in fact can be intentionally vandalized, while some people stand around idly, or even cheer it on.
 
Yeah the Acorn "story" really is pointless. If anyone with a reading comprehension beyond 4th grade would just read past the headline they would realize this "story" has no wings...
 
Unfortunately Americans have problems both reading past the headlines Fox News jams fairly and balancedly down their throats and reading beyond a 4th grade level.
 
ACORN is a distraction. If people are talking about that, they aren't talking about the thousands of legitimate voters that the republicans are having kicked off the voter rolls. It also gives them a soundbite for when someone mentions voter suppression.

As far as why the dems aren't screaming about the voter suppression from every hilltop, I've been asking myself that since 2000. You'd think with our "liberally-biased media" (ha ha) it would be front page news, yet somehow the networks are for the most part silent.

Funny how that works, eh?
 
Then there's this

Don’t worry about Mickey Mouse or ACORN stealing the election. According to an investigative report out today in Rolling Stone magazine, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Greg Palast, after a year-long investigation, reveal a systematic program of "GOP vote tampering" on a massive scale.

- Republican Secretaries of State of swing-state Colorado have quietly purged one in six names from their voter rolls.

Over several months, the GOP politicos in Colorado stonewalled every attempt by Rolling Stone to get an answer to the massive purge - ten times the average state's rate of removal.

- While Obama dreams of riding to the White House on a wave of new voters, more then 2.7 million have had their registrations REJECTED under new procedures signed into law by George Bush.
Kennedy, a voting rights lawyer, charges this is a resurgence of 'Jim Crow' tactics to wrongly block Black and Hispanic voters.

- A fired US prosecutor levels new charges - accusing leaders of his own party, Republicans, with criminal acts in an attempt to block legal voters as "fraudulent."

- Digging through government records, the Kennedy-Palast team discovered that, in 2004, a GOP scheme called "caging” ultimately took away the rights of 1.1 million voters. The Rolling Stone duo predict that, this November 4, it will be far worse.

There's more:

- Since the last presidential race, "States used dubious 'list management' rules to scrub at least 10 million voters from their rolls."

Among those was Paul Maez of Las Vegas, New Mexico - a victim of an unreported but devastating purge of voters in that state that left as many as one in nine Democrats without a vote. For Maez, the state's purging his registration was particularly shocking - he's the county elections supervisor.

The Kennedy-Palast revelations go far beyond the sum of questionably purged voters recently reported by the New York Times.

"Republican operatives - the party's elite commandos of bare-knuckle politics," report Kennedy and Palast, under the cover of fighting fraudulent voting, are "systematically disenfranchis[ing] Democrats."

The investigators level a deadly serious charge:

"If Democrats are to win the 2008 election, they must not simply beat McCain at the polls - they must beat him by a margin that exceeds the level of GOP vote tampering."

This one ain't over yet folks.
 
WV electronic vote machines swap votes from Obama to McCain, MN and other states have done ballot purges that are completely illegitimate and over the top (people getting thrown off the rolls for middle initial discrepancies or typos that were some clerk's fault and not theirs), threats that cops will arrest you for outstanding warrants in Philly and other Dem-leaning areas...

This is the shit that really scares me (as well as pisses me off). It's glaringly obvious that there is a LOT that needs to be done to fix the voting process in this country, but people's votes being changed is beyond the pale. Whether or not it's due to actual shenanigans or mechanical error, it's completely unacceptable.

I agree that this ACORN bullshit is just distraction. I would be very surprised if there isn't another fiasco like 2000 after election day. If there is, maybe finally people will take action to work towards actually fixing things so we don't have to go through this every election (or every other election).

A close race is one thing. This sort of thing is another.
 
re: a fiasco after election day

We can only hope that Obama will win by enough (in popular vote and EV) that it won't affect anything besides how strong his "mandate" is (if you buy that BS anyway). But there will probably be court battles, and it's ridiculous how much money will be spent. Both sides have lawyers ready in all the potentially controversial states already. Maybe court battles will bring attention to all the flaws/intentional vandalism?

But it's still just outrageous in the first place.
 
It's glaringly obvious that there is a LOT that needs to be done to fix the voting process in this country, but people's votes being changed is beyond the pale. Whether or not it's due to actual shenanigans or mechanical error, it's completely unacceptable.

In the 2004 Presidential election, the touch-screen machine I was using kept changing my vote to George Bush. So I raised my hand to ask for help. I was then lead by the arm over to a different machine that was sitting in the corner, where I tried again. This time it looked like it took, but when I turned to leave I was again led by the arm along the wall and to the exit, while someone else was voting on the machine that had screwed up on me. Everyone else was allowed to just walk right to the exit, but I was led along the wall and away from everyone else.

First thing I though was "What about that person?".

I wonder how many extra votes GW got from that machine, and machines like it. And this was in Maryland - a solid blue state. Sometimes I wonder if they were experimenting to see how many people would catch the error to determine how many votes they could siphon before raising red flags.
 
In the 2004 Presidential election, the touch-screen machine I was using kept changing my vote to George Bush. So I raised my hand to ask for help. I was then lead by the arm over to a different machine that was sitting in the corner, where I tried again. This time it looked like it took, but when I turned to leave I was again led by the arm along the wall and to the exit, while someone else was voting on the machine that had screwed up on me. Everyone else was allowed to just walk right to the exit, but I was led along the wall and away from everyone else.

First thing I though was "What about that person?".

I wonder how many extra votes GW got from that machine, and machines like it. And this was in Maryland - a solid blue state. Sometimes I wonder if they were experimenting to see how many people would catch the error to determine how many votes they could siphon before raising red flags.
I bet there's a lot of people with stories like this, and even more who didn't notice or if they did didn't know what to do about it. Stay classy, America.
 
I'm a Democrat & I'm shouting at the top of my lungs about this crap.


I just created a group on Facebook called "Let Your Vote Count: Don't Wear Pro-Candidate Shirts When You Vote!" to spread the word about "Passive Electioneering"---the fact that in many states, you'll be turned away from the polls if you wear a pro-candidate shirt, hat, pin, etc. Yes, this is an old law in many states (and new in some), though the fact that it is likely going to be enforced so strictly this year smells strongly of the GOP attempting to turn away Obama's young, enthusiastic supporters...who are among those more likely to be excited and wear an Obama shirt.

What really pisses me off is the culprits of voter suppression, at least in the last decade, are so heavily Republican. You never hear about Democratic efforts to stop black people from voting, to stop poor people from voting, to stop young people from voting, etc. Sure, those are all folks more likey to vote Democratic. So more pointedly---you never hear about Democrats trying to stop rich, white, retired people in the heartland from voting. It's disgusting.


Anyway, check out the Facebook group ("Let Your Vote Count: Don't Wear Pro-Candidate Shirts When You Vote!"). Even if you don't join, at least spread the word---tell all your friends and family not to wear anything that can be construed as pro-candidate, otherwise they'll be turned away. It's already happened to many people, one of whom is featured in a CNN.com video today (Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com)
 
:up:

I thought it would be common sense not to wear a pro-candidate shirt. Don't they ban any political signs or campaigning within a certain radius of a polling place? Obviously that would extend to a button or shirt you're wearing. Right?

Correct me if I'm wrong. Or else I'll never learn. ;)
 
:up:

I thought it would be common sense not to wear a pro-candidate shirt. Don't they ban any political signs or campaigning within a certain radius of a polling place? Obviously that would extend to a button or shirt you're wearing. Right?

Correct me if I'm wrong. Or else I'll never learn. ;)


No, you're right. I think, though, that a lot of people may not have the common sense to think it applies to shirts, etc...if they even knew that signs were banned. I don't doubt that a lot of people don't even know that fact!
 
I don't even think it's common sense - a lot of young people might figure what they wear is totally separate from the dudes outside with signs.


And I'm not sure how much that's known or applied (again it's not just lack of common sense), I'm pretty sure whenever I went with my parents to vote as a kid they had their buttons on still.

Luckily it's cold in most places so you can either cover it up with your jacket or take off that layer?
 
Luckily it's cold in most places so you can either cover it up with your jacket or take off that layer?


I would hope that most places would be kind enough to let you do that, or to turn it inside-out or something, as opposed to leaving the site altogether until it's fixed. If the latter happens in the backdrop of long lines, it could turn some people away altogether (though perhaps unlikely if people were psyched enough to wear a shirt...).
 
I may have to note that this is a different, at times strange political culture here, so I sometimes have trouble why people must make clear and visible who they are voting for to everyone. I guess going to the poll station it really may not harm to just go in normal, neutral clothing and the support would be equally as effective; perhaps even more so since then the vote has a greater chance of counting (if they do not find another way to tell you that your rights to vote are denied for whatever bogus reason).

I don't like to say that as it sounds like bragging, but in some ways I really prefer how Germany and about every other democratic country goes about voting: If you are 18, you are allowed to vote in federal elections (on local level from age 16). This right cannot in any way be taken from you, you cannot be turned away and you don't have to go through any weird registration process with hurdles and intransparencies.
That, and every vote counts (if cast correctly, that's for sure). No "winner takes it all".
That said, I'm frightened because voting machines are used in more and more voting districts each election. I don't want these machines between me and my voting choice or voting rights.

The people at Acorn and any other organisation that did register fake identities should be ashamed of themselves and never again be allowed to work for such organisations. Same if there were any members of the Democratic party, and I'm sure there are.
If that is true what they report on the scale of voter fraud from the Republican party, that's frightening, appalling, shameful and a slap into the face for anyone who claims democracy.
 
No, you're right. I think, though, that a lot of people may not have the common sense to think it applies to shirts, etc...if they even knew that signs were banned. I don't doubt that a lot of people don't even know that fact!

I was pondering something along these lines:

1) Wear Obama shirt under jacket.
2) Vote.
3) Remove jacket and walk out of polling place.

:wink:
 
Voting by mail for the win. I've already voted, I think Washington State will join Oregon in being entirely absentee ballot in the future. Good idea, too.

This paragraph is so good, it needs to be repeated again:
Large-scale, coordinated vote stealing doesn't happen. The incentives—unlike the incentives for registration fraud—just aren't there. In an interview this week with Salon, Lorraine Minnite of Barnard College, who has studied vote fraud systematically, noted that "between 2002 to 2005 only one person was found guilty of registration fraud. Twenty others were found guilty of voting while ineligible and five were guilty of voting more than once. That's 26 criminal voters." Twenty-six criminal voters despite the fact that U.S. attorneys, like David Iglesias in New Mexico, were fired for searching high and low for vote-fraud cases to prosecute and coming up empty. Twenty-six criminal voters despite the fact that five days before the 2006 election, then-interim U.S. Attorney Bradley Schlozman exuberantly (and futilely) indicted four ACORN workers, even when Justice Department policy barred such prosecutions in the days before elections. RNC General Counsel Sean Cairncross has said he is unaware of a single improper vote cast because of bad cards submitted in the course of a voter-registration effort. Republican campaign consultant Royal Masset says, "n-person voter fraud is nonexistent. It doesn't happen, and ... makes no sense because who's going to take the risk of going to jail on something so blatant that maybe changes one vote?"


There's no golden mean between the Republicans and Democrats' claims of vote stealing: we have a desperate hunt for fraud by the Bush Administration turning up 26 criminals found nationwide between 2002-2005, versus the RNC and Michigan GOP admitting in court that they were going to use mortgage foreclosure lists to illegally deny citizens their vote.
 
I was pondering something along these lines:

1) Wear Obama shirt under jacket.
2) Vote.
3) Remove jacket and walk out of polling place.

:wink:

The polling station will be closed and the boxes/voting machines "decontaminated". ;)
 
I've never heard this neutral clothing thing before, and I can't understand why a voter's clothing should have to do with anything. :huh: It wouldn't here, although we generally are much more low-key than you guys. Am I being dense? Can someone explain it to me? Is it an actual rule, or just a precaution, to avoid potential fraud at the polls?
 
As far as why the dems aren't screaming about the voter suppression from every hilltop, I've been asking myself that since 2000. You'd think with our "liberally-biased media" (ha ha) it would be front page news, yet somehow the networks are for the most part silent.
i know :sigh: i'm still pissed about that, even though i wasn't even old enough to vote in that election. i've made it a point to vote in every election since turning 18 though, even for "minor" elections. i figure it's kinda like the trickle down effect, in that every position matters, no matter how insignificant.

and gore was just portrayed to be some big crybaby, like he just had sour grapes. ugh.
 
I guess the intention is, as in most cases, good, to prevent election campaigning on the last steps to the vote. In Germany we have a similar rule, though not extended to the individual person (which we don't need, no one wears a shirt or button saying SPD, CDU, or Merkel), that parties are not allowed to put any party advertisements in or around the voting locations to prevent them from trying to influence voters there.
The same probably is meant here. On the day of election when people go to the voting stations they shouldn't be influenced by anyone within the voting station.
 
I've never heard this neutral clothing thing before, and I can't understand why a voter's clothing should have to do with anything. :huh: It wouldn't here, although we generally are much more low-key than you guys. Am I being dense? Can someone explain it to me? Is it an actual rule, or just a precaution, to avoid potential fraud at the polls?
i did find this news story on google: Virginia upholds ban on political clothing at polling places it only applies to virginia and d.c. though. basically, there's no political campaigning allowed within 40 feet of a poll station, and shirts/buttons on a voter can seem like campaigning. it seems not all states ban this though as it says maryland's okay.

personally, i can see why it'd be construed as political campaigning to wear such clothing while voting. but on the other hand, if someone's so easily swayed to go like "oh look an obama button, i'll vote for him i guess" then they deserve to allow themselves to be subjected to it. if everyone else at the station is wearing mccain stuff when i go to vote tomorrow, guess what. i'm still voting for obama. and if the guy next to me voted for mccain since everyone else was wearing his clothing, then at least he has to go through life knowing he's incapable of forming his own opinions.
 
Here's a list of things you can do to make sure your vote is counted:

Vote early, preferably in person. Most of the people who will be out and about to mount challenges will be doing this on Election Day proper. This also gives you a chance to makes sure you are registered properly and challenge back if anything is wrong.
Insist on a paper trail. Many states have this as an option now, but in some it's only upon request. Request.

Don't wear anything that signals your voting preferences. Some states have little-used laws that prevent "electioneering" in polling places, and there have been signals that the folks there to challenge some voters will be challenging people wearing Obama stuff. Leave it at home or in your car.

Bring picture ID. Your state may or may not require that you have it, but it is one good way to verify your identity and residency if challenged. If your address isn't up-to-date, many states can issue free temporary change-of-address cards, or just do the paperwork to get it officially changed today.

Stand your ground, politely. The point of a challenge is to keep you from voting, and they can win in two ways. The easiest thing to do — which is why they're doing it — is to embarrass you into leaving. Fuck that. If you can't win the challenge at the moment, demand a provisional ballot and a written explanation of what you need to do to make sure that it is counted. Speak only to official poll workers, and ignore the partisan hack if s/he tries to "help."

Ask for help. If there is a problem with your electronic machine, do not press done and leave the polling place. Insist that a poll worker help you until your vote is cast correctly. If it cannot be, tell them they need to request assistance from the appropriate authorities and refuse to leave or cast your ballot until the problem is corrected. If you leave, you've probably already lost. Do not forget to have a paper trail.
 
Back
Top Bottom