Ohio: Turnout vs. Suppression
Could Romney win Ohio by ginning up Republican turnout and tamping down Democratic votes?
All of the reputable polling shows a slight lead for President Obama in the all-important state of Ohio. Could Romney win by ginning up Republican turnout and tamping down Democratic votes?
The Columbus Dispatch headlines a story about its new poll “Ohio’s a toss-up.”
The “Ohio firewall” precariously stands for President Barack Obama, but a strong Republican turnout could enable Mitt Romney to tear it down on Election Day.
The final Dispatch Poll shows Obama leading 50 percent to 48 percent in the Buckeye State. However, that 2-point edge is within the survey’s margin of sampling error, plus or minus 2.2 percentage points.
Ohio remains the consensus top battlefield in the 2012 presidential election, and the campaigns are showing it: Both candidates and both running mates are here today, and three of the four are coming back on Monday. That will make 83 visits by presidential candidates to Ohio this year, a record at least in modern history.
Many in the Obama camp have said if the president can build a “firewall” in bellwether Ohio — which has backed a loser only twice since 1900, the nation’s best record — Romney’s road to the White House will be all but blocked. A Republican has never won the presidency without carrying Ohio, and without the state this year, Romney’s electoral challenge becomes steep.
One key to Obama’s lead: He is winning by more than 2-to-1 among the 11 percent of Ohio voters who say they didn’t cast a ballot in the 2010 governor’s race, which Republican John Kasich won by 2points.
In general, the Obama campaign wants to avoid the Democratic underperformance of 2010 that brought sweeping GOP victories and instead return to a 2008 turnout model in Ohio when Obama won by 4.6 points. And the Romney team looks longingly at the high GOP turnout when George W. Bush took a second term by turning back John Kerry in 2004 — when a same-sex marriage issue also was on the Ohio ballot.
None of this is news, of course. No serious analyst expects Democratic enthusiasm of the sort we saw in 2008 or Republican enthusiasm–and Democratic lethargy–of the sort we saw in 2010. Still, if the polling is accurate and turnout is “normal,” Obama should win. Literally every poll in the RealClearPolitics index, save Rassmussen, has Obama leading; and even Rasmussen just has a tie.
Even with Rasmussen factored in, Obama has a 2.8 point lead. That’s going to be hard to beat with mere turnout, given that everyone has known how important Ohio is going to be for months and both campaigns have poured tremendous resources and energy into the get-out-the-vote effort there.
Alas, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted has been going above and beyond the call of duty. ThinkProgress’ Judd Legum (“Last-Minute Ohio Directive Could Trash Legal Votes And Swing The Election“):
A last-minute directive issued by Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted (R) could invalidate legal provisional ballots. Ohio is widely viewed as the most critical state for both presidential campaigns and — with some polls showing a close race — the 11th-hour move could swing the entire election.
The directive, issued Friday, lays out the requirements for submitting a provisional ballot. The directive includes a form which puts the burden on the voter to correctly record the form of ID provided to election officials. Husted also instructed election officials that if the form is not filled out correctly by a voter, the ballot should not be counted.
According to a lawsuit filed by voting rights advocates, this is “contrary to a court decision on provisional ballots a week ago and contrary to statements made by attorneys for Husted at an Oct. 24 court hearing.”
Indeed, it also appears directly contrary to Ohio law. From the lawsuit:
Ohio Rev. Code § 3505.181(B)(6) provides that, once a voter casting a provisional ballot proffers identification, “the appropriate local election official shall record the type of identification provided, the social security number information, the fact that the affirmation was executed, or the fact that the individual declined to execute such an affirmation and include that information with the transmission of the ballot . . . .” (Emphasis added.)
The law “ensures that any questions regarding a voter’s identification are resolved on the spotor, consistent with due process, the voter is informed that he or she needs to provide additional information to the board of elections. This protects the integrity of the voting process, and provides a reasonable opportunity to resolve deficiencies.”
The last-minute directive changes this and switches the burden to the voter, greatly increasing the chances that legal provisional ballots will be discarded.
Now, frankly, the form itself is ridiculously simple. It’s far less cumbersome than the form I had to fill out Friday for early (technically, in-person absentee) voting in Virginia, which is a series of blanks to fill in on two sides of a sheet of paper, including having to put in the same information multiple times for no apparent reason.
The problem, however, is that Husted has spent months trying to change the rules of the game in a way that favors his party. He’s been repeatedly smacked down for this by the courts. And yet he’s consistently ignored the clear spirit of these court orders to try again. My strong guess is that, even at this late hour, the courts will step in and issue an injunction blocking this latest move.
CBS legal analyst Andrew Cohen(“Ohio’s Provisional Ballot Order: The Biggest Legal Story of the Weekend“):
The contours of the legal dispute aren’t narrowing, as some legal disputes do at this stage of an election contest, but instead are growing. They are growing because the secretary of state has just doubled down on his position about incomplete provisional ballots. If he was wrong on Thursday, you could say, he was even more wrong on Friday. And that will likely mean a Monday ruling from Judge Marbley which will then be appealed into Tuesday (and beyond) to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Folks, the legal fight for Ohio’s votes is already here and here to stay.
Whatever your view of the merits of voter ID laws and other attempts at thwarting largely non-existent in-person voting fraud, we should be able to agree that the rules of the game should have been set in stone months ago. That was, after all, the vehement position of Republicans back in 2000 when we were fighting back efforts to change deadlines and procedures that were instituted ahead of the election. It was the rationale the Supreme Court used in an otherwise bizarre and flawed decision in Bush v. Gore. You just don’t change the rules once the game has started, particularly when the new rules are bitterly contested on party lines.
Beyond that, political gamesmanship is the kindest interpretation of what Husted is attempting here. A less generous interpretation is intentional vote suppression targeted at poor, elderly, and minority voters. Cohen again:
The motion also is important for what it says these days about Husted and the way he is running the state’s elections. Leaving aside the provisional ballot court fight for a moment, Saturday’s early voting period was hectic, largely because Husted and his fellow Republicans succeeded this cycle in reducing the number of early-voting weekends from five to one. Indeed, they tried to eliminate all such early voting, which traditionally helps wage earners who can’t vote during regular business hours on weekdays, but were rejected in this effort by the federal courts.
What does it mean on the ground and to the exercise of a registered voter’s right to vote? From The Washington Post late Saturday: “In Cuyahoga, 36,578 had voted as of Friday; in 2008, that number was 54,340. In 2008, there were nine additional early voting days here, and 9,933 people voted on those days.” And Husted? While I was searching for the above copy I found another Associated Press story, also dated Saturday, which noted: “Husted says in a statement that voting has gone smoothly in Ohio and he expects absentee voting this year to surpass 2008.”
Now, to be sure, there are other reasons why voting is down from 2008. Most notably, both Democrats and Republicans are simply less enthusiastic than they were four years ago.
The mere fact that of having to fill out a provisional ballot declaration will make some people not bother to turn out to vote. And, while there will presumably be poll workers there to answer questions, the more complicated the form, the less likely that an uneducated voter or one with poor command of English will be to fill it out correctly. Given the consistency of Husted’s efforts, it’s likely that he considers that a feature rather than a bug.
If all you have to sell is the same old voodoo economics and neo-con foreign policy and the fear of everyone that doesn’t look or speak like you…then yeah…you gotta cheat.
Will it be enough? Yeah, I think so.
No question, John Husted has no role as Secretary of State. He will find any way to thumb the scales for the GOP.
Every person in America should have to show identification to vote so we know they are eligible to vote. The reasons given by Democrats for not wanting that to happen makes their voters sound like they are stupid. Democrats don’t stand a chance of winning fair elections so they take every measure they can to allow ineligible voters to vote and push through fraudulent registrations and bribe people to vote. Never mind that there is plenty of early voting hours, mail in ballots, absentee ballots etc, They want voting to stay open indefinately till they can get the numbers that are favorable to them through hook or crook. NAACP taking over a Houston polling place, hundreds of fraudulent registrations from Democrat voter registration firm FieldWorks, Democrat representative Jim Morans son telling people how to commit voter fraud, The list goes on and on but you wouldn’t expect this author to mention any of those facts, it doesn’t fit his Republican suppression theme.
So basically the story is written.
If Romney wins Ohio, the republicans kept people from voting.
If Obama wins its because the Democrats cheated.
I agree that these things should have been worked out months ago, but I have absolutely no issues with requiring a person who is voting to prove they are the person they say they are.
I still find it ironic that nobody is accusing the state of NH of suppressing the vote, filing lawsuits, or anything, when they created a voter ID law between the primary in January and the state primary a couple of months ago.
The majority of people have no problem with voter ID. I think they should run that on every ballot as an amendment and it would overwhelmingly pass eliminating a chunk of the voter fraud that goes on.
I think it’ll be because Romney went to Halliburton and along with the Carlyle Group they had Tagg Romney purchase Diebold to rig the voting machines to not count Democrat votes and then Romney himself used his Jedi mind control powers to dupe college students and inner city racial minorities into staying home and not voting.
On a serious note, this sort of post and the underlying stories to which it makes reference only can exist in media-academe circles. The layers of cocooning and cognitive dissonance are so thick a diamond-tipped drill couldn’t break through.
As far as OH goes, for obvious reasons the media polls are slated in favor of Obama and the actual results will be different. But for equally as obvious reasons it’ll be a damn close contest. Probably along the lines of the ’04 tally. 51-49 or thereabouts. Either candidate still could prevail there. In the end it will all come down to turnout. Just like ’04 in OH all came down to turnout.
@Patrick:
If you really wan that, what you should push for first, is a National Identity Card, issued in child, and then adult versions (at 18). Then you could say, bring your ID, no problem.
(It gets too problematic when you rely on driver’s licenses and then “something else.” For what it’s worth, I had to get a real copy of my birth certificate a few years back. I had to drive 40 miles to an issuing office, and of course show my ID. I really don’t get how that trip would be easy for someone without a car. let alone ID. Come to think of it, if you live in a different state than the one you were born in, and have no driver’s licence, how would you get any ID?)
@Patrick:
The amount of in-person voter fraud that goes on is statistically negligible.
This guy ripped the pages and both covers from from Katherine Harris’s playbook. First, early voting restrictions which have spread across the South landed in this part of Florida and yesterday marked the end of early voting. The early voting site at a nearby library was inaccessible by car – far, far more early voters this time than in 08. It was notable to me since I’m looking at 5 days overdue on a book I couldn’t physically get to the library thanks to early voting.
Second, the order from the state elections head carries undue weight with other institutions (again re Florida in 1980).
Because voter impersonation fraud is too inefficient and essentially never happens the courts have been rightly concerned with the ulterior or sometimes accidentally stated motivation. We needn’t waste time pretending there’s an actual live controversy amongst those w/o an axe to grind over impersonation fraud.
The issue is not Voter ID. The issue is making it difficult to vote and have your vote count. These efforts by Republican display a deep distrust of democracy and the American Way. Every effort by any group who is in the least bit patriotic and loves their country will make it easier to vote and remove obstacles to voting. Voter ID: Fine. Make it easy to get. Voting itself. Fine. Let’s vote on the weekends. Let’s have two full weeks of early voting with the polls open at least 12 hours and on Saturday and Sunday also. Voting is a right and the state has no right to toss out votes based on bureaucratic technicalities that are not germane to the identity of the voter. The right talks about government oppression. Well there is not oppression greater than suppressing the right to vote.
So why are conservatives so much against a national ID?
@DC Loser:
Mark of the Beast. Which is odd, because they want a state level Mark for voting.
For what it’s worth, I have some vague suspicions of IDs, but know they work well elsewhere. I like the idea that you can take your ID to the post office and easily redirect ALL your mail, etc.
The flip side of the coin is that they want every voter to have a state issued ID in order to vote, but they don’t make it easy to get the ID. If such IDs are required for voting, they should be required to issue such IDs to every citizen of voting age and eligibility.
@DC Loser:
Right, at a minimum they think “IDs are easy for people like me.”
If Romney wins Ohio by a hair, it goes to the courts. Hustled could be dyeing his hair and changing his name when this all shakes out.
Mitt Romney could shut this suppression effort down with a single phone call. He doesn’t do that because he is happy to win by depriving American citizens of their vote. And so are Republicans more broadly.
So let’s not pretend that this is just the Ohio secretary of state. This is Mitt Romney and the GOP actively suppressing votes and targeting those efforts at black and Hispanic voters. Jim Crow is back.
That’s a little naive, no?
@UberMitch: I presume it’s bureaucratic stupidity or convenience rather than some sort of malicious intent. It’s rather annoying, though, to have to hand-fill forms at this point. I’ve been typing everything for so long that my handwriting is virtually illegible if I’m going quickly and my hands tire quickly.
@scott: @DC Loser:
Two “Amens” there.
@john personna:
Those might be the words they use in their own heads but the real purpose is to limit the vote to the right kind of people. People like them. That is what they really want.
@James Joyner:
You might inquire on the disqualification rate.
@James Joyner:
The reason might be James, that it is harder to tell a lie multiple times than it is only once.
@DC Loser:
Because they only want the federal government to keep track of liberals and they haven’t found a practical way to make that happen.
I cast my vote in OH a couple weeks ago, facilitated by John Husted’s active promotion of absentee voting. He mailed applications to everyone. As is now common, there is no expectation one actually be absent on Election Day.
If someone applies for and is mailed an absentee ballot, but decides to vote in person, they will have to cast a provisional ballot. The law requires they allow ten days after Tuesday for absentee ballots to arrive. Then they can check provisional ballots against absentee ballots for double voting within OH. All quite sensible up to the point Husted starts throwing out provisional ballots for any reason he can find. Also, if it’s close, it gives him at least ten days for any other ratfracking he can manage.
Double voting by people with two residences apparently does occur at a significant rate. This is something that could be readily prevented; it is the 21st century after all. Republicans are rabid about preventing nonexistent ID fraud yet encourage absentee voting which is prone to fraud. Now, why could that be? I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that people without driver’s licenses tend to vote D while absentee votes tend to run R.
Does it ever give Republicans pause that they can only win by cheating? Nah.
scott:
But Republicans hate democracy:
Paul Weyrich, major conservative thinker, co-founder of the Heritage Foundation. Link, link.
Meant to add this:
Weyrich is admitting that what he wants is not what most Americans want. And he’s also admitting that he does not expect to be able to convince most Americans that his ideas are correct. Instead, he’s hoping that most people just won’t vote, so his minority can control the majority.
These people hate America.
In case you think I was making it up:
National ID Cards and the Mark of the Beast
If you look at the legislative record of Republicans at state and federal levels it is all about limiting rights…primarily reproductive rights or voting rights.
Why people who care about America would ever vote Republican is beyond me.
If they cared about America they’d be Democrats. Republicans care only for themselves and their “beliefs.” Republicans will trade the liberty of a minority for a tax cut. African-Americans, gays, Hispanics, all just sacrifices in the pursuit of the almighty dollar. Ho-hum, those fractious minorities, screw ’em, I got mine. After all people aren’t really people unless they’re just exactly like me.
This is why I no longer see this as a clash of ideas. I no longer see Republicans as honorable opponents with whom I happen to disagree.
My hope is that the judge whose order Husted has flouted will issue a contempt petition and a warrant for his arrest . Husted didn’t do something that was dirty pool : He violated a court order. Hopefully, he will be held to account.
Four days before a major election, and now he decides to start issuing new rules for voting? Yeah, he’s an asshole. I have no doubt that if Romney was winning Ohio, this guy wouldn’t be doing stuff like this.
@Just Me:
@Patrick:
It’s amazing to me how your simple logic is so repudiated around here. Like you have said, voter ID is something most Americans approve of, except those who kind of shrug off the notion of more fraud being possible without proper identification.
I find the voter suppression claim to be a crutch dems use, as a plan B excuse, if people actually come out and select a candidate the dems deem unacceptable to their ideology. This will hold true in Ohio, and probably every other state that inexplicably doesn’t follow the dem Axelrod/Silver model that everyone relies on around here as gospel.
@michael reynolds:
This is why I no longer see this as a clash of ideas. I no longer see Republicans as honorable opponents with whom I happen to disagree.
Unfortunately, I am beginning to feel the same way about dems, mainly because of some of the slime comments such as people like you throw out. The hatred, bitterness, nonsense, extremist ideology that comprises some of your rhetoric just promotes more polarization and chaos. Quite frankly, only the most right-wing of people equals your kind of irrational, divisive sentiments, on the other side of the political spectrum…and, that is not a complimentary association.
@ Jan
You never got around to explaining how you are more self-sufficient than you Democratic counterparts yesterday. Inquiring minds want to know…
@michael reynolds:
Let’s go a bit further. Dr. Joyner’s unmistakable – but not exactly vehement – criticism of the GOP suppression efforts is about the only criticism I’ve read coming from a Republican.
Husted, Rick Scott, et al are turning our demcratic process into a public farce, and no powerful Republican will ever speak out against them.
They will only get worse, as criticism from outside the GOP is easily dismissed. This is largely why I’ve become increasingly cynical. about “reasonable” or “patriotic” Republicans. They might mumble something about not being comfortable with these banana republic tactics, but they’ll fall into line right smartly, which tacitly legitimizes the tactics.
@jan:
Oh shut up.
Four years of birth certificates, college transcripts, Obama-as-monkey, Obama-as-witch-doctor, Obama as socialist, Kenyan, un-American, the “other,” his wife the first lady referred to as his “baby momma,” Obama-as-Islamist, Sharia Obama, palling-around-with-terrorists Obama, weak, “unready,” must-have-been-affirmative-action Obama. Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity, Gingrich, Sununu, and on and on and on.
Don’t pretend that you’ve ever seen Democrats as anything other than existential foes out to strip deserving white people like you of your privileges. This has always been tribal for you people, it’s always been about despising anyone who wasn’t exactly like you.
That is not what this country is supposed to be. The United States is the first nation built on an idea and not a tribe or a particular ruler’s fief. We are supposed to be about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But for you it never goes beyond the principal of “me, me, me.” And when it comes to a choice between democracy or patriotism or common decency on the one hand and your own fears, narrow interests, superstitions and resentments, the latter always win.
@Woody:
And he waits until it can’t possibly have any effect. He might have spoken up early when other Republicans might have joined him to do the right thing. Instead what we get is belated conscience assuagement. Sort of like joining the civil rights movement in the 70’s when it was safe. This way if Romney wins using illegal, anti-democratic and un-American means, then James still gets the perks of power but can tsk-tsk and shake his head and count himself among the righteous.
That’s the lovely thing about Republicans: some eventually get it right, but conveniently too damned late to be of any use. Profiles in courage.
A. Some proof of this perhaps?
B. So are tax increases for the wealthy – where do you stand on this issue, knowing that it enjoys majority support?
@michael reynolds:
Michael you’re living in a left wing bubble.
@jan:
Wow, really effective rejoinder there.
How about answering Anjin’s question?
@jan:
Jan, seriously:
Think Again: How to Reason and Argue
I’m being generous actually. That’s the way to make yourself more of a threat.
@DC Loser:
Because a National ID makes it much easier for the government to gather and organize information about their citizens. For instance, here in a Brazil a cop can stop someone and request his ID, then, he may use the ID number to know if there is some warrant against the guy. If you are in the country illegally, then, it´s game over for you. I worked in the Human Resources of a government agency, ID numbers make organizing data and gathering details about people easy.
I understand why Civil Libertarians do not like the idea(I already pointed out in this that it´s required by law to leave your ID any time that you go to a hotel here in my state, São Paulo). On the other hand, that´s the only way to have a electoral process that´s completely free of fraud.
@anjin-san:
A. Some proof of this perhaps?
try googling….there are polls you can snag there dealing with something like 70% approving of voter ID….or there are left wing commentaries you can rely on to augment your own ideology. Overall, common sense arguments should be enough, as it is getting relatively easy and inexpensive to attain an ID for those who want to vote. And, having such an ID will help a person, without one, in attaining a more functional place in society. But again, this all is within the mindset of someone who wants to help someone help themselves, and not simply make them dependent on someone else.
B. So are tax increases for the wealthy – where do you stand on this issue, knowing that it enjoys majority support?
I’m not a class warfare proponent. Fairness means being ‘fair,’ and giving similar advantages to everyone. If there is tax reform, it should apply to everyone. This meme of ‘tax increases for the wealthy’ has gotten old and tired, and is more inflammatory than helpful in addressing debt or deficits, and is a negative in enlarging an economy, where real long-term revenue increases can be obtained. The fact that the majority supports tax increases for the wealthy is subject to being framed in the class warfare rhetoric of the left. Additionally, it is a well known understanding, that people are mainly for what is better for their own pocketbooks, period!
@Andre Kenji:
It’s a very complex issue for Republicans. On the one hand, there’s that whole Satan 666 thing. On the other hand, they don’t want brown people voting. How to square that circle between their insane superstitions and their insane racism? Hmmm. They’ll need to get the part “intellectuals” to work on it.
As a liberal, I have no problem with a national ID card. We have four long years before the next election. Make it mandatory, give people until 2015 to get it done, subsidize the fees for poor folks, and we’re done. Easy.
Will Republicans push for this? Of course not. Satan. 666. People who think they should handle poison snakes for Jesus and vote Republican. Crazy people are a major component of the GOP coalition.
Meanwhile Google not only knows your name and location, they know just about everything about you – what you buy, what you read, what you masturbate to and just how long it takes you to get off. Amazon’s Kindle tracks not just what you read but how, whether you turned the pages quickly or slowly, whether you stopped reading and if so, where. Target knows if you’re pregnant before you do. But since those are all private industry, they apparently can’t be Satan.
And this GOP is one of our two major political parties.
@jan:
I’m for increasing taxes on the wealthy. I am in the 1%, though not, sadly, in the .01% like, say, Bill Gates or Warren Buffet who also think their taxes should go up. Which class am I warring against? My own? If so, how does that square with your revealing comment that people only vote their narrow self-interest?
The ‘class’ that opposes tax increases on the wealthy si not the wealthy, it’s the clueless.
@jan: “This meme of ‘tax increases for the wealthy’ has gotten old and tired, and is more inflammatory than helpful in addressing debt or deficits, and is a negative in enlarging an economy, where real long-term revenue increases can be obtained.”
This might be one of the most successful bits of brainwashing pulled off by the Right. The idea that tax policy is not even something to be thought about is what allows the Perpetual Stupidity Machine of tax cuts=more economic growth=more government revenue=more tax cuts=more economic growth=more government revenue=more tax cuts, ad infinitum, to roll ever onward.
Mike
@jan:
Which is why it is up to the government to set tax rates. Since, given the choice, most people who don’t understand the concept of enlightened self-interest would set their individual rate to 0%.
As it is now, only the those people and corporations with enough clout to influence legislators to insert beneficial loopholes pay close to 0%. Everyone else – including the poor – pay a significant percentage of their income through a combination of progressive income taxes and regressive forms of taxation – sales taxes, property taxes, and payroll taxes – all of which swiftly approach a limit of 0 as your income increases.
@michael reynolds:
If so, how does that square with your revealing comment that people only vote their narrow self-interest?
Don’t be naive, Michael, or take my wording ‘literally’ to mean every single person… because, ‘most’ people do vote for self-interest kind of purposes. That is human nature rather than being simply judged as ‘selfish.’ If you consider yourself in a more principled category, good for you. But, to take your case and then expand upon it to show that it doesn’t ‘square’ with what I just said, is obtuse and/or disingenuous to this conversation.
@michael reynolds: I’ve written probably half a dozen posts on these shenanigans over the last few months and wrote about it at least as far back as May 2011. I’ve even talked about it live on Fox News and gotten Fred Barnes to acknowledge that, whatever voter fraud there might be, none of it’s of the sort that we could stop by requiring photo ID.
@jan:
If that is your core thesis for “A”, you should explain it. How does an elderly person without a drivers license easily get a voter ID? Say they are in a small town, 100 miles from county records.
For “B”, do you fully reject progressive taxation then? That is the logical consequence of the “class warfare” canard. You must believe a family of four, on $50K per year, should pay the same rate as a single person earning $200K per year.
Sadly that “class warfare” meme is propagated by people who should know better. They actually support progressive taxation, they just make a floppy argument that any change is class warfare. Deeply irrational.
@jan: Shorter Jan, if polls agree with me, it’s the right answer, if they don’t then it’s class warfare/unamerican/a lame stream media plot.
For what it’s worth this is simply wrong, as adequately demonstrated in:
Obsession With Righteousness A Normal Quality Of Human Minds
BTW, that tax thing is why I’ve been mentioning this for the last few days:
Well, I am not so sure about that. In your conceptual universe class warfare means “anything that negatively impacts the rich is class warfare.” Yet you have no problem with GOP policies that hurt the middle class, the working class, and the poor.
And why would I wish to make “war” on the rich? While I am not one of them, I do make a nice living working for 1%ers. And I mean working directly for them, not toiling away in a cubicle for a rich boss I have never met. I rub shoulders with the elite pretty much constantly, and I get a lot of nice perks as a result. I don’t really want that to go away.
I get the feeling that most of the conservatives in here have not spent any time in the world the rich inhabit, hence it is easy to sell them on the fiction that a modest tax increase will cause high net worth types to flee the country, stop investing, lose interest in business activity, and so on.
In reality, it means they will have 2 vacation homes instead of three, or will skip the MacLaren and make due with the Ferarri, the Maserati and the Porsche that are already in the garage that is about five times nicer that the home that an average Amercian lives in.
@jan-There is essentially no voter fraud that would be stopped by voter ID. Here in PA I intend to make a fuss over it when I vote. If we are going to have laws for problems that do not exist, I dont think we should accept them sitting down.
Steve
@michael reynolds:
Civil Libertarians from both sides would have problems with that. If you are a gun owner it would be easy to trace gun purchases using an ID number – in fact, it would be easy to known how much legal guns any gun owner has. If you are a Hispanic that would mean that it would be easy to crack down on anyone that´s not legally in the United States – in France and Spain illegal immigrants are called sans papiers and sin papeles – people that does not have papers.
@James Joyner:
James, I like you, really. But bland commentary on the inefficacy of ID cards is not the issue. This is not about voter ID’s, this is about systematic efforts by your party that include constraining the number of polling places in minority precincts, attempting to cut days for early voting and hours of voting, threatening voter registration efforts, purging voter rolls, throwing out voter registrations.
I’d include more links but I don’t want to trigger the spam filter. This is not, “Oh, those are unnecessary laws,” this is, “WTF? I belong to a party that’s willing to deprive my fellow citizens of the franchise?”
This is not some game where it’s “okay” that our guy got away with an off-sides. If we are not about free and fair elections in this country then what are we? If I thought Democrats were constricting voting hours in white precincts I’d be livid because politicians elected by virtue of fraud are not legitimate office-holders. If Mitt Romney wins through fraud and suppression in Florida and Ohio he will not be the President of the United States, he will have usurped the Constitution.
There have got to be some things we believe in that rise above tribalism and team spirit. Equality before the law, the Bill of Rights, the sanctity of elections. If the governors of Ohio and Florida can win by making it impossible for their opponents to vote then that vote is meaningless and elections are void.
Mitt Romney could have ended this months ago with a single phone call. He refused to. That’s your candidate and your party.
@Andre Kenji:
I don’t have a problem with tracking gun ownership or with knowing who is and who is not in the country legally. I’m for comprehensive and rational immigration reform. I think this country has a perfect right to decide who does and does not get in. When I moved to Italy I got a visa, it never occurred to me that I had some right to set up there without permission.
Of course national ID would be part of acknowledging that we have an absolutely hypocritical relationship with immigrants from south of the border. They occupy the spot that Jews used to occupy in feudal Europe: we can’t run the economy without them but they’re just so convenient as scapegoats.
@jan:
I guess I do. But I am sad to see that you consider anything else normal. We are not meant to vote our narrow self-interest because if we do then we fragment the country by race, class, locality, religion and every other possible fault line. We hold rights in common, we have a country in common, we are meant to look beyond me, me, me and try as rational and moral human beings to vote for the country. We are supposed to aspire to virtue, not revel in our own selfishness.
I just love that you’re the Christian in this conversation. The atheist argues for virtue, the Christian argues for me, me, me. Perfect.
@Just Me: You’ve made this argument before, that no one is accusing NH of suppressing the vote, etc. That’s because it was done very differently, and, frankly, there have been challenges. Most of them got settled fairly quickly–as far as I know, the provision that you must sign an affidavit saying you are complying with all terms of a NH residency (this would include things like registering your car here, something a college student wouldn’t do) have been set aside for this election. So what we are left with is yes, you need to show photo ID, but if you don’t have it you can still vote. There just haven’t been the shenanigans here that we’ve seen elsewhere.
@Andre Kenji:
We used to have a term for such people here too: WOP (with out papers) would be stamped on the immigration papers of those who came without documentation. It became derogatory slang for Italian Americans and fell out of favor when Italian Americans became accepted in the country.
@michael reynolds:
You are in the minority. And the problem is that this issue is much more complicated than people like jan and Patrick thinks.
@jan:
I agree. I want my own rich Daddy Warbucks to set me up with the best education money can buy and enuf money to start my own vulture capital firm.
Right Jan?
And there goes that lie. And for the record? I most definitely am a class warfare proponent. And so are the rich, they just don’t know it. They have been waging war on the working class for so long it has become the default setting.
@michael reynolds:
Hear, hear.
I used to lean conservative. That was when I was young and naive. Problem is, I care about data and logic (I used to be a physicist). There’s only so long you can tell me the scientists are all lying about evolution, or global warming, or that cutting taxes on the rich leads to jobs, etc., before I decide that your side is full of shit.
@steve s:
Does one stop being a physicist? Excommunication?
We have to make sure this election is not stolen electronically by Karl Rove. Romney did it in the 2012 Republican Primaries and McCain did it in 2008 Presidential election. This is shown in a well written paper by two statisticians who specialize in fraud analysis.
http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/2012/10/part-ii-rigged-elections-for-romney-2/
Or, do a google on the following words:
“vote flipping large precincts michael collins part II”
Read Part I and Part II.
@john personna:
It requires a quantum shift in interests and priorities.
@john personna:
Which is why they’re not the reality-based community.
@john personna:
I used to do physics research. I haven’t done any in 7 years since I graduated. So I used to be a physicist.
In a just work Jon Husted would be brought up on charges of corruption/rigging elections. Period. The fact that even James is coming around the notion that what’s happening here has gone well beyond standard party politics and into an attempt to rig an election is a clear sign of this.
Likewise it displays the selective outrage of Republicans/Conservatives. If this was a democratic SoS doing this in a swing state they would be calling for her head. Period. One need look no further that the bruhahahs over the New Black Panthers in 2008.
Or better yet Acorn. Compare the relative level of coverage they got because of the investigation into voter registration fraud in a lesser swing state (Nevada) versus the near media blackout on the Republican voter registration form that had similar problems this year in Florida.
In 2008 Voter registration fraud was a HUGE issue. 2012, not so much. Wonder why?
Until one of these “Protect the vote acts” addresses the most verifiable, more wide spread, and far more disruptive and effective method of voting fraud — absentee balloting — then there’s not ethical or moral explanation for these measures beyond the desire to disenfranchise predominantly democratic voters.
Period.
Of course the dirty secret is that Absentee Balloting has traditionally favored republicans (and to that point at least as many local republican officials as democrats have been convicted on tampering with absentee ballots).
But the imagined threat of systemic in person voter fraud is much scarier to imagine, much like the jihadists and new black panthers that are about the take over America, than the real and far less sexy form that fraud usually takes. An so — sadly — people deal with the problem that they are SURE is happening versus the reality that is actually happening.
@steve s:
So in other words, somebody looked? And having observed, a state of being came about? 😉
tom
PS: for what it is worth, and that ain’t much, I am in Einstein’s camp, “God does not play dice with the universe.” I will never feel comfortable with quantum mechanics, no matter how many experiments prove it…. I guess on some level that puts me on a par with “creationists”…. except for the part about being able to accept things I do not understand.
Wait a minute…. Does anybody understand the Bible?
A state secretary of state, that’s an appointed position, yes?
James, if you’d lived in Ohio, you would have supported Husted through your vote for Kasich, right?
Thanks to your vote, there’s nothing stopping your Republican governor, Bob McDonnell, from doing the same thing, is there? I mean, nothing but voting him out, but you aren’t going to pick that route, are you?
Florida voter suppression effort is in full effect:
I seriously wonder, Dr. Joyner, how you could support a party that does these kind of banana republic, Jim Crow shenanigans. Isn’t it a clear sign that the party has left you- and isn’t coming back?
@michael reynolds:
Michael,
Just lecture and apotheosize. High-minded words and judgment of others is what social progressives do best.
And in Ohio:
@swbarnes2:
Not in MO it ain’t.
To vote for a party that is subverting democracy is just plain immoral. Sometimes you have to choose between the lesser of two evils, though. If you think abortion is murder, you might easily justify a little antidemocratic actions as less worse than mass murder.
Mr. Joyner recognizes that there is vote suppression going on in Ohio, perpetrated by Republican elected officials, with the intent of changing the results of the election. It’s obvious that Romney approves of this — if Romney spoke against it, it would stop.
So, I would ask: what is the greater evil that allows Mr. Joyner to vote for Romney in good conscience? I don’t even know what Romney he voted for — severe conservative, Massachusetts liberal, something in between? What does he expect a Romney administration to be like that the differences are worth the risk to our democracy?
@jan:
Jan, you do nothing but.
Jan, you see how easy it is to demolish what you call an “argument” with rhetoric? I did not say a guddamned thing, and yet you were left a gibbering idiot.
I have a feeling there is a semi-intelligent being residing within the person known as “Jan”… but I have yet to here her speak. I am not sure I ever will.
@stonetools:
But has it really?
Republicanism’s main message now is that prosperous straight white men are real Americans, and better than everyone else. Many people can not resist that siren song, and James and Doug are in their number. Observe how they never defend Republican policies. Observe all the “Ha, ha, women/racial minorities are so screwed” posts that Doug puts up where all he does is quote a run-of-the-mill Republican saying ordinary monstrous Republican things.
That message of superiority is one that Democrats can never give to people like James and Doug. And there is no policy horrible enough to make them turn their back on the party that gives them what they want.
@OzarkHillbilly: Or in California.
More from Ohio:
Seriously, how in the world can these obvious voter suppression efforts survive court scrutiny? Maybe the Voting Rights Act needs to be extended to Ohio.
Some good news from Florida:
I’m hoping we will.
@Gustopher:
To the best of my recollection James has never even made a case for Mr. Romney. He’s an ‘R.’ Apparently that’s all it takes. All the talk of politics ends up being hollow: it’s just tribalism.
@jan:
Shorter Jan: I approve of the current
Jim Crowvoter ID laws because I ignore all evidence they will disenfranchise minorities, but if it did disenfranchise minorities that would be wrong.Is there anything more Orwellian than people actively working to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters in the name of protecting the integrity of our elections?
This is what annoys me. Ohio has pretty much directly engaged in voter suppression. This provisional ballot thing is in violation of Ohio law. And let’s not forget that all the long lines we are seeing for early voting today are a direct result of Ohio cutting early voting short. Two things that there are zero reason to do unless your goal is making it harder for people to vote and have their votes count.
AND NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH VOTER ID.
What’s going on in Ohio and Fla today is disposable, an affront to Democracy, and completely the doing of Republicans.
If you vote Republican you support these craven tactics.
And by supporting these craven tactics you are damaging this nation.
Despicable. The entire Republican party.
@swbarnes2: The Ohio Secretary of State is elected. I guess looking that up before expressing an opinion was too much trouble.
Your knowledge is weak across the board. You criticized James for (in your imagination) not voting Virginia Governor McDonnell out for actions he hasn’t taken (in fact he loosened that state’s voter ID rules), apparently unaware that James CANNOT vote him out because McDonnell is not eligible to be re-elected.
Sheesh, learn something before you post. You are wasting everyone’s time otherwise.
It has been said for quite a while that if the Democrats started to believe Romney would win, they would start claiming the election would be stolen a few days beforehand to help set the stage for challenges. I think we are seeing that now on leftist blogs, and the left-bots are carrying the message around — commenters here being an example.
@Console:
Exactly. Voter ID is what people like James want to pretend it’s about. In fact it’s about stealing an election. And James seems fine with that — until it’s too late for it to matter. He gives himself a brownie point and pretends he’s not on of ‘them’ and tells himself that if this vacuous, contemptuous liar is elected he’ll reform the GOP.
Just how bad off is your party when you turn to the most dishonest presidential candidate in modern history to fix it? And why would anyone still be part of that party?
@OzarkHillbilly
SoS is an elected postition in Ohio. Election is off presidenial election years.
@Janiah:
That’s a lie. In fact we “left-bots” have been complaining about Ohio and Florida voter suppression effort for many months. For the record, I’d be complaining just as much if it were Republican voters under attack by government. I believe in democracy. I believe in elections.
@jan:
Just do us all a favor, Jan, and in the future don’t pretend that your positions are about anything other than yourself. You’ve conceded that point now. You’re about nothing but you, and all the rest of what you have to say is just noise.
@michael reynolds: What’s a lie, that “It has been said for quite a while that if the Democrats started to believe Romney would win, they would start claiming the election would be stolen a few days beforehand.”
I assure you, this has been said for quite a while.
Or perhaps you think I was lying when I said, “I think we are seeing that now on leftist blogs…”
I assure you, I do think that.
Or perhaps you don’t know the difference between “that’s a lie,” and “my opinion is different.”
Try to learn the difference.
I think it is amazing that people can claim with a straight face that not being able to vote before election day is the equivalent of voter suppression.
Assuming they aren’t laughing their heads off as they type.
@Janiah:
I’m pretty sure no one here is claiming the absence of early voting is voter suppression. Now shortening hours in Democratic areas while lengthening them in Republican areas and the Voter ID laws in response to nonexistent voter fraud are pretty much the definition of voter suppression. And the same goes for Husted in OH trying to deliberately disenfranchise voters using provisional ballots, because they are more likely to be Democratic votes.
@Janiah:
Its voter suppression if it unduly burdens the right to vote . and is applied in an unequal fashion. I guess, Mr. Klansman , you didn’t even bother to read my links. What’s the matter, too many facts for you?
I’m hoping the DOJ comes flying out of the gate on Monday with lawsuits.
@steve s:
I just thought it was an amusing way to say it. I have a chem degree, and it’s been a lot of years since i’ve done pure chemistry, but I wouldn’t really call myself “ex.”
People may remember me saying “I have a rusty chem degree,” which also amuses me. Oxidation joke.
@David M: I can tell everyone’s anti-Husted views are well-considered, given that his POV has been stated in the post/thread and analyzed fairly.
Oh wait. His POV doesn’t appear anywhere here. I guess we just know he is a bad guy doing a bad thing. Somehow.
@stonetools: Of course you are. Try to win in the courts what you can’t at the polls. Happily for you, Eric Holder is of the same mind.
@Janiah:
He’s the same guy who wanted to extend the GOP voting hours and shorten the Democratic voting hours, so he gets zero benefit of the doubt.
@David M: As Church Lady said, How convenient.
You disagreed with him on another thing, so he’s wrong on this. You don’t even need to know his reasoning.
Ha ha. Funny people here.
@Janiah:
Did you even bother read the original post?
Bloomberg is reporting a crazy story that Romney reduced his tax by giving money to the church, and then having them give earning on it back to him.
But I gotta know … does Jan approve?
@David M: You consider posting the POV of Husted’s opponents as sufficient substitute for the failure to include Husted’s POV.
Ha ha. This is a comedy thread, right?
Here’s another big joke: At least some of you concur that this is “vote suppression targeted at poor, elderly, and minority voters.”
WTF? Romney leads among seniors. The GOP Sec of State is trying to suppress Romney votes?
Given the anti-GOP bias around here, I commend you all for minding.
And btw, @stonetools: You called me “Mr. Klansman” yet who is it who thinks minorities are less capable than non-minorities of filling out a “ridiculously simple” form?
Racist.
@Janiah:
Voters required to use provisional ballots are more likely to be Democratic leaning. The poor and minority voters less likely to have ID are also more likely to vote Democratic. How is this complicated?
Ahh…the standard line from right-bots whenever a Republican hack like Husted tries to change the rules to benefit his own party…how convenient, indeed…
@David M: Let’s see. The left has been claiming that poor, minority and elderly voters are the least likely to have ID. This, then, makes them more likely to cast provisional ballots and subsequently need to fill out the “ridiculously simple” but somehow also very obstructionist form.
Now you are adding to this view that poor and minority voters (leaning Democratic) who cast provisional ballots will outnumber the elderly voters (leaning Republican) who do so.
Not that you said this. You actually seem to be ignoring the elderly voters entirely now that I pointed out the inconvenient fact that the seniors are trending pro-Romney.
But you don’t get to ignore inconvenient facts. Sorry.
So what reliable data do you have to support your contention that the poor and minority voters (leaning Democratic) who cast provisional ballots will outnumber the elderly voters (leaning Republican) who do so? Or did you just make this “fact” up?
@An Interested Party: I’d reply to your substance, but I can’t find it.
@Janiah:
Okay, that doesn’t hurt my point. James and Doug vote for Republicans, (and before you say it, Gary Johnson is also a Republican) if they live in Ohio, they would have voted for Husted. All these voter suppression tactics are being perpetrated by Republican governors and other Republican officials. People who support Republicans and vote for Republicans have to take ownership of wide-spread Republican policies. People who vote for Democrats are doing their bit to oppose this kind of stuff.
No, I criticized them for voting him in.
Voter suppression is a widespread Republican policy, (You haven’t forgotten that the RNC hired people who threw away completed voter registration forms in VA, did you?) and McDonnell, as one of the writers of the RNC platform, is a mainstream Republican. It would be negligent not to put two and two together.
@swbarnes2: So you are congratulating James fr voting for a governor who watered-down voter ID against the wishes of many other Republicans, then.
The “voter suppression is a widespread Republican policy” is a Dem/lib talking point not believed by most serious people. You may believe it, but that does not make it fact.
@Janiah:
So what is his POV. If its so brilliant, why don’t you quote it?
Besides, lets face it. Would quoting Bull O’ Connor’s POV really justify his position?
@Janiah:
Measuring the effects of voter identification laws:
Voter ID laws disproportionally impact minorities:
@stonetools: Nope. I don’t know it. it is just that, unlike apparently most of you, I’m not making up my mind until I’ve heard from both sides.
@David M:
Why should he bother? Those inconvenient facts would just get in the way of his talking points. Note that he doesn’t even pretend to offer facts to support the Republican position that there is a significant voter fraud problem. That’s just assumed, without argued for or proven.
@David M: And the seniors? Or do seniors without an ID no longer matter, now that we realize they trend pro-Romney?
@stonetools: Of course I read it. That’s how I know it did not include Husted’s POV. Nor did anything else here.
@Janiah:
So you just assume he has a defensible POV? How trusting of you.
Well, I don’t trust him . I’m going to presume he intends the natural and probable consequences of his acts, which is suppression of minority and young voters. You can rebut that presumption by presenting evidence of his good faith
@stonetools: That’s a difference between us. I hear from both sides, obtain additional information from elsewhere, and then make a judgement.
You “presume” based on assumptions.
Thanks for spelling it out clearly.
Considering your blindness, I’m not surprised…
Meanwhile, if we want to talk about facts, where are the facts that Voter ID laws were needed in the first place? If Republicans didn’t put them into place to suppress the votes of Democratic-friendly demographic groups, what other reason was there for them? If there was all this supposed voter fraud, surely proponents of these Voter ID laws can show us the evidence…
@Janiah:
This has zero to do with the unfair and discriminatory application of the early voting rules, as you must certainly realize, but thanks for pointing to the shiny object.
As for Klansman , I call it as how I see it. The old Southern segregationists presented wonderfully even handed arguments why the poll tax and voting “literacy tests” were necessary for the integrity of the voting process. I see your arguments as more of the same.
Certainly, these manipulation of the voting rules have the same effect, which is what matters in the end.
@Janiah:
I’m certainly willing to consider the other side-if you present it. I don’t assume another side, the way you do. Your position seems to be “Surely there is some good reason why Mr. Husted is issuing rules that have the effect of suppressing minority and youth votes. And if Mr. Husted or the Republicans can’t present such a reason, why I’ll just assume there is a good reason. Problem solved”.
Well, sorry. Problem NOT solved. Why is Mr. Husted violating a court order by issuing these new, discriminatory rules. If you can’t present an answer, then its time for him to be held accountable.
@An Interested Party: I think what Anastasia Williams had to say on the matter after someone (nonexistently?) voted in her place makes sense,
However, you are forgetting, I don’t have to take a position on every issue you choose to raise in order to fairly say I am not going to take a position on what Husted did without knowing his side of the story.
You folks argue a lot for people who can’t be bothered to hear from both sides.
But then, fairness hasn’t been the point, has it?
And I bet at least some of you think you’re being non-partisan.
I’m leaving for a little while. Despite what stonetools concluded, without evidence (shocker, I know), I’m not a male but a mom, and one of my kids needs me for a bit.
If anyone posts a link to Husted’s actual reasoning, I’ll be back later, click the link, and read it. If no one does, well, I think that tells us that minds aren’t open.
I leave you, for however long, with advice: Hearing from both sides doesn’t hurt.
What will it say about our Republic if a pathological liar wins because the rights of millions are violated?
Republicans talk about their love for this nation…but it’s as much bullshit as everything else they say…eg; voodoo economics, WMD in Iraq, water boarding isn’t torture, evolution is a hoax, climate change is a lie, apology tours, welfare work rules, you didnt build that, men rode dinosaurs, etc, etc, etc.
If Republicans had to speak the truth they would be mute.
If they had to win this election on the bullshit they are selling…well they can’t…that’s why they must cheat.
@stonetools: No, I choose to hear from both sides before deciding. You didn’t.
In other words, context or the complete story mean nothing to you…so much for fairness and hearing from both sides…poor, poor Husted must be given the benefit of the doubt, even though it is quite obvious that he is trying to change the rules to benefit his own party….well, obvious to most people, anyway…
@Janiah:
Shorter Janiah:
There is no other side that I can present, but I’ll accuse you of not being willing to hear from both sides anyway.
Is this really what passes for reasoned argument in Right Wing World these days ?
Good grief. Better trolls, please.
What it will tell us is that we don’t assume facts not in evidence. Its up to YOU, not us, to present evidence that there is such a thing as ” Husted’s actual reasoning.”
You failed to do that . Maybe you can do your homework and present such evidence next time . Until then, I recommend you stay away and just do whatever it is you do.
@Janiah:
Ohio’s voter ID law is not in effect for this election, so yeah seniors aren’t really part of this conversation. That’s why Husted is attempting to invalidate provisional ballots, because he knows the GOP will get an advantage.
This is the guy James thinks should be president of the United States. Good grief.
@Janiah:
It’s worth noting that you’ve acknowledged there could be a valid reason to attempt to disenfranchise minority voters. That’s a bold stand. I personally am comfortable stating that any voter disenfranchisement is a bad thing, and that voting is a right that should be protected for every citizen.
More evidence that voter suppression is a widespread Republican policy:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/05/1155728/-Arizona-GOP-Senate-candidate-Jeff-Flake-providing-wrong-polling-sites-to-Democrats
Oh, and when an election worker was filling in blank bubbles on submitted mail ballots, guess which side was getting all the votes? Yes, Republicans, of course. And voter ID would not have helped on bit, the ballots were being tampered with after long after the voter had voted.
http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2012/11/clackamas_county_roundup_state_4.html
And remember the one in AZ, where only Spanish language voter material had the wrong day of the week and date printed on it? The AZ secretary of state is of course Republican.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/18/us/arizona-spanish-election-ballot/index.html
Oh look, Ohio Republicans did that too. Again, a Republican secretary of state.
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2012/10/democrats_blast_ottawa_county.html
(Oh, and they caught a real live person trying to commit voter fraud in Nevada! She was caught with ordinary protocols they have in place for that, and of course, she was a registered Republican. No voter ID law would have prevented the attempt)
So we have Republican officials screwing with election rules days before the election, Republican led governments sending out false election information to Democratic leaning groups, a GOP consulting group throwing out completed voter registration forms; I must have missed some, I’m sure Doug and James are knowledgable enough to fill in more.
But I predict that they will not.
Yes, yes, but if you let the great unwashed vote they’ll vote in Democrats.
@Rob in CT: How do you define “unwashed”?
@swbarnes2: Your post is very illogical. It’s the logical equivalent of saying some people in Norway have committed crimes, therefore, if a Norwegian does something, it is a crime.
Republicans have committed voter fraud. Democrats have committed voter fraud. Third parties and independents and people who just wanted to get paid for registering voters without doing the work have committed voter fraud. None of those facts says anything about why a particular elected official undertook an action he did.
To determine that, a person has to examine the action itself. The arguments pro, the arguments con, and additional information to the extent it applies.
@David M:
It’s worth noting that you expressed a desire to rob a bank in the near future. That’s a bold stand.
Of course, you didn’t. I didn’t do as you allege. Try to stay within the reality-based universe.
@David M:
The post upon which this conversation is based says: “A less generous interpretation is intentional vote suppression targeted at poor, elderly, and minority voters.”
It is very interesting how many posts people here are willing to write in defense of the idea that it is not necessary to examine both sides of a question before reaching a conclusion about it.
@stonetools:
Convenient. Honest. Nuts.
Keep in mind that I have reached no conclusion about what Husted did. Me waiting to see an evaluation of the views of both POVs does not place upon me an obligation to give you anything.
@Janiah: Can you at less admit that changing voting rules the weekend before an election is a very stupid idea and if that there was some urgent need to do so that they should have said it up front? Especially if they had some “set backs” in litigation over changing other requirements? Past practices by the Ohio Sec of State gets to be used in the analysis considering he hasn’t, as far as I can find, put forh an explanation. Until such time as he does, we go with what we got.
@David: Ideally it would be good to settle all things in advance, but Husted’s office says it is responding to a court order dated October 26, 2012, and the court case against Husted’s action by the SEIU seeks on an “emergency basis… clarification” of the October 26 court decision.
Specifically, Husted’s opponents say “Plaintiffs seek emergency clarification of this Court’s October 26, 2012 Order issued in the related cases of NEOCH v. Husted and SEIU Local 1 v. Husted, and emergency relief in light of the Secretary of State’s issuance of Directive 2012-54 at 6:00 p.m. on the Friday before election day. Chisholm Decl., Ex. A. Secretary Husted issued Directive 2012-54 ostensibly to implement this Court’s and the Sixth Circuit’s recent orders regarding the November 2012 election…” in their filing.
If Husted is wrong or right in interpreting the federal court’s decision the way he did I do not know, but the timing does not appear to have been solely his.
I also am curious if James’s contention that changing who signs a form is “is intentional vote suppression targeted at poor, elderly, and minority voters” has been researched by anyone so emotional about this or if the whole thing has simply been accepted as a suppression story because it fits pre-existing biases. Apparently, by far the #1 reason Ohioans cast provisional ballots is because their address changed since the previous election, not because they are minorities, are financially poor, or are old. What is the “moved” demographic and which party does it support? Is it even reasonable to suppose this demographic is voting overwhelmingly in one direction or another? Yet if it is not overwhelmingly pro-Obama, even if the GOP SOS is trying to do voter suppression, why would he issue this order for voter suppression purposes? It would not help the GOP, yet it would give the Democrats grounds for an appeal of any race in Ohio this year is won by the GOP in a squeaker. Seems to be all downside from a partisan POV. And the guy is being watched by everybody, so if he claims it is in response to a federal judge’s order and no judge made this order, that should be easy enough to check.
@Janiah:
Sigh. How many instances can you cite of Democratic Sec. of state sending out false information to Republican-leaning voters? Where are the Democratic Sec. of state who are changing election rules days before elections?
That’s not voter fraud, and I didn’t even bring up any examples of that. A consultant paid by the GOP threw away completed voter registration forms. That means people will show up to vote, and find they can not, because they are not registered.
So, where are all the Democratic operatives being caught disenfranchising voters by tricking them into believing they are registered?
Okay, so when the actions always benefit Republicans, and hurt Democrats? And this behavior manifests itself across multiple states? Sorry, but when all the evidence points one way, it’s dishonest not to draw a conclusion. I know Doug and James lead the way in “10 racist incidents this month, each one completely isolated, what oh what could be motivating each and every one of them”, but the rest of the world is not so dim.
Okay, what would be the pro argument for a political operative throwing away your completed voter registration form, causing you to not be able to vote tomorrow?
Is the GOP stealing Ohio?
Uncertified, “experimental” software patches have been installed on machines in 39 counties of the key swing state
BY BRAD FRIEDMAN
There is indication that these patches can miscount the votes.
Thanks very much for taking a clear stand on this issue.
@swbarnes2:
Voter ID disenfranchises Democratic voters? coincidence
Provisional ballot rules that disenfranchise Democratic voters? coincidence
Early voting restrictions that disenfranchise Democratic voters? coincidence
Tea Party
(GOP)challenging voters in minority precincts? coincidenceRepublican voter roll purges targeting minorities? coincidence
Romney campaign incorrectly training poll watchers? coincidence
Conservative groups placing “voter fraud” billboards in minority neighborhoods? coincidence
GOP efforts to restrict voter registration? coincidence
GOP officials pushing “voter fraud” myths? coincidence
I think that sums up Janiah’s position rather well.