August 7, 2016

Just as the Democratic commentator is saying Republicans can only win through voter suppression, she's radically undercut by the crawl at the bottom of the screen.

A commentator on "State of the Union" this morning — Baltimore mayor Stephanie Rawlings — asserts that voter suppression is "the only way Republicans win" just as the crawl across the bottom of the screen says: "Federal appeals court reinstates lawsuit against IRS says agency needs to prove it's no longer discriminating conservative groups. Court rules conservative groups who brought 2013 lawsuit were 'subjected to extended delay' when applying for tax-exempt status with IRS. Court says 'it is absurd' to suggest unlawful delays by IRS have completely ended, considering two of the plaintiff groups still have tax-exempt applications pending...."

99 comments:

AReasonableMan said...

Both of these arguments, from either side, are largely nonsense but they are unrelated and the post makes no sense.

David Begley said...

Rawlings was an abject failure as a mayor. Murder and drugs out of control. Riots. She abandoned the police.

Typical Dem. But she's the best looking mayor in America!

Fernandinande said...

Voting is a "natural right" and no one should have their vote suppressed by naughty people.

Everyone, including babies, illegal immigrants and dead people should vote, and vote often. Especially the dead illegal immigrant babies.

AprilApple said...

What a pant load.

The democrats know that if we remove the basic fundamental of one-person/one-vote with a valid photo ID - they cannot cheat to win.

Hagar said...

There is a reason we refer to election day as "the day of the walking dead."

Unknown said...

How is she undercut? How does the case against the IRS pertain to voter suppression?

AprilApple said...

You need a photo ID to travel, check into a hotel, buy or rent a home, get a credit card, buy booze or marijuana (to name a few) - but the dems are horrified by a photo ID to vote.

Why is that?

AprilApple said...

The democrat party has nothing to sell but shit and lies.

...at your expense, however. Enter - queen Hillary, of the Clinton Crime Family. She needs your multiple votes.

LYNNDH said...

Here in CO we have mail in ballots as the primary way to vote. Wonder if any fraud occurs? HA HA.
Leaving soon on a trip overseas. What would happen if I told them I don't need no stink'n Passport or photo ID?

AprilApple said...

LYNNDH - In CO, we have stacks of paper ballots abandoned in apartment and condo lobbies.

CO goes by signature verification instead of a valid photo ID. CO is ripe for fraud and that's just how the corruptocrats like it. You bigots.

cornroaster said...

ARM said: "Both of these arguments, from either side, are largely nonsense but they are unrelated and the post makes no sense."

I think the point our hostess is trying to make is that the Democratic speaker was accusing the Republicans of voter suppression while the crawl at the bottom of the screen was showing how the Democratic administration was trying to suppress conservative political thought and action. The two definitely are related.

Sorry, ARM, Althouse is perfectly sensible, unlike your statement.

ndspinelli said...

I like Jake but he had a minor league panel this morning. Not even AA, more like rookie league.

ndspinelli said...

The vast majority[69%] of people believe this position by Dems that requiring a vote ID is suppression is BULLSHIT.

n.n said...

Democrats can only win through indoctrination, fraud, disenfranchisement, judicial override, quasi-eminent domain, refugee crises, and a beholden population.

Sebastian said...

"Just as the Democratic commentator is saying Republicans can only win through voter suppression, she's radically undercut by he crawl at the bottom of the screen." What do you mean, undercut? Progs fight on all fronts. Sure, the court's IRS judgment is a temporary setback, but O's minions will keep at it, and Hill's will pick up where they left off. It's not as if existing law, or courts, or rules, mean anything--less to Hill than to O, if that is possible.

The whole voter suppression business rhetoric serves prog purposes nicely: race-baiting riles up the troops, and the practical effect is to swing close contests. If logic and evidence mattered, it would also look very strange: it depends on the racist assumption that minorities are incapable of getting IDs, and most Western countries, as far as I know, require voter ID as a matter of course, because "racism."

AReasonableMan said...

cornroaster said...
Sorry, ARM, Althouse is perfectly sensible


As unknown noted, "How does the case against the IRS pertain to voter suppression?" You could, unreasonably in my view, argue that the IRS case relates to suppression of free speech but it is not what normal people would normally understand as voter suppression.

n.n said...

A multi-trillion dollar welfare industry and Democrats cannot even document their charges. It's no wonder that their liberal fiscal policies create catastrophic misalignments that require progressive debt (progressive wars, refugee crises, immigration reform) to compensate.

Ann Althouse said...

Actually, the argument that the 2 things are related is detrimental to the argument that the groups deserve the tax-exemption.

But the lawsuit is about delay in processing their applications.

I agree that it's not a direct contradiction. But the Democrats should keep their hands clean if they want to go with the GOP-wins-by-suppression propaganda.

FullMoon said...

AReasonableMan said... [hush]​[hide comment]

Both of these arguments, from either side, are largely nonsense but they are unrelated and the post makes no sense.


Not only were specific Republican/Tea Party groups denied opportunity to raise money, other potential groups were intimidated by the example.

Ann Althouse said...

"But the lawsuit is about delay in processing their applications."

That is, there should be no political discrimination in the speed with which applications are processed.

The same standard should apply to all the applications about how political they can be and still get the exemption. The plaintiffs might not, in the end, deserve the exemption. But the delay alone is a technique in suppression.

It's terrible for either party to use its government power for partisan political advantage, but it's so predictable, routine, and unavoidable that people naturally stop caring.

AJ Lynch said...

At least 10% [about 30 million people] or more of current residents of America are not citizens and are not eligible to vote.

To get to that number, I am adding the 12 million illegals we hear of and assuming there are another 18 million legal visitors who are visa holders and/or legal immigrants who are not yet citizens.

If my estimates are accurate, that means an average of one out of every ten current residents you see on the street are not eligible to vote. That alone makes the call for proof of citizenship and Voter ID laws entirely reasonable and smart.

Comanche Voter said...

The Democrats can't keep their hands clean because they are too busy shoveling the sh@t. But then politics is always a messy business and the beautiful bozette from Baltimore doesn't seem to mind; she just keeps on shoveling.

This whole voter suppression idea is a load of bull; my family has sits ancestral roots in the South; and I would note that it was largely Bull Connor style Democrats who thought up every possible suppression method for keeping black folks "in their place" which most definitely was "not in the polling place" up through the late 1960s. If you want an expert on actual vote suppression, talk to a Democrat. Of course they have a sideline specialty (Chicago Democrats anyway) of raising the dead from cemeteries to go to the polls. That's more voter levitation than voter suppression. So there is that.

mezzrow said...

My cognitive sounds like Penderecki at fortissimo. Ouch.


Crimso said...

"but it is not what normal people would normally understand as voter suppression."

Neither is showing an ID to vote.

Curious George said...

"David Begley said...
Rawlings was an abject failure as a mayor. Murder and drugs out of control. Riots. She abandoned the police.

Typical Dem. But she's the best looking mayor in America!"

Nope, 5th.


http://www.ranker.com/list/hottest-us-female-mayors-of-cities-larger-than-200-000/mtechman?&var=2

DKWalser said...

ARM -- Several of the groups illegally targeted by the IRS were voter education organizations that hoped to help people register to vote and get them to the polls. There are several liberal organizations that provide similar services as qualified charities. The IRS blocked the conservative groups while taking no action against the liberal groups. That's a clear case of suppressing the conservative vote by prohibiting the get-out-the-vote efforts of the conservative side while green-lighting the same efforts on the liberal side. (Such groups can operate as permissible charities as long as they provide services to all comers, without regard to race, political beliefs, etc. The liberal groups just target their "marketing" to neighborhoods and communities where they expect to find a lot of liberals and the conservative groups hoped to do just the opposite.)

We don't have all of Lois Lerner's emails, but we do have one where she says it is "up to us" to address the FEC's concerns about the Tea Party groups. The Democrats on the FEC wanted to investigate the Tea Party groups for violating federal election laws. The Republicans blocked this effort. In response, and with some apparent urging by someone(s) at the FEC, Lois sent her email saying, in effect, the baton had been passed to the IRS for enforcement in the area. So, it's pretty clear that the IRS' actions were motivated, in part, by a desire to affect the election by making it difficult for these groups to act.

Hagar said...

I believe I have read that in the last couple of presidential elections there were predominantly Black districts in Ohio and Pennsylvania where 110-120% of the registered voters turned out to vote.
Think of wht the turnouts could have been if not for the dastardly Republican efforts at voter suppression!

Real American said...

the IRS suppressed groups that would have been involved in voter registration and GOTV efforts. It is directly tied to voter suppression and there's actual evidence of it. There is NO evidence that any blacks or anyone else was ever denied a valid vote because they lacked an ID.

Democrats just rigged their own primary to favor HiLIARy. They should not be making these baseless accusations against Republicans, but like most of Leftists, they project - they assume the Republicans must be trying to suppress the vote because that's what they do.

bagoh20 said...

The only remaining substantial form of voter disenfranchisement is voter fraud, and only Democrats see that as a plus, so they try to maintain it. This is so obvious that denial of it proves a person's bias in favor lawlessness for political gain.

traditionalguy said...

There is no rigged system like the DemonRats.

Terry said...

Why the worship for 50%+1?
The party that applauds the defeat of majority-approved voter ID laws is pro-democracy? Gimmee a f'n break.

cubanbob said...

From from being a bad thing this country needs voter suppression: a simple thing of leaving the vote to only live US citizens in full possession of their civil rights. That the Democrat's oppose this simply means they can't win without gaming the system.

Dave Greene said...

If the right were smart, they would frame the IRS's campaign against Tea Party groups as SUPPRESSION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZING.

bagoh20 said...

"Actually, the argument that the 2 things are related is detrimental to the argument that the groups deserve the tax-exemption. "

The relation of the two is Democrat lawlessness The IRS scandal involved a true act of suppressing votes for Conservatives by limiting their speech and fundraising. Lets face it they only wanted to shut them up to affect the election. The voter ID issue is Democrats trying to artificially increase Dem voters who are ineligible. Both cases are Democrats trying to win by cheating and lawbreaking. Where is the bad acting by Republicans or Conservatives?

The number of people who want to vote but would not be able to because of voter ID is virtually nil, while the number of voters disenfranchised by voter fraud is substantial and has likely turned elections. More unfortunate is the fact that the publication in recent years on youtube of examples of how easy it is for ineligible voters to vote without repercussions has undoubtedly encouraged more to do so. Voter ID is now badly needed and will get more so.

buwaya puti said...

I vote absentee in two countries (not the USA) and in both I have to show or document ID, and if I were voting in person I would have to show physical ID. And one is a poor third-world country. The Philippines can do it, and there is overwhelming public support for it, among people who on average have fewer resources than the poorest of the poor in this country. If they can do it and, these days, run clean elections, the US can't?

This is the international standard.

The objection to this is, well, not absurd, because the point is clear. It is meant to facilitate fraud. The disingenuous arguments against ID are in service of corruption.

What does this say about the level of ethics in American politics? The Marcos mafia was less corrupt.

rhhardin said...

The joke is: my grandfather voted Republican until the day he died, then he started voting Democrat.

Hagar said...

The Democrats to this day insist that there was no reason for us to be disturbed over the Kennedy brothers meeting with Sam Giancana and his capos at Frank Sinatra's place in 1960, since all they were discussing was organizing election fraud in Illinois, so nothing to see here; just move along, folks!.
Yeah, right!
And furthermore, though they freely admit to the fraud in Illinois, we have no cause to fret over that either, because Kennedy would have won the election anyway, without Illinois.

The amazing thing about the Democrats and election fraud is not just that they habitually engage in it, but they seem to feel that they are entitled to do it, and the Republicans are just totally unreasonable and unfair in objecting to it!

walter said...

Did Hildebot ever get further questioned when she recently said "..we need to appoint Supreme Court justices who will get money out of politics and expand voting rights"?

I get the attempt to paint voter ID as "suppression", though I don't agree with it..given even non-drivers most likely have a state ID for various day to day functions.
But who in her short-circuiting brain would the SCOTUS be expanding "voting rights" for..or to?

Curious George said...

I'll believe this voter suppression bullshit when the Democrats take up one other single cause that forces an American citizen to have a photo ID. The sure want them to vote, but could care less about everything else, much which effects daily life.

bagoh20 said...

I believe that many - maybe most - Democrats would be fine with foreigners living abroad voting in our elections as long as they are voting correctly. I've even heard some make that argument, based on the fact that American policy affects the world so much.

Sebastian said...

@bp: "This is the international standard." Of course. Whole lotta racists out there. But it's not as if evidence matters. Especially not to progs who generally want to cherry-pick foreign law (on death penalty, hate speech, and so on).

Here's a thought for GOP states: require anyone who has ID from any state or locality, or a passport, to show it. Same thing for absentee ballots: ID # to be included. Make it a felony to vote without showing proof of identity when you in fact posses such proof.

n.n said...

What does this say about the level of ethics in American politics?

It's selective or Pro-Choice, and not limited to secular/material concerns and vocational ethics. It's a progressive slope.

Big Mike said...

Making it difficult for people to vote twice ==. Voter suppression. Yup. Got it.

Curious George said...

"Sebastian said...
Here's a thought for GOP states: require anyone who has ID from any state or locality, or a passport, to show it. Same thing for absentee ballots: ID # to be included. Make it a felony to vote without showing proof of identity when you in fact posses such proof."

Not sure what this would do. It would not stop illegal aliens for instance.

Hagar said...

It may be the Democrat ideal of equality of outcomes; if they cannot win with their policies, they should be allowed to even the playing field with a little fraud.

FullMoon said...

ID required to use the local dump in California. Keeps the riff raff out.

Tommy Duncan said...

I believe I have read that in the last couple of presidential elections there were predominantly Black districts in Ohio and Pennsylvania where 110-120% of the registered voters turned out to vote.
Think of wht the turnouts could have been if not for the dastardly Republican efforts at voter suppression!


I'm an election judge (aka "poll worker") in rural Minnesota. The election rules and procedures require some effort to circumvent, so you don't see a lot of attempts at cheating in rural voting precincts. There are too few votes at stake. Most rural cheating attempts have the appearance of someone who is at the wrong precinct or someone who didn't know the rules.

The real cheating is in Democrat controlled urban precincts, where the Democrats control all levels of local government. The rules depend on the presence of members of both parties for fairness. The Democrat work around is to have a Democrat operative vote in the Republican primary and claim to be a Republican. In urban areas the Democrats control the election process, which enables them to engage in wholesale cheating.

Even though they have the most current voting technology, urban precincts are often late in reporting results. It takes time to (1) figure out how many votes are needed, (2) sign the logbooks for those votes and (3) re-tabulate the results. It also takes time to create the needed new voter registrations to match the vote count, thus allowing urban precincts to have over 100% participation.

tim maguire said...

Blogger Ann Althouse said...
Actually, the argument that the 2 things are related is detrimental to the argument that the groups deserve the tax-exemption.


The IRS action was motivated by the IRS's view of the groups, not their view of themselves. It is consistent to assert that they had a right to approval and that the IRS action was an exercise in vote suppression.

Original Mike said...

"This is the international standard."

I have two friends born in other countries who became US citizens; one from New Zealand and one from Canada. Both of them (they don't know each other) were shocked, and not a little pissed, the first time they voted in Madison, WI. Shocked/pissed, as they said, because there was no attempt to determine they were who they said they were. Yes, it IS the international standard. This is one of those issues that causes me to loss respect for the Dems.

Jim O'Sullivan said...

Pet peeve: that should be "can win only." I'm sorry. I can't stop!!!

buwaya puti said...

A lot of foreign concepts overdue for adoption in the USA - these are common or typical across many countries. Most have to do with education, which is probably more significant than it seems.

The Democrats like to present foreign=better when it suits them, but are completely silent on US peculiarities that benefit them.

- Protections against vote fraud - there are a whole range of these policies not used in the US that are typical of both rich and poor countries. Voter ID is just one.
- Drop university in loco parentis concept
- Strict university admission through competitive examinations
- K-12 tracking - kids are tracked according to ability in most countries
- Vocational training in public schools
- Vocational tracking including apprenticeships, in partnership with industry
- Public schools run directly by a ministry of education, with performance tracking and an inspectorate authorized to impose discipline.
- School vouchers. Most countries have public funds supporting private/religious schools in one form or another.
- Strict budget controls for schools
- Drop mainstreaming of special ed. This is both quixotic and ridiculously expensive.

poker1one said...

Went to see, "Hillary's America," Friday night with a group of fellow Trump volunteers in Arlington, Mass. One of many scenes that stood out was of Dinesh D'Souza learning from a con man, that he met in jail, to, "Never give up the con," and "Lie, lie, lie," when confronted with the facts. Explains the whole Democrat thing and most of the GOPe thing. Oh yes, and all of the government thing. We only have ourselves to blame as by our inaction we allow it to go on. Vote Trump 2016! You don't really have any other choice.

buwaya puti said...

To add,
The US probably has the absolute worst performance in managing public pensions in the developed world. We are talking Greek-level improvidence/incompetence.

AJ Lynch said...

Buyawa:

All really good ones on your list but best of luck with that last one. The lawyers will tie that one up in court forever.

And let's face it, re voter ID, the Dems lawyers are outgunning us on this issue and when they lose, they find an appeals court to conveniently overturn sensible ID laws just before a big election like they just did in three states.

Fernandinande said...

Not just a "natural right": As it says in Corilassonians 3:14159, "Let he who is without identification cast the first vote."

Funny headline:
"Study: Voter ID laws hit minorities"

"The report by the Government Accountability Office, ..."
[no link to the report itself]

"It estimated that reductions in voter turnout were about 2 percent greater in Kansas and from 2 percent to 3 percent steeper in Tennessee than they were in the other states examined.
...
It also found that of 10 other studies that mostly focused on voting before 2008, five found no significant impact from voter ID laws, four found decreases and one found an increase.
...
The report said that in Kansas and Tennessee, reduced voter turnout was sharper among people aged 18 to 23 than among those from 44 to 53. The drop was also more pronounced among blacks than whites, Hispanics or Asians and was greater among newly registered voters than those registered at least 20 years.

[so the headline "hit minorities" means "very slight differential effect on just blacks, the only minority that counts."]

Estimated falloff among black voters was nearly 4 percent greater than it was among whites in Kansas, and almost 2 percent larger among blacks than for whites in Tennessee, the report said."

The politico writing is quite poor (obfuscation hidden in poor writing), and the actual numbers aren't given except in relation to each other**, but taking the 2% falloff in Kansas as representing white voter falloff, 4% greater than 2% is 2.08%.

Oh, the horror.

** "This percent is 2% more than that percent" - say what?
As in, is 12% 2% more than 10%, or is it 20% more?


AJ Lynch said...

Buwaya:

That is a good one too. Public pensions, cost of K-12 education, cost of college, federal student loan programs, etc are all issues that our betters, the elites, have f-ed up for 40-50 years [think of a maroon like Joe Biden]. These will all require very painful costly corrections that we, the taxpayers, will pay.

cubanbob said...

Question for the lawyers commenting here (and of our hostess), does the Constitution allow the Federal Government to decide who gets to vote in a Federal election?

buwaya puti said...

"And let's face it, re voter ID, the Dems lawyers are outgunning us on this issue and when they lose, they find an appeals court to conveniently overturn sensible ID laws just before a big election like they just did in three states."

This is because the entire government system, including the courts, is hopelessly corrupt.
As an outside observer I don't see any of it as reformable. The problem is cultural decadence, and not just in the obvious and lurid matters.

AJ Lynch said...

I agree with you- we have allowed our kids to be brainwashed in schools and now they tend to think right and wrong is very very subjective and depends on the goal of the actor.

PB said...

The only votes we want to suppress are illegal votes, of which there are way too many.

We wouldn't have Obamacare of 900 felons hadn't voted illegally in Minnesota and put Al Franken in office to give the Dems just enough to pass that POS.

Fernandinande said...

Griffe du Lion on how the presidency was swiped, SWIPED I TELLS YA!, from Gore and handed to Bush, due to voting systems which required an IQ above about 70 to operate properly.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

AReasonableMan said...You could, unreasonably in my view, argue that the IRS case relates to suppression of free speech

It's unreasonable to think that the IRS targeting certain groups and needlessly slowing down the process by which they can form effective groups to engage in speech "relates to suppression of free speech?"

You can see that your statement is nonsensical, right ARM? Do you maybe think some of those words mean something other than they do? I'm really not sure what the hell you could mean--you're not arguing that the IRS' bad actions didn't happen, but you seem to be arguing that they don't "relate" to suppression of free speech--in fact that it's not reasonable to think that they did/do. That's just bonkers--what could you mean?!

John said...

Would it be racist to point out that the last republican mayor of Baltimore left office in 1967?

Demmies ever since.

Why are cities dominated by demmies such shitholes?

John Henry

William said...

I read the Caro books. LBJ won his first seat in the Senate due to massive voter fraud. Of course, that was long ago and far away. Nothing like that could ever possibly happen again. And even if it could, wouldn't it be worth it to have such a visionary in public office.

Scott said...

No ID? No problem. We should dye mark voters' index fingers when they vote. Just like other third world nations do.

cubanbob said...

It's not for nothing the Left and the Democrats are against the electoral college and want a simple straight majority vote instead.

William said...

This is off topic, but here's my objection to Rawlings. She comes from a black family that made the cross over to the middle class. So did those black police officers. I never heard her nor for that matter any other black person in public life say a word in defense of those officers. Rather the opposite in fact......Why does the black middle class make common cause with street level drug dealers over honest black men who work for a living?

Phil 3:14 said...

I'm no lawyer and I don't believe in "massive" voter fraud but I can't understand courts disagreement with voter ID.

Terry said...

No votes on gay marriage, immigration, affirmative action are allowed. They won't even let you vote on whether to require ID to vote, and they say that they want to protect democracy?

Terry said...

Democracy and voting is so important we won't even allow you to vote on it . . . what a load of BS.

hombre said...

"Voter fraud" and "corruption" are code words for "electing Democrats."

n.n said...

It is Democracy, not democracy... and class diversity. Votes, as individuals, do not matter. It's all very selective.

boycat said...

Oregon went to vote-by-mail in 1996, and the Republicans haven't won a state-wide election since, and those Republicans then holding such an office promptly lost when they next stood for reelection. The dirty work happens out of sight and behind closed doors, in the county election offices of a few large counties, at the nexus of Democrats, public employees, public employee unions-types particularly, and all those mailed-in ballots piling up just waiting to be "counted."

John said...


Blogger William said...

LBJ won his first seat in the Senate due to massive voter fraud.

At the risk of being pedantic, he actually won the Democrat nomination to the Senate seat due to massive fraud. They didn't even try to hide the fraud. See this picture of the famous "Ballot Box 13" and the fraudsters standing around grinning.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dt5ocjbO8Yg/TVJpDTTfS1I/AAAAAAAAACo/NgC95F3ul_4/s400/vote%2Bfraud%2Bjohnson%2B1948%2Blarge-ballot-box-13.jpg

Texas at the time was so heavily Democrat that the real election was the primary. They almost didn't need to hold a general election.

LBJ won the primary due to massive fraud.

Trivia fact: The Texas Ranger who faced down the guns at the polling place, Frank Hamer, was the same one who killed Bonnie & Clyde. Texas elections used to play for keeps!

John Henry

mockturtle said...

And all the automatic voter registration in many states pretty much ensures that illegals will be voting in huge [or even YUGE] numbers. States are forbidden to require proof of citizenship. They just ask if the applicant is a citizen. This has been part of the Democratic strategy for decades and the GOP can pretty much kiss WA, OR & CA goodbye.

John said...

Scott,

Here in Puerto Rico, USA, we dye the fingers too. We also have paper ballots, marked directly with a pencil.

We also have voter ID cards that are pretty secure and must be presented to vote. These are issued free by the State Elections Commission and are fairly painless to get. Since they do not expire, you only have to get a new one when you move or they change the form. I've had 3 in more than 40 years here. This is what the current one looks like

https://aldia.microjuris.com/2014/02/26/comienza-inscripcion-de-estudiantes-en-la-comision-estatal-de-elecciones/

We also have no early voting and it is very hard to get an absentee ballot, unless you are military or a student. Voting takes place, in person, from about 9AM to 2PM on election day. Businesses must make arrangements to permit voting, most treat the day as a holiday.

There are special arrangements for people unable to make it to the polls due to incapacitation. Police and some others who must be on duty have special arrangements as well.

We typically have about 70-80% of the eligible population voting. Not just registered voters, 70-80% of everyone over 18.

Doesn't do us any good in terms of the quality of our politicians. They are as shitty as politicians everywhere in the US. But we have next to no allegations of fraud or shady dealings on election day.

In Puerto Rico we do NOT have jokes about "Vote early and often" or "voting in cemetaries" etc because in our system it is just not physically possible.

The US electoral system in most states and jurisdictions is a sick joke. If I ever move north, I doubt I will even register. I would feel morally corrupt taking part in such a mortally corrupt system. It would depend on where I moved to, of course.

John Henry

Darleen said...

there have been several closed elections where the margin of victory was less than the contested/illegal ballots

that's how CA got Loretta Sanchez (46th Congressional district) ... a woman has to be chaperoned during a rainstorm least she look up and drown herself.

Darleen said...

argh

"close elections" not closed...

... sumimasen ...

Fritz said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
William said...

People here criticize voter fraud like its some kind of bad thing. Hardly. Any time you elect a Republican president the nation is in imminent peril of nuclear war or a fascist state. The Republcans want to ban birth control and pain suppression drugs in the delivery room. Good people must show their opposition. The responsible, honorable thing to do is to vote early and vote often. Thank God for voter fraud. There's no telling what those racist, misogynistic brutes would do if left to their own devices. Only those who have mastered the basic skill of ballot fraud have shown that they're worthy of governing.

walter said...

"The Democrats like to present foreign=better when it suits them, but are completely silent on US peculiarities that benefit them."

Yep. Bernie championing "Democratic Socialism" of Northern Europe that were enabled by oil economies...
Also..more restrictive abortion laws in much of Europe.

Drago said...

Phil 3:14: "I'm no lawyer and I don't believe in "massive" voter fraud but I can't understand courts disagreement with voter ID."

You can't understand courts disagreement with Voter ID?

Really.

Well, would it help if I changed "courts" to "leftist jurists"?

buwaya puti said...

Fernandinande - the Griffe du Lion article is very interesting.
Leaving out the racial, or racist, argument, Griffe du Lion always makes one think in a new direction.

What seems clearest is that the real problem with the effectiveness of the black/poor vote is that they make an enormous proportion of voting errors vs the white/prosperous population, and that the voting system used is by far the most significant factor here.

The trouble is almost exclusively that of ergonomics/user interface design.

The registration/ID issue, as far as vote-suppression goes, is marginal compared to that.

A rational bargain among people of goodwill would trade a simple, fool proof (literally, one designed for persons with an IQ of 70) voting system for the requirement to show ID and register properly. I think the value of this can be shown mathematically.

Birkel said...

Growing up, we pushed a pin completely through a piece of paper to signify our voting preferences.

In the year 2000, residents of the state of Florida proved unable to accomplish such a task, in thousands of cases.

A foolproof system is impossible. What is needed is a system that is straightforward, excludes errors from tabulations, allows only rightful voters to vote and is trusted by the population.

America is far from those obvious goals.

And, I do argue, America fails in those goals on purpose because the failure favors one political party - Democrats - over all others. And so Democrats fight any changes lest their advantages be diminished.

buwaya puti said...

Of course, any rational solution or system is not possible, because you aren't dealing with people of goodwill, but rather with the hopelessly corrupt.

Hagar said...

I very much dislike the ballot system that New Mexico has gone to where we fill out a paper ballot while standing by a little desk shielded to the sides, but the election "volunteers" passing behind you can easily see if you are filling out the form "correctly." The forms are then slipped into a scanner that goes brrt, and that is it. There is no way to tell if the scanner recorded what you marked on the paper ballot or something else.
I assume that the scanners are hooked up to a computer that tabulates that precinct and sends the results in to a larger computer in comedy central.
I understand that this system is very commonly in use now, but that the IT guys say any reasonably bright teenager could hack this system and make it print out the Star Spangled Banner, or whatever.

n.n said...

buwaya puti:

We may not be able to change course, but a conversation, rather than avoidance and suppression, about practical and rational things, and reconciliation of moral and natural imperatives, is positive progress. Perhaps it doesn't matter, and the outcome cannot be influenced. Perhaps it does, and will dampen the dysfunctional convergence.

walter said...

"could hack this system and make it print out the Star Spangled Banner, or whatever."
If you see that, gently call attention to it.

Well..I guess Hil's desire for SCOTUS "expanded" voting rights is just going to fade into the background...for now. Ti me, it was a bizarre statement..maybe worthy of the "short circuit" label..except I think she means it. More of a slip up to say it out loud.

Hagar said...

Printing out the Star Spangled Banner or the collected works of Shakespeare might not be that difficult; shading the numbers just enough to produce the desired results without attracting unwanted attention is more difficult. Besides, more than one person would probably know about it.
But technically, as far as the system goes, it apparntly is quite possible.

narciso said...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cotton-clinton-discussed-executed-iranian-scientist-on-email/article/2598807

Michael Kochin said...

These are not inconsistent. Given Democratic success at criminalizing the opposition, only the fearless can afford to express opposition views or work for the opposition. The only way Republicans can win, Dems hope, is by suppressing the vote of the committed and the cowed.

HT said...

AReasonableMan said...

Both of these arguments, from either side, are largely nonsense but they are unrelated and the post makes no sense.
8/7/16, 10:13 AM

_____

Agree completely.

Rusty said...

Blogger Phil 3:14 said...
I'm no lawyer and I don't believe in "massive" voter fraud but I can't understand courts disagreement with voter ID.

Ever hear of 'motorvoter'? Massive vote fraud.

damikesc said...

Rawlings was an abject failure as a mayor.

Haven't all of Baltimore's mayors been pretty terrible for a long time? Yet they keep electing Democrats, over and over.

How is she undercut? How does the case against the IRS pertain to voter suppression?

The IRS suppressed conservative groups. Not hard to follow. If suppressing voices is "bad", then it should be noted that conservative groups were undeniably suppressed in 2012.

The US probably has the absolute worst performance in managing public pensions in the developed world. We are talking Greek-level improvidence/incompetence.

All of them (including the "gold standard" CalPERS) fully expect to use the media to get Congress to pass bailouts of their useless funds. And they likely are going to get it because the media will show the sob stories of "long time" public employees "who played by the rules" and are "being screwed over by a market that doesn't care" --- ignoring that the funds are intentionally over-estimating --- wildly --- the expected return on investment. Detroit gave away "extra money" that was delivered by investments to their retirees instead of keeping it to, you know, fund the retirement plan years in the future. They did it a lot.

When people mention how overwhelming our "off the books" debt it, this is no small part. Public employees, who already make more than their private counterparts in most circumstances, have been given retirement benefits wildly out of whack with their actual usefulness.

damikesc said...

Wait until the Dems demand that we do elections on the internet, which our government is completely incapable of securing.

People whined about Florida in 2000 --- but having a paper ballot is still the best option. Now, I admit, the WA State Gubernatorial Election in 2004 is a concern and the MN Senate election of 2008 is as well, but that is because Democrats tend to be really corrupt.

I'd buy it was a "bad system" if you can find too many states where the recounts don't ALWAYS benefit the Democrat. You cannot have one party win every single recount without it being corrupt.

It required the SCOTUS to finally tell FL "No, you cannot pick and choose where you recount votes indefinitely" for the Democrats to not win one of these scams.

LilyBart said...

Obama says he represents the people who don't vote - so why not make it official and vote for them! They'll all vote Dem, of course!

Brando said...

That's right, if you can't win, claim cheating. Much easier than actually figuring out how to win, and now you don't have to accept the legitimacy of the winners.

That said, I think the computerized voting machines could be a bad idea--what do we have to safeguard against a bug or virus or hacking that could lose or change a lot of results? Punchcard ballots may have their own problems, but it seems physical evidence of voting at least gives you something more to work with than an electronic record that can disappear.

Robert said...

Defund Prog Ed in K-12, university, law-journalism-film schools; replacing the suicidal pedagogy with Western Enlightenment.

wildswan said...

The voter ID requires a photo ID which can be a drivers's licence or a state photo ID. studies have shown that minorities often do not have driver's licenses - less than half of Milwaukee County African-Americans and of Hispanics.
" Minorities and poor populations are the most likely to have drivers license problems. Less than half (47 percent) of Milwaukee County African American adults and 43 percent of Hispanic adults have a valid drivers license compared to 85 percent of white adults in the Balance of State

(BOS, i.e., outside Milwaukee County). The situation for young adults ages 18-24 is even worse
-- with only 26 percent of African Americans and 34 percent of Hispanics in Milwaukee County with a valid license compared to 71 percent of young white adults in the Balance of State.

The Voter ID law provided that those without a driver's licence go to the DMV and present the same ID as a driver applying for a licence for the first time would have to present. Then they would get a photo ID. If they have no ID showing citizenship they can ask the DMV to do a search and find their citizenship proof for free. This law was struck down because there are so many minorities with no driver's license. They would have to apply to the DMV for ID. And this was seen as burdensome though it is no more than everyone does to get a driver's license. Being treated the same was disparate impact.

Actually we know that in 2012 87% of Milwaukee registered voters voted 2012. Hillary needs similar turnout to win. If there were no huge surge in numbers obtaining Photo ID's at the DMV, a thing that could be checked, then Hillary could not possibly pretend that the 2016 turnout matched the 2012 turnout without fraud. So a Dane County judge strikes down the law. By this we know that it is likely the 2016 turnout will match the 2012 turnout of 87% as required by Hillary.

Is it possible for 87% of registered voters on unpurged voter rolls such as exist in Milwaukee County to turn out. No, because voters in Milwaukee County move frequently so the unpurged voter rolls are filled with names of people who have moved. So it may be that industrial strength voter fraud is being prepared. Our vigilant General Election Board will catch this, however, so we need not worry.