2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

[Rover]

You're begging the question. His saying that means either:

1. He thinks this will suppress enough legitimate voters who would have voted Democrat to tip the scales (bad), or
2. He thinks there is enough widespread voter fraud on the Democratic side that eliminating the fraud will tip the scales, in which case it would actually be a good thing (unless you're coming down on the side of voter fraud).

BTW, I agree 100% with your overall position - establish voter ID laws, but don't do it in a disingenuous, last-minute fashion. That approach practically writes its own objections.

Thank you. One has to wonder when all these court cases will finally be resolved. Election eve?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Thank you. One has to wonder when all these court cases will finally be resolved. Election eve?

Nah, a couple days after, then they'd have to sort it out, and a la 2000, we'll have the Supreme Court case of "Obama vs. Romney".

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Then you're basically saying it's never going to happen. If they try to put it through Congress in, say, 4 months, the public will say, "Who cares?!" and the Congress will say it isn't a pressing issue. If you pass it now and have it take effect in 2014, I expect it will be repealed in a year. After all, look at the repeal Obamacare measures (albeit not yet successful, but it could be soon).

Um, I think Voter ID laws are enacted at the state level, no? of course, in New Haven, they are giving city-issued IDs to known illegal immigrants, so not sure how much help any kind of voter ID law would be in that situation....The rumor is that in Chicago, if they ever do pass a Voter ID law, all registered Democrats will get multiple ID cards each one with the name of their favorite dead people!

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Results are coming in for one of the top election predictors: halloween masks.

Obama is ahead of Romney...but it looks like we'll be propping up Nixon's corpse for another term.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Um, I think Voter ID laws are enacted at the state level, no? of course, in New Haven, they are giving city-issued IDs to known illegal immigrants, so not sure how much help any kind of voter ID law would be in that situation....The rumor is that in Chicago, if they ever do pass a Voter ID law, all registered Democrats will get multiple ID cards each one with the name of their favorite dead people!

This is true. Replace Congress with Assembly/State Senate/whatever that state has. Did you have to remind me about Client #9 trying to issue drivers' licenses to illegals? I was carrying a passport for a while thinking a state wouldn't accept my driver's license because they'd think I was an illegal alien.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Results are coming in for one of the top election predictors: halloween masks.

Obama is ahead of Romney...but it looks like we'll be propping up Nixon's corpse for another term.

They don't make Dubya masks because of the risk of kids being shot.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I'm not ignoring it, I'm dismissing it as a lie.

I'm sure they had an excuse for poll taxes, too.

A reminder: among the dozens of demographic groups broken out in the WaPo poll (which found 74% overall approval for voter ID) the only group that didn't support the concept was self-described "liberal Democrats."

Naturally, this opposition is based entirely on "one man one vote" and other core principles. I, too, support "one man one vote." ONE man, ONE vote. The truth is, they know the customary tidal wave of inner city voting we see in every election is critical to their chances in certain states. They also know that tidal wave is augmented by the dead, the criminal and those who are helpfully voting for someone else. Talk about poll taxes and Bull Connor's cattle prod is just hysterical hyperbole.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

A reminder: among the dozens of demographic groups broken out in the WaPo poll (which found 74% overall approval for voter ID) the only group that didn't support the concept was self-described "liberal Democrats."

Naturally, this opposition is based entirely on "one man one vote" and other core principles. I, too, support "one man one vote." ONE man, ONE vote. The truth is, they know the customary tidal wave of inner city voting we see in every election is critical to their chances in certain states. They also know that tidal wave is augmented by the dead, the criminal and those who are helpfully voting for someone else. Talk about poll taxes and Bull Connor's cattle prod is just hysterical hyperbole.

Don't forget about those literacy tests. Never mind that the ballot is a literacy test in and of itself.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Don't forget about those literacy tests. Never mind that the ballot is a literacy test in and of itself.

Serious question: are you not aware that the major problem with literacy tests wasn't the literacy requirement, it was the selective enforcement? The deal was: illiterate black shows up at the poll: he has to pass the test. Illiterate white shows up at the poll: I know that guy, go ahead and vote.

Literacy tests were actually a different kind of voter suppression -- they were much more direct. The voter ID bills the GOP keeps hatching are one stage removed: they attack people by demographics rather than personally.

Both suck, though, and are the mark of the desperation that comes from not being able to win legitimately.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I'm wondering what the long term strategy is here. Speaking as a Dem and if I lived in PA for example, I'd be horrified if my party's election strategy was to concoct a voter ID law to supress crankly old guy conservative votes (say holding the election the same time as the Matlock marathon on TV Land ) while also trying to proportion out electoral votes on a congressional district basis because they thought Obama would lose the state and this would be a way to get him 10 cheap votes.

Look, either you have a candidate that can win over voters, or you can't. Trying some backdoor shenanigans instead of, oh I don't know, something radical like convincing the public to vote for you doesn't seem like the best use of a party's time.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

I'm wondering what the long term strategy is here. Speaking as a Dem and if I lived in PA for example, I'd be horrified if my party's election strategy was to concoct a voter ID law to supress crankly old guy conservative votes (say holding the election the same time as the Matlock marathon on TV Land ) while also trying to proportion out electoral votes on a congressional district basis because they thought Obama would lose the state and this would be a way to get him 10 cheap votes.

Look, either you have a candidate that can win over voters, or you can't. Trying some backdoor shenanigans instead of, oh I don't know, something radical like convincing the public to vote for you doesn't seem like the best use of a party's time.

At the national level they're just trying to win this cycle. They can't reinvent their party overnight so they're trying to slide through under the wire of demographics one last time. Tomorrow will take care of itself. "Après moi, le déluge."

At the local level, there's just a ton of derp and craziness, and a whole group who actually believe whatever rolls off the RNC press via its surrogates on talk radio. They've drunk so much of their own urine over the years that they aren't attached to the reality-based community anymore. They think they are right in doing this. Half of them think God is telling them to do it.

So: cynics leading rubes. To some extent, every political force in every age. With this bunch it's just extreme. It'll pass with time, every moment of mass hysteria does. The trick is to keep them away from sharp things until it does.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Serious question: are you not aware that the major problem with literacy tests wasn't the literacy requirement, it was the selective enforcement? The deal was: illiterate black shows up at the poll: he has to pass the test. Illiterate white shows up at the poll: I know that guy, go ahead and vote.

Literacy tests were actually a different kind of voter suppression -- they were much more direct. The voter ID bills the GOP keeps hatching are one stage removed: they attack people by demographics rather than personally.

Both suck, though, and are the mark of the desperation that comes from not being able to win legitimately.

Oh, so now you think these states are going to say, "Oh, I know you're GOP, go ahead and vote." The butthurt is just plain hilarious.

I love how I don't even need to watch mainstream media: I get all the talking points right here.

 

[Hopkinja]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

As someone who's voted in Pennsylvania for the last 30 years, they check who you say you are every time you go to vote, or at least they do in my district.

They have a copy of your signature on file. When you go to vote, they have you sign the roll book, right next to your "signature of record." The poll workers, old and blind as they may be, do their best to check your signature against the record version. That's been enough to deal with the type of voter fraud that these new laws are supposed to protect against.

The new law is clearly a tool to disenfranchise those who'd tend to vote Democrat...full stop.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

Serious question: are you not aware that the major problem with literacy tests wasn't the literacy requirement, it was the selective enforcement? The deal was: illiterate black shows up at the poll: he has to pass the test. Illiterate white shows up at the poll: I know that guy, go ahead and vote.

Literacy tests were actually a different kind of voter suppression -- they were much more direct. The voter ID bills the GOP keeps hatching are one stage removed: they attack people by demographics rather than personally.

Both suck, though, and are the mark of the desperation that comes from not being able to win legitimately.

Right. Just like the height of the Jim Crow days. Just remember: "Forever Selma."

Speaking of "not being able to win legitimately," does the name Kennedy, Jack, ring a bell?

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

At the national level they're just trying to win this cycle. They can't reinvent their party overnight so they're trying to slide through under the wire of demographics one last time. Tomorrow will take care of itself. "Après moi, le déluge."

At the local level, there's just a ton of derp and craziness, and a whole group who actually believe whatever rolls off the RNC press via its surrogates on talk radio. They've drunk so much of their own urine over the years that they aren't attached to the reality-based community anymore. They think they are right in doing this. Half of them think God is telling them to do it.

So: cynics leading rubes. To some extent, every political force in every age. With this bunch it's just extreme. It'll pass with time, every moment of mass hysteria does. The trick is to keep them away from sharp things until it does.

So those legions of inner city drones aren't rubes? What are they, then?

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

As someone who's voted in Pennsylvania for the last 30 years, they check who you say you are every time you go to vote, or at least they do in my district.

They have a copy of your signature on file. When you go to vote, they have you sign the roll book, right next to your "signature of record." The poll workers, old and blind as they may be, do their best to check your signature against the record version. That's been enough to deal with the type of voter fraud that these new laws are supposed to protect against.

The new law is clearly a tool to disenfranchise those who'd tend to vote Democrat...full stop.

"Clearly." Horse sh*t.

 

[geezer]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

geezer, call me a skeptic, but IMHO these voter ID laws have little to do with rooting out fraud, which happens much more in absentee balloting anyway. What part of the leader of the PA Senate saying this was going to put his state in Romney's column doesn't speak to their true motivations? Two things stick out. 1) This is being done entirely by GOP legislatures (for laws effective by Nov election) even though they never previously had such concerns, and 2) there's scant evidence of any actual voter fraud.

To your second point, yes this was a foolhardly miscalculation on their part but I'm speculating they were looking at a closer election than they've gotten thus far. Back when these laws were being passed a lot of these places were supposed to be in play and some still are. FLA purging its voting rolls even if the voters are legitimate for example. I also find it telling that the courts keep knocking these efforts back.

You're right. And I apologize, I got busy today and forgot I was in the middle of trying to pick a pointless fight to get you guys riled up.

 

[walrus]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

As someone who's voted in Pennsylvania for the last 30 years, they check who you say you are every time you go to vote, or at least they do in my district.

They have a copy of your signature on file. When you go to vote, they have you sign the roll book, right next to your "signature of record." The poll workers, old and blind as they may be, do their best to check your signature against the record version. That's been enough to deal with the type of voter fraud that these new laws are supposed to protect against.

The new law is clearly a tool to disenfranchise those who'd tend to vote Democrat...full stop.

I doubt the local grocery store has enough tinfoil for that hat

 

[joecct]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

You gotta be kidding me: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/01/b...all&adxnnlx=1349131649-X6H+dhnGd/D5dyUL6qSk7Q

And -- are we surprised?? http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=36789&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

[unofan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part III: October Surprise!

2. He thinks there is enough widespread voter fraud on the Democratic side that eliminating the fraud will tip the scales, in which case it would actually be a good thing (unless you're coming down on the side of voter fraud).

Which would be fine, except the PA government admitted in court they have no documented cases of actual voter fraud ocurring in the state.