Interesting how it’s only necessary to “protect the vote” from one kind of fraud, keeping people with a right to vote from being prevented. But not from the complementary form of fraud, enabling people who don’t have a right to vote from voting.
Of course, if I vote for Bush, and an illegal alien votes for Kerry, I’ve been disenfranchised as effectively as though somebody prevented me from entering my polling place.
I’ll be convinced Democrats actually care about fraud, rather than just winning, when you start showing some interest in preventing the types of fraud your own party prefers.
I did a get-out-the-vote-stint in 1976. I got my list, showed up in my old precinct in south Berkeley, and knocked on doors.
It was kind of a bad neighborhood, working class blacks and hippies. While I lived there I was burglarized twice, losing a couple of cameras, binoculars and a twenty-gauge shotgun. That night nobody objected when I knocked on their door and told them I was from the Democratic Party.
I reached one commune just as they were all going out the door to vote. They were registered Peace & Freedom, but I hope they voted for Carter.
The hard part was telling younger people who were watching the election news that, since they weren’t registered, they couldn’t vote. Victory was in the air and they wanted to be a part of it.
The polls show the dead are voting 98 to 2 Democract in Ohio. But all jokes aside, anyone want to volunteer to keep the dead from voting? Franklin county? Any takers on coming up with a reasonable explanation for four Ohio counties with more registered voters than eligable voters?
The conservative backlash against this rampant fraud is going to be a hoot to watch ;)
“Any takers on coming up with a reasonable explanation for four Ohio counties with more registered voters than eligable voters?”
Bet-losing Republicans re-registering as Democrats?
The fraud in Ohio gets better by the second. A Clinton [read skawwy] appointed federal judge just ruled that she will decide [in her own sweet time] if the Ohio election committee can rule on 35,000 voter registration forms that were filled out with invalid addresses. So by virtue of a delaying tactic, those 35,000 registrations will remain valid on election day.
Funny how “protect the vote” means one thing to a Democrat [even though there is ZERO proof of wide spread voter suppression in Florida, and one cop car investigation a burglary doesn’t count unless you are crazy] and another thing to Republicans [even though there is abundant proof of people illegally voting].
I just remembered why I tend to discount right-wingers complaining about election fraud. In the 2002 South Dakota Senate campaign, Republicans made a mighty racket in the build-up about Democratic voter fraud in Native American districts. Afterwards the Republicans filed a bunch of affidavits ostensibly about fraud. The Republican Attorney General ruled that most of them didn’t even allege fraudulent activities (“[a] fair number could be read as complaints about how effective the Democratic get-out-the-vote effort was”). Of the ones that did, the affidavits themselves were fraudulent.
So, big noise about Democratic fraud, no fraud except by Republicans.
This year, several Republican operatives in South Dakota got caught in voter registration fraud. They were fired from the South Dakota operation. They were then redeployed to George Bush’s GOTV operation in Ohio. That’s not to mention Sproul Associates and the New Hampshire phone-bank jamming scandal.
Is there isolated fraud going on in favor of the Democrats? Probably, and efforts like this strike me as a good idea. Are the Republicans carrying out massive, coordinated fraud and voter suppression operations that dwarf anything credibly alleged of the Democrats? Absolutely. Are they also trying to gin up exaggerated accusations of fraud in order to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Democratic votes, whether fraudulent or not? It seems to have worked in South Dakota.
Both “major” US parties habitually engage in election fraud and the only issue is who’s more effective. We got Kennedy in 1960 because of it and Bush in 2000. Not a fair trade, but that’s how it goes.
Question—are those who are alleging more registered voters than eligible voters relying on Census Bureau population figures? (At least on one blog I read, it was stated that there were more eligible voters than census population figures would indicate. I think it was Philadelphia that was being discussed).
Isn’t it true that the Census was not an accurate count of inner city populations, due to the powers-that-be’s refusal to allow the Census Bureau to extrapolate (or whatever the word is, I’m certainly no expert) the actual population from the number of census forms returned? Is the right wing going to now use those figures, known to be inaccurate, to insist on voter fraud?
Franklin county? Any takers on coming up with a reasonable explanation for four Ohio counties with more registered voters than eligable voters?
I was actually doing canvassing in Franklin County this weekend, and I can offer a perfectly rational explanation. Probably 15-20% of the people on our walk sheets used to live at the address listed, but had either moved away or died. Meanwhile, new people have moved in and, presumably, registered (our sheets weren’t entirely up-to-date, so I can’t swear to that). Election officials just don’t have a very efficient way of getting voters off the rolls who don’t live there anymore, but it’s not fraud if they don’t vote.
Hey, I’m happy to have Republicans file legitimate challenges against voters — I’m just wondering how they plan to pick those folks out of the crowd. “Hm, young black male, probably a felon who doesn’t have the right to vote!” Seriously, how do the GOP poll watchers figure out whom to challenge? I hope they have a coherent clue, because I’m going to be on their collective ass in Cleveland.
Thanks for the plug Kieran, I appreciate it. It’s still not to too late to contact Election Protection or one of the other groups listed. Go People!
MKK
I think work at the polls is just more party bickering. The only voter registration work worth doing is to revamp the system so that there is no doubt who has a right to vote and who doesn’t.
Democrats could wave their card and sneer at the poll police as they go to vote and Republicans can sleep at night without having nightmares about Nixon-Kennedy.
A bit more on the more-registered-than-eligible voter question: not only are voter rolls inadvertently out of date, but people can’t, by law, be removed from the rolls for a certain number of years, so there are always folks who have died or moved on the rolls.
As an Australian I don’t have experience of the American system, but it seems to me that requiring ID of voters would be a damn good start in reducing fraud.
I don’t care who engages in election fraud, they should be caught and put in the stocks.
It seems at least plausible to me that if increased attention to the rules (“registration challengers” and such) scares off certain voters, those voters are likely to be ineligible in some way — or at least more likely than the general population of voters. If the majority of people who are thus scared off are of X ethnicity, this would imply that more people of X ethnicity are ineligible to vote. Forty years after the civil rights movement, how many legitimate black voters are really scared away from the polls by fear of violence or even generalized distrust of the authorities?
I admit that I may just be naive here. It’s hard to underestimate the dirtiness of political players at the ward-and-neighborhood level. I don’t generally get involved in politics, but I used to know a guy whose job was “election consultant.” Real dirtbag. Shortly after the 2000 fiasco in Florida, we were chatting and I asked him whether he thought the GOP had really consciously acted to suppress the black vote in Florida. He looked at me like I was an idiot and said “Of course! That’s how the game is played.” Unsettling.
“It seems at least plausible to me that if increased attention to the rules (“registration challengers” and such) scares off certain voters, those voters are likely to be ineligible in some way — or at least more likely than the general population of voters.”
Possibly; they’re also likely to be less able to spare extra time - childcare probs, inflexible work hours, caring for other family members, you know, the things that affect poor people. And then they get pulled over by a bunch of self-appointed “election consultants” who don’t work for local government, they work for the party that doesn’t want them to vote.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review