So much for GOP Siren of voter fraud
Maybe the appropriate title for this is: Do as I say and not as I do….
Just listening to Thom Hartman and he noted something that struck a cord (chord?) with me: voter ID, electronic ballots. In the caucuses last night, the Republican party did not require and ID, they allowed onsite registration and hand counted the ballots. This is completely and totally counter to the Republican national position. Even RIland passed an ID law. Dare I use the over used word “hypocrisy”? No, this is not hypocrisy. This is flat out A-holeism. This is the big middle finger from the GOP to the nation that the MSM villagers have totally…ignored? Avoided? To stupid to recognize? Believes in?
To strong you say? Then consider these graphs from Juan Cole (ht digby):
Didby looks at these graphs is sees it as a means to interpret the MSM Villagers favorite phrase: Real Americans. She correct in that one too.
A-holeism is a problem for the Republican party. Thanks for this fine example!
My sister recently renewed her driver’s license in Florida. FL requires people over 60 to prove their age, SS card, marital status in case of a name change from the name at birth, undergo a vision test, and submit two pieces of correspondence showing their name and address.The vision test makes sense in a state in which so many older drivers are involved in accidents caused by uncorrected poor vision. But, although by sister is over 60, she was born in FL and had never resided anywhere else. She had held a FL license since she was 16 and had a license showing her married last name since the late 70’s. The new birth and marriage certs she ordered cost her something like $80 dollars including application and shipping charges. The whole process ended up taking several weeks.
FL now requires a driver’s license or state issued picture ID to vote. My sister is working and could afford the cost of her new docs. Obviously, many people in the state without drivers’ licenses or needing to renew their licenses cannot. And, these people will not be voting this November. Whaddaya bet these people are members of minorities, old, and/or poor? Can’t vote? Not the State of Florida’s problem. NancyO
Florida doesn’t require a state-issued ID to vote (although it makes it easier). They ask for an ID with photo and signature (or one with a photo and one with a signature). If you don’t have it, you can vote provisionally and the vote will count if the signature on the ballot matches that on the voter registration.
At the polls, you will be asked to provide a valid picture identification with signature. The following photo ids will be accepted:
Florida driver’s licenseFlorida identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor VehiclesUnited States passportDebit or credit cardMilitary identificationStudent identificationRetirement center identificationNeighborhood association identificationPublic assistance identification.
If your photo identification does not contain your signature, you will be asked to provide an additional identification that includes a signature.
If you do not have the proper identification, you will be provided with a provisional ballot. Your provisional ballot will count if the signature on the provisional ballot envelope matches the signature on your voter registration application.
Uh, Daniel, the Iowa caucuses have no meaning as Votes; they allocate the same amount of Delegates as that State Fair thing that Michele “God Wants Me to Be the Next President (but Apparently Wants Obama Re-Elected in 2012)” Bachmann won. (The one where she paid for more people to vote than voted for her.)
I don’t think your general point is incorrect, but needing Voter ID for a No-Effect “vote” might be too much even for Republicans.
(Note, for instance, that 25% of the votes cast were by Democrats and Independents, up from 14% in 2008. And still Mitt Romney’s net vote change was -6 between the two years.)
Standard and principles my dear Ken, standards and principles. 🙂 Besides, it had enough meaning that the vote counting was done in “secret” place.
A-holeism all the way.
Now, I’m new to the site so maybe I’m jumping to conclusions but DB sounds uninformed and just plain angry. The IA caucus is not an election in any true sense of the word (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_caucuses). It is a very community based event where neighbors who “know each other” ACTIVELY participate in one of the most grass-roots campaigns in the country. As per wikipedia, “The caucuses are generally defined as ‘gatherings of neighbors.’ … Typically, these meetings occur in schools, churches, public libraries and even individuals’ houses.” Compairing participation in this event to an election is just plain ridiculous. This is not an environment where there have been allegations of voter disenfranchisement or voter fraud so the “standards and principles” refrain rings hollow. Now I realize the tagline says “just slightly left of center” but hopefully that’s just a joke.
But candidacies are made and broken in the Iowa caucus. (Alas, poor Michelle, we knew ye all to well.) It might not be en election, but it is a serious part of the electoral process and it does involve voting, of a sort.
And this event is run by the republican party, not the State of Iowa.
Everything about the Republican-run Iowa process is different from what the Republican party is working very hard to impose on the rest of the country. (except for the no-recount decision – that part is the same) DB might be angry – after all we are Angry Bears at this site, but I’d think twice, and maybe a third time before calling him uniformed.
Hartmann also mentioned that the actual ballots, recounted by news outlets about 18 months after the 2000 election, showed that Gore actually won Florida. That’s why the Rethugs are agianst recounts.
Do you suppose the Rethug elite might have some reason to prefer Romney over, say Santorum or Paul? Just more speculation on my part . . . . . . . .
A meeting where they just happen to write on a piece of paper their preference that is then put in some type of container which is then taken to a place where the papers are removed, tabulated while others watch all so that a decision is completed and delegates assigned. All this leading to the reduction of the contestants to one who will then compete in another repeat of this process.
You know, when I go to do my choice on a piece of paper, it’s in a school and I always see people I know. They call this thing I do voting.
Thank you Jazz.
This is not true:
“Hartmann also mentioned that the actual ballots, recounted by news outlets about 18 months after the 2000 election, showed that Gore actually won Florida. That’s why the Rethugs are agianst recounts”
It is a thing of faith on the looney left though.
Interesting. Can you point me to those recount results?
I’d really like to understand this. So because you “write your choice on a piece of paper” and “it is tabulated” you equate that to a general election for public office? Polls, surveys etc all have preferences recorded and tabulated. The results impact fundraising, media and public awareness, organizational vigor, among others, but have no direct bearing on the outcome. Elections matter because they result in the winner taking office.
You may see people you know in a school when you vote but there are probably far more people you don’t know. Everything I have been told about IA caucuses indicates they are nothing like your “school” vote – assuming you live outside of IA. Maybe I’m too generous with my faith in a truly grass roots process (on both sides) but I think it bears repeating: I have never heard any allegations of voter disenfranchisement (on the left) or voter fraud (on the right) with respect to the Iowa caucuses so, in my opinion, is the voter ID requirement is a moot point. Nevertheless, I’d be willing to bet that the Republicans would gladly accept very stringent voter ID requirements if it were to apply at ALL caucuses, primaries and general elections. If so, the hypocrisy claim (a-holeism as you refer to it) also rings hollow.
As to jazzbumpa’s statement that it’s “a serious part of the electoral process involving a vote, of a sort” – that’s true but you could say the same about all the public polling. News reporting, endorsments, donations, fundraisers and speeches are also important parts of the process. I don’t understand the inability to distinguish between “important parts of the process” and a vote in an election that results in the winner taking office. Then again, the very unoriginal and inelegant “rethug” name-calling probably reveals more than the rest of the post. Besides, from what I’m reading I’d guess that you would’ve thought the “rethug elite” would’ve been in the bag for Santorum, Bachmann or Perry rather than Romney – by far the most benign of the Republican field.
What kind of “Standards and Principles” do states that have no Voter I.D. Laws have? When the dead, illegal, and people who vote multiple times vote………are we furthering and strengthening the Democracy?
Here is the difference between Caucus voting in the Primaries between the to major political parties.
“Democrats: Only registered Democrats who live in the precinct and are eligible to vote may participate. Attendees are asked to join preference groups for candidates. To be viable, a group must consist of at least 15 percent of those present. Nonviable groups are dissolved, and those who were members of them may join viable groups. Much lobbying occurs at this stage of the meeting. Delegates are allocated to candidates strictly on the basis of the group’s proportion to the caucus as a whole.
Republicans: Attendees, who must be eligible to vote but do not have to be registered as Republicans, cast a presidential preference vote by secret ballot. The votes are tabulated on a statewide basis. Delegates to the county convention are then selected by whatever method the caucus chooses, either by direct election (winner-take-all) or proportionally on the basis of a straw vote.
The actual size of any state’s delegation to the national nominating convention is calculated on the basis of a formula established by each party that includes such considerations as the state’s population, its past support for the party’s national candidates, and the number of elected officials and party leaders currently serving in public office. The allocation formula that the Democrats use results in national conventions that have about twice as many delegates as those of the Republicans.
The U.S. Constitution gives the states the authority to make their own election laws subject to the rules and qualifications that Congress may establish. Although states are free to determine the dates on which their primary and caucus elections may be held, they also have an incentive to conduct their nomination contests in accordance with party rules, since the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the parties have a right to describe and enforce their own rules for those attending the national conventions. Thus, states that permit selection of party convention delegates in a manner that does not conform to party rules may find their delegates challenged when they get to the national party conventions, or they may find the size of the delegation reduced by the party for violating its rules.”
States with strict Photo I.D. requirements:
State with Photo I.D. requirement:
States that require I.D. (no photo required):
States with no I.D. requirements:
Are you not embarrassed that all the states that have no voter I.D. requirements are Democratic strongholds? Do you really expect people to beleive that the Democratic Party and media spin that Voter I.D. […]
“And this event is run by the republican party, not the State of Iowa.”
So what…when the Democrats Caucus there, they select the rules upon which they prefer to hold their voting too.
“Everything about the Republican-run Iowa process is different from what the Republican party is working very hard to impose on the rest of the country.”
Not True……Iowa is a Democratic Stronghold and Republicans have tried to require Voter I.D. Laws there. Iowa does not require I.D…..just like many other states. (See my comment to Daniel above) What makes you think that the Republican establishment rigged the vote for Romney to win instead of Democrats conspiring together to vote in Republican Causcus’ to select Romney, or to give Santorum a better showing hoping to derail the others?
Are you sure you have any evidence to suggest one, and denounce the other? Or any evidence to make any conclusion?
“That’s why the Rethugs are agianst recounts.”
Would you mind giving us a run-down on the recount of the Minnesota election that produced Al Franken? Please explain how honorable and honest, and principled the Democrats have been in the past in reference to this topic….we could all use a good laugh!
I wonder if I will ever get to die in peace without hearing about how Bush stole the 2000 election in Florida. I always find it amazing that so many actually believe it.
Even more amazing is the typical Democratic supporter never analyzes the senerio that maybe its possible that instead of looking at it from the perspective that Bush stole the election, maybe they should look at it from the prespective that Democrats just didn’t cheat well enough! 🙂
For those of you that didn’t understand that last paragraph…..think Franken 2010!
Are you not embarrassed that the states that have strong voter I.D. requirements are/were traditional KKK strongholds? (ex Wisconsin)