Slashdot Mirror
Election Dirty Tricks About To Begin
An anonymous reader writes "ABC is warning that dirty election tricks are about to start. In the past, they've ranged from late-night robo-calls to voter intimidation. ABC has a pretty good list of what to watch out for as told by Allen Raymond, a former Republican operative, who was reformed after spending three months in prison in 2006 for pulling some of the stunts he now helps to prevent." To make this story timely, last week someone broke into a McCain campaign office in Missouri and stole a laptop computer containing "strategic information" about the local campaign.
Yesterday I received a DVD in the mail from an obscure group known as the "Clarion Fund." It was a hatchet job meant to scare people about the evils of muslim extremism.... The shocking part was that they somehow had my full name on the address label....
The joys of living in the swing state of VA....
With less than 28 days to go before election day StopPoliticalCalls.org has started to see reports in the media and from members that the robo calls have started, big time. You can help us Robo calls are the worst form of political campaigning. Candidates can send them and voters receive them and they disappear into thin air. There is no record. Until now. The internet has made it easier than ever to record robo calls and then put them up for the world to listen to. There is no better disinfectant than sunlight. **What we need you to do: StopPoliticalCalls.org is keeping a database of all robo calls that are made in the 2008 election cycle. Since we are non-partisan, we have all calls made from all sides. Here are two examples from members in the past two weeks right here in Northern Virginia. One is Progressive and one is from the VA GOP. 1--Working Families Win Robo call regarding Frank Wolf --> http://thinkdodone.typepad.com/ccd/2008/10/working-familie.html 2--VA GOP robo call --> http://thinkdodone.typepad.com/ccd/2008/09/va-gop-robocall.html **What you can do: 1. Record the robo call. 2. Send the file or link to the file to me at info AT citizensforcivildiscourse.org with the subject: "Robocall Recording: Date, Name of Candidate" **How: 1. If you have a VOIP service like Vonage, it is easy since the system creates files you can email quickly. 2. If you have an old fashioned answer phone simply get out your "camcorder", video tape the answer phone with the volume on, and upload the recording to YouTube. Regards, Shaun Dakin CEO and Founder The National Political Do Not Contact Registry StopPoliticalCalls.org
I live in South Carolina, and have seen many nasty tricks over the years (being in a particularly conservative/religious-nutball/reactionary state). Of course, there was the infamous John McCain flyer that was sent out to upstate Rebublicans in 2000 (implying McCain had a black love child). But the nastiest bit is the one they've done the last two elections (and will almost certainly do again this time). Republicans show up a precincts on or near historically black colleges (like Benedict) and demand to see people's ID's before they vote, checking every crossed "i" and dotted "t" and generally trying to intimidate black voters or make it as hard on them as possible (since they know they'll likely vote Democrat). They do not, of course, do this for precincts at predominantly white colleges or in strong Republican precincts.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Raymond says that such tactics have evolved from some of the more overt voter intimidation schemes seen back in the early 1980s when the GOP's "Ballot Security Task Force" used armed off-duty police officers at the polling places in New Jersey and posted signs reading "voter fraud is a felony." Other underhanded tactics...
So, reminding people that voter fraud is a felony is voter intimidation? Wrong.
Perhaps 'reminding people that voter fraud is a felony' is not voter intimidation. Reminding people that voter fraud is a felony using armed men in uniform is voter intimidation. Are the armed men protecting themselves against similarly armed voter fraudsters? No. The armed men are there to take advantage of the fact that there are very clear demographic statistics that show that some segments of the population (not to be racist, but it's typically African-American and Hispanic citizens) are very afraid of the police (and looking at history, perhaps rightly so). The fact that the men are armed does nothing to assist in 'preventing voter fraud' and does everything to scare away citizens who are skittish of authority and perhaps view their vote as a means of resistance that will not be welcomed by the armed guards...
Wait, what?
Lets test each of these:
1) Citizenship - No poverty limitation there. You're basically born into it, are lucky enough to get amnesty, or wait through the bureaucracy. This isn't New Zealand...
On the other hand, if you can't prove you're a citizen WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING TRYING TO VOTE?
2) Name - When I was born, those were being handed out free to everyone. Maybe something has changed?
3) Birthdate - Since when is a date something you have? Its a fact. Can't be owned. Poverty has no bearing.
4) Driver's License or SSN - The former requires having a car, while the latter, again is given without any cost whatsoever. Just walk into the office and ask for one.
If this is 'Informative', I have completely missed the sarcasm tags...
For one thing, "reminding people that voter fraud is a felony" doesn't even come close to describing what the "Ballot Security Task Force" did. After investigations into their conduct, the GOP had to promise such conduct would not occur again.
I was referring more to this, though:
In 2006, voters in Virginia reportedly received fake voicemail messages from the state elections commission claiming that the voters were registered in another state and could be criminally charged if they cast their vote in Virginia.
If there is any sort of verification at the polls, making an error about which state you can vote in will be picked up and you won't be able to vote. This doesn't even remotely qualify as voter fraud, and lying about someone's registration status and threatening them with arrest and criminal charges is undoubtedly intimidation.
The VP debate was funny until I checked the news the next day and everything was about how well Palin did, saying that she even 'won' (politically). Then it was just very sad.
Really? I heard they both pretty much did what was expected from them. Palin did well, but probably not good enough to matter. Biden demonstrated he knew what he was talking about without getting pedantic, and that he'd be an adequate choice as VP.
And according to the analyses I read, that's pretty much all the Obama/Biden ticket needs to do: show they're not idiots, reliable, and an adequate choice to lead the country. McCain and Palin are working so hard to appear mavericks that they come across as unreliable loonies.
No idea if it's true, but if it is, it'd be pretty impressive that a young, black advocate for change has conquered the "safe choice" position. Although that's probably more because of McCain's panicky stunts than his own doing.
As a card carrying member of the "Bush is a Moron" club even I have to admit Bush actually did quite well as a debater. In terms of scoring debate points he fought both Gore and Kerry to a draw. I attribute this more to Gore and Kerry focusing too much on pre-prepared talking points rather than thinking on the fly during the debate, which made them seem wooden, disingenuous and out of touch. Bush had his talking points too (fuzzy math) but was able to put together some coherent statements responding to his opponents arguments. Comparing Bush to Palin is really an insult to Bush's intelligence--and I wouldn't have thought that was possible a month ago.
As a VP candidate Palin is the new Dan Quayle--only without the pedigree. If she were a man she would have been laughed off completely weeks ago, but they've played the gender card well.
Well, as an Australian I prefer our system by far compared to the US system. I just didn't want to derail the thread.
Preferential and mandatory voting leads to the best representation of voter intention I've seen in the world, but it also can lead to the balance of power being held by a single independent politician. A few years back Brian Harradine held the balance of power in the senate, and was able to massively pork-barrel for Tasmania by selling his vote for terms that suited him well (even though the gov't of the day had an electoral mandate to deliver). It can be argued either way whether this is good or bad politics.
The best example I've seen in our politics so far was in Tasmania some years back when the Labor Party had to join a coalition with the Greens to form a government. There was a real move towards Green politics in Southern Tasmania, and that actually did come out in the elected politicians. It didn't last so long, and after a while the two major parties reworked the system to destroy third party power (yay democracy!) but it was the best representation of a third party I've seen here.
You may note that I discount the Nationals in the federal political coalition with the Liberals. They are utterly spineless, bending to the Libs' whim immediately and obediently. Sadly they represent the 'bush' voters as much as any inner-city Lib does (and their complete willingness to fold on Telstra was all the proof we ever needed of that). More's the pity. A real coalition would be better for all concerned.
(Help for our international friends - the Liberals (note the capital) are the Australian conservatives, Labor are closest to the small-L liberals and the Nationals are meant to represent the rural voters.)
To any Australian voters - always vote below the line! Distribute your preference how you want to, don't let some party official give your vote away!
(diatribe over, resume normal transmission)
Social healthcare is prominent unconstitutional issue and it must be drilled.
What? No it isn't. I believe I know where you're going... that States should have the right not the federal government... but if the people decide that they want the feds to take over healthcare... that's totally legal, that's Democracy. You may not like it, but I'm sure that we have the power to let them.
I spent my Saturday doing it, and felt pretty damn good afterwards for someone who, by right-wing ideology, is doing something morally wrong. I helped a lady born in 1925 who can't talk or get around much anymore (but who had political news on the TV) fill out an absentee ballot application. If it weren't for me, she would not be voting this year. I helped another lady born in 1923 fill out her first ever voter registraition! I had a guy invite me into his (incredibly modest rent-controlled) home, sit down next to his open bible while we filled out his form, and tell me dead serious that he felt God sent me there that day to get him registered. I wouldn't nessecarily agree, but who knows? Perhaps.
As the saying goes, if this is what being wrong feels like, I don't want to be Right.