Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The problem is NOT voting machines. There is an ELEPHANT in the room

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 06:31 PM
Original message
The problem is NOT voting machines. There is an ELEPHANT in the room
Edited on Sat Jun-17-06 06:32 PM by IndyOp
that we seem to talk about, in some ways, only tangentially.

We cannot solve a problem we cannot clearly, concisely define.

We cannot counter the arguments of a bully if we cannot speak the whole truth DIRECTLY TO the entire nation.

We must REVEAL the 'values' and 'goals' held by 1,000's of fanatical Republicans who are determined to 'win' elections. Why? Our problem is NOT Karl Rove. Our problem is that Karl Rove is just one of 1,000's of fanatical Republicans who have moved from anti-democratic 'questionnable behavior' (like misrepresenting their opponents during campaigns); to 'clearly unethical behavior' (voter misinformation, providing bad equipment to precincts likely to vote Democratic); and on into illegal behavior (phone jamming, rigging machines to switch votes, ballot box stuffing, targeting minorities for voter suppression and more).

Voting machines do not steal elections.

Republicans use voting machines to steal elections.

And they use a wide variety of other methods including, especially, voter suppression. (Though dirty, dirty politics is also going to be in full-force this summer and fall).



The 'values' and 'goals' held by 10,000+ fanatical Republicans who are determined to 'win' elections.

While the upper-eschalon of Republicans are pretty clearly operating solely out of the sickness of greed and power -- they've done a fantastic job getting 1,000's of Religious Right to see the goal of politics as doing God's work. Of course, they are dedicated. Of course, they are likely to step over the line. They are living the belief that "The ends justify the means."

ONE: Paul Weyrich is the Father of the Reagan Revolution, co-founder of the Heritage Foundation and Free Congress Foundation. Weyrich & Richard Viguerie worked together on the first successful direct-mail campaigns for Ronald Reagan.

Weyrich, speaking in private to a church to Republican activists said this: “How many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome? Good government! They want everybody to vote! I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections, quite candidly, goes up as voting populace goes down.” (This is an audio recording played often by Thom Hartmann on his radio show.)

Weyrich has a very different message in an article entitled Easy Voting Brings Low Participation online: "Former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter have come up with a series of recommendations aimed at increasing participation in national elections. Among the proposals the former presidents have put forth are (a) to hold elections on a national holiday, such as Veterans Day; (b) to make convicted felons eligible to vote after they have served time; (c) to permit people who aren't on the voter rolls on Election Day to vote, sorting out their eligibility in the days after the election…. I am glad that Pres. Bush’s reaction has been lukewarm…. The truth is simply this: The easier we have made it to vote, the lower the voter participation.”

----------------------------------------------

TWO: My right-wing degree

How I learned to convert liberal campuses into conservative havens at Morton Blackwell's Leadership Institute, alma mater of Karl Rove, Ralph Reed, Jeff Gannon and two Miss Americas.

By Jeff Horwitz


May 25, 2005 | One recent Sunday, at Morton Blackwell's Leadership Institute, a dozen students meet for the second and final day of training in grass-roots youth politics. All are earnest, idealistic and as right wing as you can get. They take careful notes as instructor Paul Gourley teaches them how to rig a campus mock election.

It's nothing illegal -- no ballot stuffing necessary, even at the most liberal colleges. First you find a nonpartisan campus group to sponsor the election, so you can't be accused of cheating. Next, volunteer to organize the thing. College students are lazy, and they'll probably let you. Always keep in mind that a rigged mock election is all about location, location, location. "Can anyone tell me," asks Gourley, a veteran mock electioneer, "why you don't want the polling place in the cafeteria?" Stephen, a shy antiabortion activist sitting toward the rear of the class, raises his hand: "Because you want to suppress the vote?" "Stephen has the right answer!" Gourley exclaims, tossing Stephen his prize, a copy of Robert Bork's "Slouching Toward Gomorrah."

The students, strait-laced kids from good colleges, seem unconvinced. The lesson -- that with sufficient organization, the act of voting becomes less a basic right than a tactical maneuver -- doesn't sit easy with some students at first. Gourley, a charismatic senior from South Dakota and the treasurer of the College Republican National Committee, assures them: "This is not anti-democracy. This is not shady. Just put somewhere where you might have to put a little bit of effort into voting." The rest, Gourley explains, is just a matter of turnout.

There is no better place to master the art of mock-election rigging -- and there is no better master than Morton Blackwell, who invented the trick in 1964 and has been teaching it ever since. Blackwell's half-century career in conservative grass-roots politics coincides neatly with the fortunes of the conservative movement: He was there when Goldwater lost, when Southern voters abandoned the Democratic Party in droves, and when the Moral Majority began its harvest of evangelical Christian voters. In the 1970s, Blackwell worked with conservative direct-mail king Richard Viguerie; in 1980, he led Reagan's youth campaign. Recently, he's been fighting to save Tom DeLay's job.

Yet Blackwell's foundation, the Leadership Institute, is not a Republican organization. It's a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) charity, drawing the overwhelming majority of its $9.1 million annual budget from tax-deductible donations. Despite its legally required "neutrality," the institute is one of the best investments the conservative movement has ever made. Its walls are plastered with framed headshots of former students -- hundreds of state and local legislators sprinkled with smiling members of the U.S. Congress, and even the perky faces of two recently crowned Miss Americas. Thirty-five years ago, Blackwell dispatched a particularly promising 17-year-old pupil named Karl Rove to run a youth campaign in Illinois; Jeff Gannon, a far less impressive student, attended the Leadership Institute's Broadcast Journalism School.

----------------------------------------------

THREE: Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean today issued the following statement calling on Governor Barbour to denounce the phone jamming scheme and demanding that Mehlman stop stonewalling on this case: "Today we learned that both the current RNC chairman and a former RNC chairman are linked to a criminal campaign to keep people from voting in New Hampshire. Governor Barbour should immediately denounce GOP Marketplace's conduct in this phone jamming scheme and make clear the degree to which he or his investment company benefited from it. Again, I encourage Chairman Mehlman to end the Republican stonewall and answer the many questions that remain regarding the involvement of the White House staff and the RNC in this shameful and illegal activity. It's a simple question, what did they know and when did they know it?"

While the AP revealed Barbour's financial interest in the company hired to block phone lines at Democratic get-out-the-vote phone banks, Knight Ridder today highlighted the disturbing parallels between this scandal and Watergate.

<http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=64817>


More? See ModMom's 4 STEPS TO HOW THE GOP STOLE THE '04 ELECTION (and will repeat again)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. kicked
N/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yes, but we can get rid of voting machines nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. We can, but probably not in 4 months time -
What we can do is what Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) - among many others - recommends:

For us, it (winning 2006 elections) must all be about execution.

First, we must not allow the Republicans to steal the election-again. <snip>

I apologize for not taking seriously enough the allegations that the 2004 election was stolen. After reading Bobby Kennedy's article in Rolling Stone, "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?", I am convinced that the only answer is yes. He documents how 357,000 Ohio voters, the vast majority Democrats, "were prevented from casting ballots or did not have their votes counted…more than enough to shift the results." Watch for the DCCC to take some very public steps in the near future to ward off a repeat performance. In the meantime, there needs to be a citizens' effort starting now to assess the machines, the ballots, the registration process within each and every election jurisdiction in each and every swing district and state, in the case of Senate races. Where the situation looks perilous, go to the media, raise a stink, demand changes. This is a great project for the many of you who have been diligently working to guarantee fair and accurate elections.


Specific instructions for election activists who are willing to act locally are provided by VoteTrustUSA, VotersUnite, VerifiedVoting on documents at their websites....


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 05:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. Yes, but it won't solve the problem
And it's doubtfull that we can get rid of all the voting machines in time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. kick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
4. true. I use "Diebold" as shorthand for all dirty tricks - voter supression
and intimidation at the polls, broken machines - or none in blue precincts, discarded registrations, defective ballots, miscounting, scraping exit polls , phony polls media actively campaigning for the GOP and against the Democrats etc. There are too many to even keep in my brain at one time. So, I just say "Diebold"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. It makes sense for election activists to use shorthand -
but I think it might hinder our ability to communicate with newbies. My focus at the moment is on polishing my 'presentation' for newbies -- what do they need to know, what can they DO about the situation in 4 months time.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Febble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. That's interesting.
and may be part of the problem.

If you want to use shorthand, it might be worth using something like "vote suppression".

FWIW I think that "Diebold" or even "digital vote theft" was a much smaller factor than the other things you cite. But it all involves suppression the Democratic vote. I'd save "Diebold" for specific allegations about "Diebold" otherwise you may be too easily refuted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niallmac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. The shame is not that Republicans are stealing elections.
Lying, cheating, stealing is what Republicans do. It's their nature.
The shame therefore in my view exists in the simple fact that
this nation who's very core principals depend on fair and
honest elections does not spend whatever it takes to:
1- Insure they are incorruptible
a. Big fines and jail time for those convicted of tampering with the voters.
2- Insure that voting is as accessible to as many voters as humanly possible.
This means tailoring voter access accordingly and not finding ways to
disenfranchise the poor.

Why do our courts our congress and our countrymen/women put up with this
present state of affairs? How is it that we can land machines on planets but
achieving a verifiable vote count and insuring that NOT ONE vote is lost
is so difficult?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. Republicans don't want everyone to vote. And they don't want every vote
to be counted.

I agree that this is actually a more important point than the machines, which are in fact one technique of many.

Great thinking, and well-expressed.

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
9. Good line-up of info.
I no longer believe that Christians who do this sort of thing at the highest levels think of God as most humans in the world do.

I believe they know full well that it's all about the power, the wealth and self-aggrandizement.

K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Chrisitian Reconstructionists had a majority stake in ES&S (literally)
Edited on Sun Jun-18-06 12:45 AM by chill_wind
I had forgotten about this...

"(...)

In short, Hagel controlled and still partly owns the only voting machines that counted his votes when he ran for election in 1996 and 2002.

But, wait. There's more. The majority stake in ES&S is owned by Howard F. Ahmanson and the Ahmanson Foundation, heirs to the Home Savings of America fortune. Howard Ahmanson has long been associated with Christian Reconstruction, a radical faction of the Religious Right that seeks to replace American democracy with a theocracy based on biblical law and under the "dominion" of Christians. For years, the Orange County, California multimillionaire served on the board of the Chalcedon Foundation, the lunatic Right's think tank. He has channeled millions from his family's fortune to a variety of causes designed to discredit and defeat Darwin's evolution theory. He currently is a member of ultra-right Council for National Policy."

http://www.bestoftheblogs.com/2003_02_05_bestof.html

They will never give up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I never knew about the CR connection.
They won't give up, and we won't give up our Democracy.

So "they" are just shit-out-of luck. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 07:21 AM
Response to Original message
14. Too true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC