TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Republicans trying to purge votes
Republicans trying to purge votes
The only way the Republicans can win is if they purge votes. They are waging a campaign to purge votes in districts that are demographically minority and democratic (see bolded bottom). In recent elections, the result was decided by less than 1000. They are purging tens of thousands in 10 states! You can bet they will try to steal this election. We can't let them do it!
| quote: |
| Voter Purging: A Legal Way for Republicans to Swing Elections? By Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet. Posted September 11, 2007. The Department of Justice's Voting Section is pressuring 10 states to purge voter rolls before the 2008 election based on statistics that former Voting Section attorneys and other experts say are flawed and do not confirm that those states have more voter registrations than eligible voters, as the department alleges. Voting Section Chief John Tanner called for the purges in letters sent this spring under an arcane provision in the National Voter Registration Act, better known as the Motor Voter law, whose purpose is to expand voter registration. The identical letters notify states that 10 percent or more of their election jurisdictions have problematic voter rolls. It tells states to report "the subsequent removal from rolls of persons no longer eligible to vote." "That data does not say what they purport it says," said David Becker, People for the American Way Foundation's senior voting rights counsel and a former Voting Section senior trial attorney, after reviewing the letters and statistics used to call for the purges. "They are saying the data shows the 10 worst voter rolls. They have a lot of explaining to do." "You are basically seeing them grasping at whatever straws are possible to make their point," said Kim Brace, a consultant who helped the U.S. Election Assistance Commission prepare its 2004 National Voter Registration Act report, which contains the data tables cited by the Voting Section letter to identify the errant states. The Justice Department would not comment for this report, despite repeated requests. The 10 states receiving Voting Section purge letters are Iowa, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Vermont. Since 2005, the Section has also sued six other states or cities -- Indiana, Maine, New Jersey, Philadelphia and Pulaski County, Arkansas -- where purging voter rolls was part of the resulting settlement. Only Missouri fought a Voting Section suit, winning in federal court, although that decision has been appealed. Democratic Party officials in Washington and state capitals were not fully aware of the latest Voting Section effort to winnow voter rolls, but Democratic National Committee officials said it would be studied in a 50-state review of election practices before 2008. The voter roll purges are part of an unprecedented effort at the Justice Department to eliminate "voter fraud," which, as defined by Republican activists, is an assumption that Democratic political operatives or sympathetic political organizations have filed fake voter registrations or encouraged supporters to vote more than once to win elections. These claims have been investigated by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and academics and found to be without merit. However, the Bush administration's Justice Department, starting under former Attorney General John Ashcroft, has devoted considerable resources to prosecuting "voter fraud." The effort to pressure states to additionally purge voter rolls is a trickle-down effect of these policies. Voter roll purges, if incorrectly done, can be a factor in determining election outcomes -- particularly in tight races. Unlike most of the "voter fraud" cases cited by GOP activists, where a handful of registrations -- usually in the single digits -- from big voter registration drives are found to be erroneous, purges can affect thousands of voters. In Florida and Missouri in 2000, a total of 100,000 legal voters were incorrectly removed, according to academics and local election officials. In Cleveland in 2004, voter purges were a factor behind long lines and people leaving without voting as poll workers dealt with people who did not know they had been removed from voter lists, various media reported. AlterNet obtained and analyzed the EAC data used by the Voting Section to identify states with allegedly swollen voter rolls that need purging. Using the methodology cited in Tanner's letters, it found 18 states where more than 10 percent of the jurisdictions -- a total of 2,000 counties, cities and townships -- allegedly had more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens. It shared those findings with several dozen experts -- from consultants like Brace, who compiled the numbers, to former Voting Section lawyers, to state election officials, to political operatives -- to assess if those states' voter rolls needed purging and whether the Voting Sections actions were partisan. AlterNet found many of the states targeted by the Voting Section have outdated voter rolls, especially in rural counties, where the registrations of people who have moved, died or been convicted of felonies need to be removed. That is the standard practice of local election officials and required under federal election laws. However, AlterNet found that some states facing Justice Department pressure to purge voters have long been targeted by GOP "vote fraud" activists, especially where concentrations of minority voters have historically elected Democrats -- such as St. Louis, Philadelphia and South Dakota's Indian reservations. One of those Republican activists who is now a Federal Election Commission member, Hans Von Spakovsky, started the department's purge effort in January 2005 when he was a political appointee overseeing the Voting Section's legal agenda, according to former Voting Section attorneys who worked with him then. |
Why do Dems whine so much about voter fraud, as if the only way they can lose an election is if the Republicans do some underhanded stuff? The Dems aren't immune to the same scrutiny... they are always crying civil rights violations in hopes of distracting people from allowing illegal aliens and ineligable voters in the booth (who instinctually go to vote for the party that gives free handouts) Hell, even Al Gore did all he could not to allow overseas military ballots in 2000. When Dems lose, they demand recounts, try to sue, and claim fraud. It was hilarious when they were turning against themselves in the primaries over the same things. And remember ACORN?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht...tefraud26m.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006...D8KGIHB01.shtml
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss Why do Dems whine so much about voter fraud, as if the only way they can lose an election is if the Republicans do some underhanded stuff? |
You can't paint them all with the same brush man... republicans aren't all jesus freaks who play dirty politics, just as all democrats are not like the San Francisco/Berkely america haters. Both sides are chalk full of jerkoffs and corruption and manipulation and you know it. You know full well how the extreme left is trying to hijack the democratic party in the same way. ANd I don't think (all) liberals are evil, my problem is the unintended consequences that come with liberal policies that nobody takes responsibility for because they were "well intended." I can see this has all the making of a 10 page discussion so let me say now that I don't have the energy for this one...lol
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss You can't paint them all with the same brush man... republicans aren't all jesus freaks who play dirty politics, just as all democrats are not like the San Francisco/Berkely america haters. Both sides are chalk full of jerkoffs and corruption and manipulation and you know it. You know full well how the extreme left is trying to hijack the democratic party in the same way. ANd I don't think (all) liberals are evil, my problem is the unintended consequences that come with liberal policies that nobody takes responsibility for because they were "well intended." |
| quote: |
| I can see this has all the making of a 10 page discussion so let me say now that I don't have the energy for this one...lol |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton Agree to disagree! |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.