« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
The Obligatory Freak the Fuck Out Post
Apologies to Articleman for riding on his coattails a bit here. Also, I had intended to provide a link, but TPM hasn't seen fit to provide a usable interface.
Anyhow, Articleman had a recent post about why we should chill the fuck out about the current national polls. It was full of insightful analysis and was generally a good post which quickly found itself on the Recommended list.
However, Articleman made a grave miscalculation in his analysis. Like many people, he seems to be under the mistaken assumption that elections are decided by voting.
The last two U.S. Presidential elections were stolen by the GOP. Florida in 2000 was the test run. They expanded it in 2004 and used it to pick up Ohio. And they've already set up the scheme for 2008.
It's unfortunate that we've heard nearly nothing about this here at TPM. After all, TPM was instrumental in breaking the story about the U.S. Attorney firings. We've heard precious little since, though, about why these people were fired.
Investigative journalist Greg Palast describes what it means in this interview. You can also learn more about the story in this episode of Now.
In a contest this close, you don't need to fix the whole system. You just need to give it a little nudge.
Comments (27)
It's always a possibility, DF. But what's the point of worrying about it? Seriously - I've worried about it for years and done everything I could and I honestly don't know of one other thing I can do to prevent a stolen election. So what is the point of worrying about it?
'
You know what I think? I really do believe that except for a handful of fundamentalists, serious people on both sides of the political spectrum are horrified at the prospect of Sarah Palin being one 72 year old hearbeat away from being CIC. Read what Lincoln Chaffee said about her - and I think he's far far from being alone.
September 11, 2008 12:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, and this is where some of us really aren't gonna like some of what Obama HAS to do. There are powerful people who can nod their head... and things shift a bit. Look at Obama meeting Murdoch - Tony Blair CULTIVATED that Murdoch machine. He had to. There's big moneymen, bankers - numerous centers of power. I did one of my (dreadfully long) posts early on, about how MANY people have been complicit with Bush. And you not only can't prosecute them all, you HAVE to let some of them know that the country isn't gonna go through 1,000 trials, and jailings. I think some of that's already been happening.
Right now, I'd say there are some signals coming out that not everyone on the right is 100% backing McCain, even with Palin. they GET how nutso this might be. Even Billo tonight was odd. I don't like these guys, and - once elected - changes have to happen. But they don't necessarily have one button, under one finger, that will give them 10,000,000 votes. They too have multiple interests & spheres & rivalries. So some of what Palast thinks they can or will do, ain't gonna happen. Both because we work to stop them - but also because, on their side, not all will see fit to pull the trigger.
It's like, who stopped McCarthy. Murrow? Or Ike & the Army - and some Republicans? Who stopped Nixon? In the UK, the Tories were brought down partly from within. If these guys are as worried as I suspect some of them are, their camp will be split. Which is - once again - why I think the even if every word Palast says is true, we have room to maneuver. So let's GOTV, support those who are working to unlock all voters, and make the whole MCain-Palin mess so unpalatable that even some Republicans want change.
September 11, 2008 4:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't write this just so people would worry about it. You're right that there's a limit to what each of us can do individually. However, I've seen little to no discussion of these issues since the primaries started heating up. Yes, there have been occasional updates on muckraker regarding the plodding congressional machinations, but no one seems to be reminded people about why these people were fired and who they were replaced with.
I should also mention that I still regularly see Dems blame Ralph Nader for Gore losing the election in 2000. If you're familiar with Palast's story you know this is bullshit. Nader got some 70k votes in FL, but Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush had some 90k Dem voters scrubbed from the rolls. This story didn't see the light of day in the US. It's one of the reason that Palast now works for the BBC.
The point is this: While we see plenty of horse-race coverage and talk of what Obama has to do to win this thing, let's not forget that there's hard evidence to show that the Dems won the last two.
Are we prepared for that to happen again?
September 11, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
DF. I'd LOVE to see a piece - here or elsewhere - that lays out, fairly high-level, but covering the map - that shows what we can do directly, and what can be done to raise the issue with others, apply pressure, etc. Would it be through RFK Jr & Palast? Also think it might be good to have more posts here on that. (Not looking to ad to your workload dude, but.... umm, could you add that to your workload? ;-)) Anyway. At a minimum, thanks for the piece.
September 11, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's true that serious people on both sides of the spectrum are horrified. However there is a very large number of people who aren't thinking too deeply about it and are falling for the myth and the image. Those people have to be reached also and they may not watch a lot of news. There needs to be ad campaigns that appeal to the small town and not college educated folks that are very focused on their own situations and don't spend a lot of time analyzing current affairs.
September 11, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey DF. Great post. Clearly at least 10 others read your piece, hit Recommend, read the link, put their affairs in order, and threw themselves under buses.
I tried to throw myself under the dogsled.
Gimme a hand, willya? And get those F*CKING huskies off me.
September 11, 2008 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
But the huskies like you. They really, REALLY like you! Next time try a snowmachine. Just trying to be helpful. :)
September 11, 2008 4:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love this post. Highly rec'd!
DF, I find the interplay between the two titles (of our respective pieces) to be laden with literary subtlety.
You're dead wrong on Bush v. Gore, it was decided by voting -- by five old judges! Bush won the election, 5 to 4!
Maybe this time we win in the House by winning Colorado in a recount that puts us in an electoral tie, and having lost the national popular vote by 3 percent. That would be entertainment to the max. But another way the actual vote would also not decide our election.
September 11, 2008 12:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey DF, TPM did actually report on this issue last year and found Palast's charges in FL to be credible: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/003523.php
That said, you are correct in that I haven't seen any follow up.
Here's a Kos diarist's supporting analysis that also includes some criticism of Palast's reporting:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/26/113923/608
And here's a more recent Kos diary criticizing allegations in NM:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/12/112747/342/815/566689
My sense is that there is definitely evidence of discriminatory caging, but it's not clear how widespread it is. It also seems that there isn't enough admissible evidence for a lawsuit, which is not to say that further evidence won't come out.
September 11, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I had read the diary about Mora, NM, but I'm not sure that what the diarist is addressing is meaningful. He/she seems to be discussing a blurb on Palast's site which was actually spoken by Air America's Thom Hartmann. The dKos diarist seems to be looking at the data from this year, but the comment by Hartmann actually refers to Palast's reporting on the 2004 election. Take a look.
So, while the diarist did some respectable number crunching, he/she sort of went off half-cocked based on the front page blurb.
I'm not sure what the standard of evidence is for a lawsuit, but RFK Jr. sure seems to think it's a violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. If you prefer TPM's reporting, you'll note that Paul Kiel has a statistician willing to say that there's less than a 1 in 10,000 chance that the racial profiling of the lists isn't intentional.
A more significant problem in prosecuting these cases is jurisdiction. Prosecution of voter fraud falls under the jurisdiction of... wait for it.... U.S. Attorneys! That's the whole deal with Griffin. They promoted the perp to prosecutor.
The other prong of the GOP's attack is visible with respect for Iglesias. The GOP was telling him to go investigate "voter fraud". For the GOP, this is a code-word for preventing low-income and minority voters from voting.
There's a group called ACORN that's been getting mentioned a lot by conservatives lately. They're a favorite target of the Lou Dobbs-xenophobia crowd. ACORN engages in efforts to register exactly the voters that the GOP is attempting to disenfranchise.
Guess who used to work for ACORN? Barack Obama.
If you haven't heard anything from the right about this little dust-up, you can sample it here.
Just some food for thought.
September 11, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's really all about turnout and about putting new states into play. The only way the neoconservatives steal elections is with a divided electorate and a sub 60% turnout, even lower in "battleground" states.
Gen X and Gen Y didn't really vote in significant numbers either of those years. The Internet as a social networking tool was in its infancy. The bad news of the last 8 years (and the good from the previous 8 in 2000) was obscured in most people's lives.
Comparing this year to the last few elections isn't really relevant to the dynamics in play for this particular election. Such comparisons can be helpful in terms of seeing which trends need to be countered, but not so much in actually determining who the winner will be.
I am not worried even a little bit as long as the primary turnout is reflective of about half the general turnout, which it always is, there will be too large of a margin for any funny business.
September 11, 2008 6:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
JEM: The only way the neoconservatives steal elections is with a divided electorate and a sub 60% turnout, even lower in "battleground" states.
Do you have some research or expert analysis that supports this, or is it simply your opinion?
In either case, it might be helpful to point out that the Republicans are experts not only at switching votes, they also excell at suppressing turnout, as FL 2000 and OH 2004 demonstrated.
September 11, 2008 8:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unless I specifically link to something else, it is obviously my opinion. As is 99% of what you write here. As is 99% of what most people write on TPM.
Having said that, it is an opinion based in observation of the historical record as well as various movies and articles and books about both elections.
The evidence is self-evident. The low turnout created an election where a single state by a margin of less than 1000 votes "elected" a president in 2000, or allowed the Supreme Court to which is the same thing. In 2004, yet another election where a single state decides things with a partisan as the election czar. Two for two so far, but that dog won't hunt this year. Those factors are gone, so the entire race changes.
This year is nothing like 2000 or 2004, no matter how much you purport it to be so. There will be no "suppressing turnout" this year when perhaps a dozen states are in play that never were before. That only works when there is no enthusiasm or very low enthusiasm.
The "republicans" aren't magicians. They aren't all powerful. They created a very specific game plan to take advantage a very specific situation in America that no longer exists. You give the "republicans" way too much credit. The neoconservatives who run the republican party are trying desperately to hold one as the rank and file republicans come apart underneath them.
Four years was enough for a generational shift of an election. The Bush presidency was enough to cause major fractures in the republican party. Millions of new voters turned out for the primaries already and will turnout for the general given historical trends.
What is so hard to understand about any of this very basic and common sense analysis of the available data?
September 11, 2008 9:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not disputing your observations, I'm noting that you are expressing opinion in such a way as to give the impression that it is fact. You do this in much the same way that other members of your party "announce" that the Democratic candidate has called the Republican vice-presidential candidate a pig.
I still don't see that you have made any case that the election must be close or that turnout must be light in order for your party to steal it. You properly make the case that turnout will be very heavy, and you opine that heavy turnout will obviate your party's ability to steal the election, but nowhere do you show any mechanism that prevents your party from stealing a close or low-turnout election. Claiming that "common sense" is on your side doesn't strengthen your case unless you make sense in the first place.
It is just as easy for the Republicans to flip a million votes in a computer as it is to flip a thousand. It's almost as easy for Republican dirty-tricks squads to mislead ill-informed minority voters to believe that election day is actually NEXT Tuesday in a dozen states as it is in one state. It's just as easy for local Republican officials to come up with schemes to limit non-Republicans' access to polling places in 2008 Pennsylvania as it was in 2004 Ohio.
I am all for being energetic and optimistic, but being pollyannish is ridiculous.
September 11, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
You keep saying "my party" as if I condone any of the tactics by said party. As if I have ever cast a vote for any of those clowns. As if I am not working to recreate the GOP just as the democrats are getting rid of the DLC.
Further, that you would treat opinion as fact is more your problem than mine. That is what "your party" always does with opinions - treats them all as if they were equal facts. Everyone is a winner in Liberal Land.
If you honestly think that "my party" can rig the elections in the dozen or more states in play this year, I can't really help with your lack of education about these matters or your obvious paranoia. I know that losing for decades can lead to shell shock, but you should really be more confident this year.
You are the one who sounds like a Pollyanna as much as you worry about non-existent conspiracies of an order that simply couldn't exist. At worst a couple of partisan hacks can throw a state or two that happen to be close. As much as you think otherwise, this is not 2004 and those tricks won't be enough the throw the election.
September 11, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since you are so fond of statistics, here is a story all about turnout. The 2004 presidential general election was the highest since 1968 - at 60.7%. We have yet to have a modern election with the turnout that is telegraphed by the primary numbers.
When a tactic to steal elections revolves entirely around suppressing a couple hundred thousand votes how the hell do you suppose that scales to a few million new voters in newly competitive states?
I am all for being prepared and pragmatic, but being paranoid is ridiculous.
September 11, 2008 9:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Obama loses, and there's even a hint of voter fraud/tampering (there will be), then he must cause a Constitutional crisis. He should not concede, and he should sue for re-vote upon re-vote upon revote if necessary.
If that doesn't work, then the Democrats in Congress must open criminal investigations into everyone from the Bush administration, and send as many Republicans to jail as possible.
This is no joke, but they've turned law-breaking into a joke.
September 11, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
After watching this Congress operate, I won't be holding my breath.
September 11, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is an incredibly upsetting but informative article on how the GOP is already rigging Ohio:
http://www.truthout.org/article/ten-ways-gop-is-now-stealing-ohio-vote
September 11, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is being talked about on Air America today. The McCain camp is sending out intentionally confusing absentee ballot request forms in several states, not just Ohio. The forms are intentionally confusing and in some cases the return address is incorrect. It seems the intent is to get the recipients to cast their votes such that they can be invalidated.
Here's one article on the Ohio shenanigans, but it seems to be happening in other states as well:
http://ohiodailyblog.com/content/gop-blames-brunner-their-own-screw
September 11, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
While the whole issue of election protection, Florida in 2000 and possibly Ohio in 2004 are incredibly important, the problem with bringing this issue up too much is that it leads to the "fuck it, Diebold's just going to steal the election anyway" or (not as bad) "first we've got to eliminate Diebold/etc., THEN we'll think about the election" kind of post and thinking. I remember a lot of people in 2006 who were regularly posting that kind of tripe on Dkos and elsewhere. Those same kind of people are probably the same ones who wanted to abandon Obama over FISA, never afraid to let the perfect (or almost perfect) be the enemy of the good (or at least not bad).
My own hunch is that most of this kind of thing goes on in certain areas on pretty much an ad hoc basis, but at times (as in Florida 2000) canny political operatives can capitalize on it and really make it work for them.
So, vigilance is crucial, but so is a sense of proportion.
September 11, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely. I'm in no way trying to discourage anyone from getting Obama elected. Far from it. I just don't want this to slip off of the radar.
September 11, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
While the whole issue of election protection, Florida in 2000 and possibly Ohio in 2004 are incredibly important, the problem with bringing this issue up too much is that it leads to the "fuck it, Diebold's just going to steal the election anyway" or (not as bad) "first we've got to eliminate Diebold/etc., THEN we'll think about the election" kind of post and thinking. I remember a lot of people in 2006 who were regularly posting that kind of tripe on Dkos and elsewhere. Those same kind of people are probably the same ones who wanted to abandon Obama over FISA, never afraid to let the perfect (or almost perfect) be the enemy of the good (or at least not bad).
My own hunch is that most of this kind of thing goes on in certain areas on pretty much an ad hoc basis, but at times (as in Florida 2000) canny political operatives can capitalize on it and really make it work for them.
So, vigilance is crucial, but so is a sense of proportion.
September 11, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently, giving the system a nudge is a part of the GOP plan (not surprising). I don't think it's anything to freak out about, but it is another front on which the war is being waged. Here's an interesting angle they've come up with in MI.
http://www.michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote
(crap ... I hope this doesn't double-post)
September 11, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have tried a few times to post a comment with links to current voter suppression preliminary moves by the GOP but each time I get a message saying it needs to be approved by the blogger. I will try again with one link, the others have been added above by others but at a glance I didn't see this one about the county that Virginia Tech is in issuing a statement warning students that they could loose benefits if they register at their current residence. It is erroneous. I hope this link goes through:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/03/voting
September 11, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
sorry, but i'm with df. gore was quite capable of raising a constitutional crisis, and no doubt, kerry. however, congress will sit on its ass, just as the justice department has in bringing anyone up on charges in MMS "hookers and blow" debacle. i have been not-so-secretly convinced that bushies' funding promised to crush whatever efforts would have been made on either of their parts. but i do agree that apathy would be most detrimental.
September 11, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Attack the person. That's the Republican way, Jason.
JEM: I can't really help with your lack of education about these matters or your obvious paranoia.
So educate us. Or just continue the insults. Either way works for me.
September 11, 2008 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment