Bubble? What bubble?

Let me introduce you to my red state friends.

49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama. We found that 52% of Republicans thought that ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama, so this is a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn't exist anymore.

The exact question (PDF), in case you were wondering if these people were somehow tricked:

Q8 Do you think that Barack Obama legitimately won the Presidential election this year, or do you think that ACORN stole it for him?

Interestingly enough, 2% of those who voted for Obama also believe ACORN stole the election for him. (Don't tell Willard. It will just make him sadder.)

(h/t: Jack, via email | pic. source: plognark)

Just in case you're still not convinced

i'm late to this, but it's still a must-read: Jane Mayer's The Voter-Fraud Myth; nyr.kr/S6I4Rq

— Eric Boehlert (@EricBoehlert) October 25, 2012

Full link here, if you're leery of those shortened ones.

We have a whole category for this aspect of the GOP's love for democracy ...

... and not a day goes by without another huge piece of evidence coming to light.

Good thing I've sworn off following politics this year, is all I can say.

Democrats' (Democracy's) Problem in a Nutshell

Charles Blow's column in today's NYT, which is well worth reading, had a discouraging sidebar, showing some results from a Suffolk University/USA TODAY poll of unlikely voters. Let us weep for our country, together.

First question of interest:

If you were registered to vote and the General Election for United States President were held today and the candidates were Democrat Barack Obama, Republican Mitt Romney, or a third party candidate, for whom would you vote or towards whom would you LEAN at this time?

Answers from those who are not registered to vote:

Obama	43%
Romney	14%
Third party	23%
Undecided/Refused to answer	19%

Answers from those who are registered, but say they are unlikely to vote:

Obama	43%
Romney	20%
Third party	18%
Undecided/Refused to answer	18%

Next question of interest:

Is your opinion of [name] generally favorable or generally unfavorable?

	Obama	Romney
Favorable	55%	25%
Unfavorable	37%	51%
Undecided/Never heard of	8%	25%

Oh, one last thing:

Can you tell me the name of the Vice President of the United States?

"Joe Biden"	39%
"Dick Cheney"	1%
Don't know/Refused to answer	60%

To end on a positive note: I think we should be encouraged that none of them said "Sarah Palin."

Voter Fraud!!!1!

 OMG IT'S TRUE!!!1! 

GOP: By God, we WILL make this a ©enter-®ight Nation.

It doesn't matter who or what we have to trample on.

pourmecoffee Short, data-rich look at ongoing campaign to restrict voting rights in the states: http://bit.ly/HFReyZ

The link in that quoted tweet takes you to the Brennan Center for Justice, which must be some kind of historical site? Among the highlights (up is down in today's RealAmerica) of their "2012 Summary of Voting Law Changes:"

As of March 21, 2012, at least 65 bills remained pending that have the potential to suppress the vote. … • Photo ID laws … • Proof of citizenship laws … • Making voter registration harder … • Reducing early and absentee days … • Making it harder to restore voting rights …

So far, pre-registration transvaginal ultrasounds aren't required. But give them time. I'm sure they'll get around to it.

In case you missed my tweet, ...

... don't miss this outstanding post by Kay at Balloon Juice on the never-ending efforts by the Republican Party to suppress minority voters.

(h/t: @edroso and @azjayhawk47)

Tweet of the Day

From Fed Up Fed:

All the noise #wingnuts made about zombie voters in SC, and we'll hear crickets on the results of the investigation http://thkpr.gs/xIEGwl

The headline and some excerpts from that quoted link:

Investigation Finds No Dead Voters — And Zero Voter Fraud — In South Carolina

South Carolina elections are still free of dead voters.

That’s what the State Election Commission concluded from its investigation into South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson’s declaration that over 900 dead people may have voted in recent elections.

Though the charge itself is laughable, South Carolina was still compelled to devote taxpayer money to investigate whether their elections had indeed been tainted by zombie voters. Unsurprisingly, they uncovered no evidence of voter fraud:

[...]

When Wilson first leveled the charge, many conservative media outlets, from Human Events to Fox News to Weasel Zippers and others, jumped on the story, using it as justification for South Carolina’s discriminatory voter ID law. Now, four days after the State Election Commission released its initial findings, none of these organizations have ran an update or correction, much less a full story informing their readers that “dead voters” in South Carolina still don’t exist.

That’s the major problem with Scooby-Doo accusations like “dead voters”: the investigation is sexy, but the finale is always far more mundane. As ThinkProgress wrote earlier this month, “when the allegations are inevitably shown to be false, far fewer news outlets follow up.” As a result, many people are still left with the mistaken impression that dead voters tainted South Carolina’s recent elections.

Never forget: there is a faction of the Republican Party that really, really doesn't like democracy.

(minor housekeeping note)

The post label the myth of "voter fraud" and the reality of voter suppression is suddenly not allowed, and I'm guessing it's because the new Blogger interface simply does not care for scare quotes.

I put this post up just in case someone linked to the old label; such links should be updated to point to the new label, the myth of voter fraud and the reality of voter suppression. I will be adjusting the labels on the old posts momentarily.

Sorry if you clicked over just to read a post that is boring even by the "standards" of this blog. (Ah, good, scare quotes are still okay in the post body.) As partial compensation, and because I believe that if there is anything more important to modern humor than scare quotes, it is Venn diagrams, allow me to pass along this fine image, sent to me by MK. You even get to click it to big it!

Your chickenhawks are coming home to roost

Following is something several of my political junkie friends and I have been saying for years, but let us not quibble about precedence, and instead be glad that someone with a larger megaphone has also come to these realizations.

Mr. Dionne, the floor is yours.

Newt Gingrich and the revenge of the base

It is one of the true delights of a bizarrely entertaining Republican presidential contest to watch the apoplectic fear and loathing of so many GOP establishmentarians toward Newt Gingrich. They treat him as an alien body whose approach to politics they have always rejected.

In fact, Gingrich’s rise is the revenge of a Republican base that takes seriously the intense hostility to President Obama, the incendiary accusations against liberals and the Manichaean division of the world between an “us” and a “them” that his party has been peddling in the interest of electoral success.

The right-wing faithful knows Gingrich pioneered this style of politics, and they laugh at efforts to cast the former House speaker as something other than a “true conservative.” They know better.

The establishment was happy to use Gingrich’s tactics to win elections, but it never expected to lose control of the party to the voters it rallied with such grandiose negativity. Now, the joke is on those who manipulated the base. The base is striking back, and Newt is their weapon.

The rest.

On a closely related note, the Education Fund of Americans for Democratic Action is conducting a "Congressional Briefing on Voter Suppression" tomorrow. If you're in the DC area, they'd love to have you join them. See the Facebook event page to RSVP and to see who else is going, and get more info here.

The Koch Brothers' latest slimy tactic

Like the post label says, voter fraud is a myth. Voter suppression is the reality.

An email just in from the NAACP:

MORE »

No one could have predicted that Florida ...

... would once again be looking for ways to suppress voting rights.

Ohio Republicans Seek Further Disenfranchisement of Likely Non-Republican Voters

Daniel P. Tokaji, Professor of Law at Ohio State University:

In 2004, Ohio became infamous for making it difficult to vote and have one’s vote counted. Much of the criticism was directed at then-Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. Remember his directive to reject registration forms on less than 80-pound paper weight?

Now, Ohio House Republicans are attempting to go further than Blackwell ever dared. In an obvious attempt to gain an advantage in the 2012 presidential election, they are attempting to rush through a bill (HB 159) that would make it more difficult for eligible citizens to have their votes counted. Ohio already has a tough voter ID law, but the proposed bill would make the burden on eligible citizens more onerous, requiring that in-person voters present one of four specified forms of government-issued photo identification.

“Disenfranchisement” isn’t a word to be used lightly. But it is necessary to capture this bill’s purpose and impact. Passage of this bill would restore our state’s unfortunate reputation as the nation’s capital of vote suppression. Yet so far, it has gone completely under the radar. This comment provides background on the problem, debunks the arguments in favor of the bill, and anticipates the lawsuits that can be expected to follow if it passes.

The rest.

(h/t: Kay at Balloon Juice)

"NH GOP Seeks To Disenfranchise Students"

As in, take away their votes. Because, Republican House Speaker Bill O'Brien says, "the kids [are] coming out of the schools and basically doing what I did when I was a kid, which is [vote liberal]."

As Brian Beutler notes:

The push is a part of a trend in states, particularly where Republicans made major gains in the 2010 election. Many of those states are advancing voter ID laws, nominally meant to crack down on the unsubstantial problem of voter fraud, but which in practice are meant to disenfranchise young and poor liberal voters.

Even Wisconsin, under intense national scrutiny as protesters march to protect collective bargaining rights for public sector workers, the legislature passed a Voter ID bill "requiring certain identification in order to vote at a polling place or obtain an absentee ballot."

Some of these bills as written are of questionable constitutionality. But that's beside the point when the point is to sow confusion and uncertainty on election day.

(h/t: @EricKleefeld, via RT | x-posted)

How is Texas Like Wisconsin?

Following up on the earlier post concerning Wisconsin's all-Republican government looking to install Voter ID requirements, here's a recommendation from Scott Lemieux of Lawyers, Guns and Money:

The Vote Fraud Fraud

Texas edition. It’s also worth noting that most “Voter ID” statutes still allow for (heavily Republican-leaning) absentee ballots to be cast without ID.

With Republicans in Charge, the Myth Becomes the Reality

Now that every branch of the state government in Wisconsin is controlled by the GOP, wouldn't it be an excellent time to pass a Voter ID bill, and come to that, amend the state constitution to really nail it home?

And what does this mean?

That Wisconsin will be able to reduce its number of documented cases of voter fraud to zero! Hurrah! Which is a HUGE reduction from the previous number!

(Zero.)

And who will this new law hurt?

Eh, just people without a lot of money, a lot of English, or a lot of white skin.

Above: not a Wisconsin drinking fountain.
Not yet, anyway.

And the real beauty of this? Don't forget: no more ACORN!

This is America, Saved. For RealAmericans™. Just like the Republican Party promised you.

__________

Hat tip to Kay at Balloon Juice, whose post is worth reading in full.

__________

("Colored Waiting Room" sign pic source)

Voter Intimidation, Teabagger-Style

Back in 2008, I posted several items related to the hysteria wingnuts always try to gin up about VOTER FRAUD!!!1!, which is almost entirely non-existent, since there's a world of difference between being able to register to vote as, say, Mickey Mouse, and being able to vote under that name. I also called attention to the real, well-documented efforts that Republicans have long used to suppress voting using various dirty tricks, most notably and heinously, a variety of tactics seeking to intimidate people who are not white. Click the label below this post, if you're interested in learning more.

The NYT has an article up today indicating that this just keeps on keeping on. The new variation? A bunch of teabaggers plan to stand outside polling stations, to harass "individual voters at the polls whom they suspect of being ineligible."

Presumably the detection mechanisms used by the teabaggers to determine ineligibility will be some blend of the never-fail criteria employed by Arizonans to detect Teh Elleegulls and Wan Williams to detect Teh Muslins.

Easy enough to ignore, you say? Suppose you went to vote by yourself and encountered something looking like this:

There are other techniques described in the article, such as specious accusations against various get-out-the-vote groups ("CONNECTED TO THE NEW BLACK PANTHERS!!!1!") and billboards designed to intimidate people into not showing up in the first place.

I encourage you to read the article. This is what "democracy" looks like when you let the RealAmericans™ define it.

(pic. source)

It must be the money ... turns everything to crap, doesn't it?

I am very glad Josh Fruhlinger is able to find the funny in this story about Republicans and their campaign financing schemes. Because, me, I'm about to crack a bottle of the hard stuff and put Bulworth on infinite replay until I pass out.

But, y'know, thank god we shut down that EVIL ACORN. And tsk tsk on that uppity president for mentioning the Supreme Enablers.

[Added] Also (via):

Sen. David Vitter to return campaign contribution from deceased woman

Assuming he's able to dig her up.

Moar diaperz jox plz. kthxbai.

Shoutout to Digby (@digby56)

Glad that someone else cares about this:

I've written reams about rightwing voter suppression efforts over the years, and like other single subjects (like tasers) I get a fair amount of blowback from people who say "enough already, we get it." Still it's worth reminding even those in the know, if only to establish a record all over the internet that some archeologist may someday find in the virtual ether.

It's important to be aware of this especially now that we have a an energized and batshit insane right wing ready to pull out all the stops. (We've already seen their capabilities with the destruction of ACORN.) The following story from Glenn Smith who's been following this from the trenches in Texas for a long time sounds the alarm:

[...]

As I've said before, right-wing voter suppression campaigns are the most under-reported political scandal of the last 50-100 years. [...]

In other details, the suppression campaigns follow a familiar pattern: raise suspicions of widespread voter fraud. Accuse "others" of stealing elections from us (read: white people). Threaten would-be voters with criminal charges. Limit polling locations in poor and minority precincts. Distribute spurious "felon lists" that disenfranchise legal voters who happen to share a name with a felon. Staff phone banks that make election calls to minority and poor voters giving incorrect polling locations and dates. Dress up vigilantes in cop clothes to intimidate would-be voters. [...]

Read the whole thing.

Ed. note: Above blockquote has minor typos corrected.

Joyous News: Momentary Outbursts of Spine on Display

Among both Democrats and the MSM, no less!

There's a story about Shirley Sherrod on the NYT's site that keeps getting updated. Most recent version of the story appears to have been posted just before 9pm, EDT (an hour before this posting). Here are some excerpts from the way it now appears.

With Apology, Fired Official Is Offered a New Job

WASHINGTON — The White House and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack apologized profusely and repeatedly on Wednesday to a black midlevel official for the way she had been humiliated and forced to resign her Agriculture Department job after a conservative blogger put out a misleading video clip that seemed to show her admitting antipathy toward a white farmer.

By the end of the day, the official, Shirley Sherrod, had gained instant fame and emerged as the heroine of a compelling story about race and redemption.

Pretty much everyone else had egg on his face — from the conservative bloggers and pundits who first pushed the inaccurate story to Mr. Vilsack, who looked stricken as he told reporters he had offered Ms. Sherrod, until Monday the Agriculture Department’s rural development director in Georgia, a new job that would give her a “unique opportunity” to help the agency move past its checkered civil rights history. She told him she would think about it.

“This is a good woman, she’s been put through hell and I could have and should have done a better job,” Mr. Vilsack said, as he conceded that he had ordered Ms. Sherrod’s firing in haste, without knowing that the video clip, from a speech she gave to the N.A.A.C.P., had been taken out of context. He said that he had acted on his own, and that there was “no pressure from the White House.”

Mr. Vilsack’s late-afternoon appearance capped a humiliating and fast-paced few days not only for the White House, but also for the N.A.A.C.P. and the national news media, especially the Fox News Channel and its hosts Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, all of whom played a role in promoting the story about Ms. Sherrod.

The controversy illustrates the nexus between Fox and right-wing Web sites like the one run by Andrew Breitbart, the blogger who initially posted the misleading and highly edited video, which he later said had been sent to him already edited. (Similarly, Mr. Breitbart used edited videos to go after Acorn, the community organizing group.) Politically charged stories often take root online before being shared with a much wider audience on Fox. The television coverage, in turn, puts pressure on other news media outlets to follow up.

[...]

Fox News began its pursuit of Ms. Sherrod in prime time on Monday night on three successive opinion shows that reached at least three million people. Leading off, Mr. O’Reilly asked on his top-rated program, “Is there racism in the Department of Agriculture?” He discussed the tape, plugged Mr. Breitbart’s Web site and demanded that Ms. Sherrod resign immediately.

By the time Mr. O’Reilly’s remarks, which were taped in the afternoon, were broadcast, Ms. Sherrod had indeed resigned, a development that Fox’s next host, Mr. Hannity, treated as breaking news at the beginning of his show. He played a short part of what he called the “shocking” video from Mr. Breitbart, and later discussed the development with a panel of guests, mentioning the N.A.A.C.P.’s recent accusations of racism within the conservative Tea Party movement.

“It is interesting they just lectured the Tea Party movement last week,” Mr. Hannity said, telegraphing a talking point that would come up repeatedly on other shows.

Fox’s 10 p.m. show also covered the resignation as breaking news. Ms. Sherrod later said Fox had not tried to contact her before running the video clip repeatedly on Monday.

Fair and Balanced™!!!1!

I'm about ready to faint that the NYT is finally showing enough stones to state such facts as appear in those last paragraphs (shoutout to Sheryl Gay Stolberg, who will no doubt have O'Reilly, Hannity, Breitbart, etc., calling for her resignation tomorrow), so I'll leave you to read the rest.

Also, here's the tweet that made me think I ought to go back to check on this article:

UOJim Cause they're lying sacks of shit? RT @daveweigel "Why is there no Sherrod correction at Big Government right now?"

(Big Government, if you didn't already know, is one of Breitbart's many websites.)

(x-posted)