Latest from Voter Suppression 2012 Edition: North Carolina, New Hampshire, Ohio

hat tip -ProfGeo

Good News to report.


from TPM.com:

North Carolina Dem Governor Vetoes GOP Voter-ID Bill


North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue (D) has vetoed a Voter-ID bill passed by the Republican-controlled state legislature. The proposed law was part of a wave of similar bills that have been pushed by Republican-led legislatures in the wake of the 2010 elections. Like those, it would have required voters to show certain approved forms of photo identification at their polling places, or else cast provisional ballots and then have to prove their eligibility later.

"This bill, as written, will unnecessarily and unfairly disenfranchise many eligible and legitimate voters," Perdue wrote in her veto announcement.

She also added an allusion to North Carolina's past as a segregated, Jim Crow state before the Civil Rights movement: "There was a time in North Carolina history when the right to vote was enjoyed only by some citizens rather than by all. That time is past, and we should not revisit it."

Perdue's veto is likely to succeed, rather than be overridden. The CBS affiliate in Raleigh points out that while the bill had passed the state Senate by a veto-proof margin, it had in fact only passed the state House by a margin of 62-51, short of the 72 votes that would be needed to override the veto in that chamber.

Perdue's full veto message:

Read more »

GOP 2012 Voter Suppression New Hampshire Edition

hat tip-ThinkProgress:


Even Before NH Voter ID Bill Becomes Law, Illegal Signs Appear At Polling Stations To Disenfranchise Voters

New Hampshire House Speaker Bill O’Brien (R) took to the House floor this morning to defend Senate Bill 129, which would require voters to show photo identification in order to vote. But even before the bill became law, a sign was hanging on the door of a polling station in O’Brien’s own district, demanding that voters show ID before they could vote. The progressive blog Blue Hampshire first reported the placement of the signs, which were hanging outside polling places for the special election to replace state Rep. Robert Mead (R):

Signs posted at the New Boston Elementary School, one of the five polling locations in the district, this morning read, “Per pending legislation you will be required to produce a photo ID in order to receive a ballot.” They were removed at the request of the New Hampshire Attorney General, but not before voters on their way into the polls turned saw them and turned around.

“Law abiding New Hampshire citizens were discouraged from voting this morning as a direct result of Speaker’s O’Brien terrible piece of legislation, SB129,” said Harrell Kirstein, press secretary for the New Hampshire Democratic Party. “Just moments before O’Brien defended this reckless bill in Concord, voters in his own district were walking away from the polls without having cast a vote.”

ThinkProgress has documented recent efforts by legislators in as many as 22 states, including South Carolina, Florida, and Wisconsin, to disenfranchise voters through voter identification laws and other methods. Republicans often justify these proposals by spreading fear about widespread voter fraud, but voter fraud is, in fact, extremely rare. For instance, in Kentucky, which is holding statewide primary elections today, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported that the state’s voting fraud hotline has not received a single call.

I keep on publishing articles on GOP VOTER SUPPRESSION, because it's a serious issue.

IT'S REAL.

The GOP KNOWS that they can't win elections LEGALLY, so they do what they always do - they try to RIG THE GAME.

Keeping it close is the name of the game. If you keep it close, then you can STEAL IT. The reason they were unable to do it in 2008, was because it WAS NOT CLOSE. Because folks CAME OUT TO VOTE.

THAT is why the GOP plan, from state to state, is to LIMIT THE NUMBER OF DEMOCRATIC PARTY VOTERS.

PERIOD.

That is their plan, and it's obvious.

The issue of VOTER FRAUD is a NON-ISSUE.

It DOES NOT EXIST.

It's a made up issue so that the GOP can pass these discriminatory, anti small ' d' democratic laws.

Are American Voters Really This Feeble-minded?

I have heard a few reports of Women from New Hampshire who stated that they supported Hillary Clinton at the last minute because of her little emotional episode. The candidate who usually came off as robotic and scripted all of a sudden became human in New Hampshire. And that influenced who voters supported? Incredible.

This seems to be another indication that American voters react more to style than actual substance. This is one of the many reasons why we ended up with George W. Bush in back to back elections coronations. Americans rarely pay attention to actual issues and the track records of the candidates, or the plans and platforms that those candidates put forth. How voters "feel" about a candidate always seems to trump any of the substantive issues. This makes the American public easy prey for any snake oil salesperson with a pursuasive, feel-good message.

What makes American voters so feeble? I understand that the public education system is lacking and that has a lot to do with this problem, but there seems to be more to it than that.

But all is not lost. Some folks didn't drink the Kool-aid. The woman who asked the question that got Hillary so emotional, didn't quite buy it. In the end she voted for Obama.

The Rise of Obama - Can He Win A General Election?

And Why I Supported John Edwards

None of the candidates were really a choice for me. However, out of the line-up that was presented, I would have preferred to see John Edwards get the nomination. But the corporate media decided over a year ago that John Edwards would not be President.

The Obama/Clinton Show represented the biggest ratings draw and the biggest money maker for the networks, and therefore the media set the agenda for voters and decided who the “favorite” candidates were going to be. The media clearly decided (for the people) who the favorites were, and have spent the last 18 months bombarding the American public with coverage….herding the public in the direction of the media’s choosing.

Americans vote how they are told to vote….always have. This year will be no different. Like obedient sheep, Americans will participate in the Obama/Clinton made for TV Movie. I will watch the movie, but i’m not participating in the production.
I have never participated in an American election ceremony, and never will. But I will remain an avid observer.

My cynicism has not gone anywhere. If anything, this election cycle is (so far) only making me more disgusted with the political system, and the electoral process in particular. This election is a sham to me…..as all recent elections have been. The media has more influence in choosing Presidents than voters do. THAT IS A PROBLEM.

In my case, John Edwards is (or “was” now…because he’ll be done here pretty soon) …but he was the only candidate with a message that resonated with me. He was the only candidate with poverty as a focus of his platform. He was the only candidate with Hurricane Katrina as a part of his platform…and he had a plan for Katrina… (how many of the other candidates went down to volunteer numerous times…when the cameras were not there?). He was the only candidate with a focus on the working poor… And in my view, he would have been more electable in a General Election. He’s a Southern Democrat…just what the Democratic Party needs for a nominee. It’s no coincidence that the last 2 Democratic Presidents were Southern Democrats… the last 3 if you count Gore. lol.

He’s not the perfect candidate… But he had “great” President potential… almost Kennedy-esqe (not that i’m a big fan of Kennedy).
But Black folks (as a whole)… are some of the most loyal Sheep in the electorate…. so it’s no surprise that folks would vote for someone who looks like them, but has not necessarily articulated a plan or platform that best represents their interests.

To me, Obama seems to be more along the lines of an elitist Wall Street corporate Democrat…. willing to negotiate with entrenched corporate interests….and “hope” that they come to their senses….rather than someone who will fight his ass off for my best interests (at least some of my interests) as a Black man struggling in the working class…and stuck in the working class. (See great commentary "I Don't Need A Candidate To Hope For Me, I Need One To Fight For Me"). His stump speeches and his message never really caught on for me. And being staunchly independent, I had no interest in jumping on his bandwagon just because he was Black. That whole idea is insulting to me…. I hate when people bring this up… assuming, in a roundabout way, that I should automatically back the man because of our shared skin pigment.

I recall Obama saying just last week at a rally that he helped put together legislation that prevented Senators from accepting meals from lobbyists… But who cares about a f—-ing meal when lobbyists are still buying members of Congress and literally writing the legislation. K Street is as strong as ever. In other words, he’s too superficial in his challenge of the Washington DC culture and corporate control of our government. He should be talking about closing K Street down… PERIOD. These lobbyists have all sorts of special access to elected officials…both in Congress and the White House. Yet the citizens have zero access. Ironically… the original meaning of “lobbyist” referred to a time when the average citizen would go to Congress to lobby their elected officials. Access was practically open at that time. Try reaching your elected official today. Good luck! Good luck even getting a response to a letter. If you are lucky…. IF you are lucky, you will get a form letter back, thanking you for your effort to contact Sen. or Congressman Joe Blow.

But the test now for Obama will be winning a General Election. That’s the true test… winning purple States. He will need more than “hope” and a smile to overcome the brutal beating that the Republican attack machine & Conservative corporate media is about to put on him. AND FOLKS… THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE PRETTY…. IT WILL NOT BE FOR THE FAINT OF HEART. I can’t stress that enough.

People say…well he won in 2 White States… well that was a Caucus and Primary, with mostly folks from his own Party participating. That will not necessarily translate into success in a General Election….even with some support from independents.

But if he wins the nomination… I will support him. Because the alternative is just unthinkable. Two of the Republi-CON candidates- Romney and Huckabee- want to turn the State into an Imperialist Theocracy, and the other two top candidates- Giuliani and McCain- are warmongering lunatics who will give us the Bush+ Plan… The same Bush administration policies on steroids. It will essentially be an extension of BushCo. Both McCain and Giuliani have the most prowar military and foreign policy teams and they have both expressed an interest in taking the nation into more wars. John McCain is the biggest warhawk in the U.S. Senate…has been for many years.

The problem with Obama is that I just don’t think he can beat a top Republican in a General Election. If McCain gets the nod… Obama will be in trouble.
And he could also struggle with any of the other top Republicans.

Obama as an ideal opponent for the Republicans, because they see him as one of the most beatable Democrats.

At any rate… this year will be interesting on many levels.

Media Blackout Continues for John Edwards

There has clearly been a concerted effort on the part of the major media to take John Edwards out of the Presidential race. This has been going on for more than a year. They have successfully moved Edwards out of the way by sinking his campaign; allowing them to get the matchup that they want no matter what. And with so little time between Iowa and the New Hampshire Primary, Edwards has little chance of making up any ground.

All along, the networks wanted to see a matchup between Obama and Clinton because it would be the biggest ratings draw. Therefore, the networks proceeded to set the stage & set the agenda for what THEY wanted....(not what the people wanted), by giving disproportionate wall-to-wall coverage to the Obama and Clinton campaigns. In doing so, they set the agenda for voters...and established who the "favorites" were going to be...in order to get the matchup that they wanted.

Without the media hype, the Obama & Clinton campaigns would have gone nowhere... because neither candidate is the best that the Democrats had to offer, and neither candidate is the most electable.

What we are witnessing with John Edwards is one of the biggest travesties in American electoral history. And no one will do anything about it.... because there is no election authority in this Country that can regulate, enforce laws, recommend changes, or correct these kinds of injustices.

This is why fundamental electoral reform is so desperately needed...including the regulation of media coverage. Other Countries already regulate media coverage and public polling during campaigns.


Here are the latest examples of the media's Blackout effort against John Edwards... But this nonsense has been going on everyday for over a year.





Example with additional video



_____________________

Related Links

The Blackout of John Edwards and the Aftermath of Iowa

Other Candidates Banned from Participating in New Hampshire Debate

Iowa - A Test For American Democracy

McCain Losing Votes to Obama in New Hampshire

Hat tip: Prometheus6

McCain losing votes to Obama in N.H.
By Maeve Reston and Doyle McManus, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
December 30, 2007

NASHUA, N.H. -- Like many New Hampshire voters, Dave Montgomery considers himself a dyed-in-the-wool independent -- which in this state means he can vote in either the Republican or Democratic presidential primary when he goes to the polls Jan. 8.

This year, the semi-retired school bus driver from Milford finds himself torn between two candidates, one from each party: Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Barack Obama of (D-Ill.).

Montgomery likes McCain, he said, because "he seems to be enough of a rebel." He likes Obama for pretty much the same reason -- because he seems to be "his own man."

"I think either one of them could do the job," he said.

Independents like Montgomery may be the decisive factor for both major parties when New Hampshire holds the nation's first primary next week, hot on the heel's of Iowa's caucuses on Thursday. And the choices these nonaligned New Hampshire voters make almost assuredly will shape the nation's later primary races.

"This big group in the middle . . . has a chance to really transform the election," said Tom Rath, a veteran New Hampshire Republican strategist who is advising former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Mass.). Describing the efforts to woo independents, he added: "It's more like a general election here."

If Obama bests national front runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), he probably will owe his New Hampshire victory to independents, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll suggested last week.

Among the state's registered Democrats, the survey found Clinton led Obama, 35% to 28%. But among independents who plan to vote in the Democratic primary, Obama led, 37% to 24% -- turning the contest into a virtual tie.

Rest of the article is HERE.

The reason why this article is important, is because it points out the fallacy of Barack Obama's ' Unelectability'.

In the last month, poll after poll has consistently shown that Barack Obama polls well, against every major GOP Candidate in the General Election. He consistently polls BETTER than Hillary Clinton.

Why?

Because of his appeal to independents and some Republicans.

You see in this article that Hillary wasn't remotely a choice for him. It was Obama or McCain. Independents have already told the pollsters that they aren't voting for Hillary Clinton. They will consider Obama.

You win elections by trying to appeal to the broadest possible constituency. Of course you CAN win with '50%+1', but what has that brought us in this country the past seven years? Nothing but bitterness upon bitterness. Why set ourselves up for that AGAIN (with Clinton), when we don't have to. When you have a candidate that can gather a broad coalition to govern.

Barack Obama is electable.

He's NOT the one that HALF THE COUNTRY says they will NEVER VOTE FOR.

I have said it before; I'm not naive to think that Obama couldn't be victim to some sort of Bradley Effect. But, I stand by this: for him to catch up to where Clinton is RIGHT NOW?

It would have to be the size of a tsunami.


Cross-posted at BrownIowa

Democratic Candidates Square Off At Dartmouth College

The Democratic Presidential candidates squared off at Dartmouth College on Wednesday.

They were all still lying about pulling troops from Iraq, especially Hillary Clinton. However, they also appeared to be more cautious about how many troops to pull out and when. I plan to make a huge post about the "Iraq Withdrawal" question and I will highlight the fact that the whole discussion is a fraud. WAKE UP! There will be no end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq anytime soon, no matter who wins the Presidential election in November of 2008.

The Iraq post is quite long and I have not even begun to type it up. No rush though... since troops will be in Iraq indefinitely, and since the candidates will be lying about withdrawal until election day, I figure I have plenty of time.

Talking Points Memo has provided a video of the highlights from the debate.