New Voter Suppression in Key States Planned by Republicans

[Nbadan]

Republican Party officials in Ohio took formal steps yesterday to place thousands of recruits inside polling places on Election Day to challenge the qualifications of voters who they suspect may not be eligible to cast ballots.

Party officials say their effort is necessary to guard against potential fraud arising from aggressive moves by the Democrats to register tens of thousands of new voters in Ohio, seen as one of the most pivotal battlegrounds in the Nov. 2 elections.

Election officials in other swings states, from Arizona to Wisconsin and Florida, say they are bracing for similar efforts by Republicans to challenge new voters at polling places, reflecting months of disputes over voting procedures and the anticipation of an election as close as the one in 2000.

Ohio election officials said they had never seen so large a drive to prepare for Election Day challenges. They said they were scrambling yesterday to be ready for disruptions in the voting process as well as alarm and complaints among voters. Some officials said they worried that the challenges could discourage or even frighten others waiting to vote.

Ohio Democrats were struggling to match the Republicans' move, which had been rumored for weeks. Both parties had until 4 p.m. to register people they had recruited to monitor the election. Republicans said they had enlisted 3,600 by the deadline, many in heavily Democratic urban neighborhoods of Cleveland, Dayton and other cities. Each recruit was to be paid $100.


NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/23/politics/campaign/23vote.html?ei=5094&en=9f4420d7cc5a3720&hp=&ex=1098504000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&position=)

[Hook Dem]

:lmao :lmao :lmao

[Yonivore]

Suppressing illegal votes? Well, that undemoncratic!

[Marcus Bryant]

Damn. Mary Poppins (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041020/ap_on_el_pr/registration_scam_1) is going to be pissed that she can't vote.

A word of advice: when she picks up that umbrella....RUN.

[Nbadan]

The Republican voter suppression continues...


In yet another sign of how fiercely Ohio will be contested in the Nov. 2 presidential election, Republicans challenged 35,427 newly registered voters yesterday. And both parties named thousands of people to be challengers at the polls.

<snip>
But overburdened elections officials were left wondering how to comply with a state law requiring a hearing on each challenge no later than two days before the election.

Those who have been challenged must receive a letter by first-class mail no later than three days before a hearing to answer the challenge — with a lawyer and witnesses, if they choose.
<snip>

The Repubs harvested the addresses from all newly-registered voters then sent out mailing to all of them. Any mailing which came back undelivered was automatically challenged.

The good news: over 700,000 new voters signed up statewide.

dispatch (http://www.dispatch.com/election/election-local.php?story=dispatch/2004/10/23/20041023-A1-01.html)

If the voter doesn't first show up for their "hearing"...they can't vote

L ike the poll tax or literacy tests in Alabama in the 60s, the GOP has devised a major hurtle for these 35,000 new voters.

[Marcus Bryant]

L ike the poll tax or literacy tests in Alabama in the 60s, the GOP has devised a major hurtle for these 35,000 new voters.

It wasn't the GOP that created those you ignorant fuck.

[dcole50]

His quote doesn't imply that the GOP created the poll tax or literacy tests. He is simply comparting this hurtle to those previous ones ... I think.

[Yonivore]

Like the poll tax or literacy tests in Alabama in the 60s, the GOP has devised a major hurtle for these 35,000 new voters.
Proving you are who you say you are and that you live where you say you live is a "major hurdle?"

[Nbadan]

Having to show up for a 'hearing' to be eligible to vote is bullshit.

[Hook Dem]

I see that you're planning all your excuses as to why Kerry "lost" Dan. :lol

[SpursWoman]

Proving you are who you say you are and that you live where you say you live is a "major hurdle?"


No kidding. Bring valid ID or utility bill or whatever with your registration card...what's the big deal? I've always had to have ID where I vote.


Suppression?? Whatever.

[Nbadan]

Suppression?? Whatever.

Did you even bother to read the article??? We are talking much more than just signing up for a blockbuster card here. They are forcing people to take time off and go to court to be eligible to vote.

[SpursWoman]

Having to show up for a 'hearing' to be eligible to vote is bullshit.


Wow...then how about they give a valid mailing address when they register? Then there should be no problem, huh?

[Nbadan]

Wow...then how about they give a valid mailing address when they register?

How do you know they are not valid? Because they didn't reply to Republican propaganda?

[SpursWoman]

It's only a hearing for those that have been challenged. Did you bother to read the article?

[SpursWoman]

How do you know they are not valid?

There is no reason why their mail should be returned otherwise. If they are newly registered the address they registered with would be CURRENT, and if they moved in the week since they registered, unless they moved across the street, they'd have to re-register in the new precinct.

There is no reason why their mail should be returned otherwise...the info they registered with should be current within a week or so.

[Nbadan]

It's only a hearing for those that have been challenged


No, they challenged all new voter registrations that came back undelivered...


The Repubs harvested the addresses from all newly-registered voters then sent out mailing to all of them. Any mailing which came back undelivered was automatically challenged.

[Nbadan]

There is no reason why their mail should be returned otherwise.

There are plenty of other reasons, maybe the letter was delivered wrong, maybe the recipient thought it was a court summons, maybe the Postman is a W supporter, maybe the Republicans just addressed the letters wrong. There are so many possibilities.

[SpursWoman]

that came back undelivered...


They only come back undelivered if the address they registered with didn't exist, or they no longer live there and the forwarding address expired. And since they would only have registered within a week or so, forwarding requests are good FOR A YEAR.

[Hook Dem]

Quit trying to explain it to him SW. He's on a black helicopter training mission.

[Nbadan]

Quit trying to explain it to him SW. He's on a black helicopter training mission.

go take your 'medicine' old man

[Useruser666]

OMG!!! 100% Percent of the voters were challenged! Well 100% of the NEW registered voters were challenged. And I guess that out of those there were only those newly registered voters whose mail was retuned undeleverable. And then those who didn't show up for the challenge or who couldn't meet the standards in order to vote were kept from voting. So lets see, that leaves 0% of the people who were correctly registered to vote were kept from voting.

http://img87.exs.cx/img87/1296/FloridaVoters.jpg

[Hook Dem]

go take your 'medicine' old man
Atta boy Dan! Your ass is showing! :lol

[Nbadan]

They only come back undelivered if the address they registered with didn't exist, or they no longer live there and the forwarding address expired. And since they would only have registered within a week or so, forwarding requests are good FOR A YEAR.

How is any of this not a barrier to a person's right to vote? If a person is registered and has a valid ID they should be allowed to vote.

[Nbadan]

that leaves 0% of the people who were correctly registered to vote were kept from voting

Who is to decide what is correct and what is incorrect?

The Republicans know that a high voter turnout will only benifit the Democrats, especially among the young and poor who frequently don't leave forwarding addresses.

[Hook Dem]

It's a bitch when you get challenged trying to pad an election ain't it Dan?

[Useruser666]

Dan, then what keeps these people from voting again and again all over the place? If they give an address then they maybe they should actually LIVE there!

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

How is any of this not a barrier to a person's right to vote? If a person is registered and has a valid ID they should be allowed to vote.

If they're registered, they should have a valid mailing address.

But this whining is what I expect from Dan. I can't wait to hear Kerry complain that he lost Ohio because Mary Poppins at 1234 Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious Way couldn't vote.

[Nbadan]

It's a bitch when you get challenged trying to pad an election ain't it Dan?

I don't know, lets ask Diebold.

[Yonivore]

Having to show up for a 'hearing' to be eligible to vote is bullshit.
Really? These are "people" who had their voter registrations sent to invalid addresses...I think it's appropriate they prove their eligibility.

[Nbadan]

Dan, then what keeps these people from voting again and again all over the place? If they give an address then they maybe they should actually LIVE there!

What about your drivers license and voter registration numbers? There are enough safeguards in place to keep people from repeaditly voting.

[Nbadan]

But this whining is what I expect from Dan. I can't wait to hear Kerry complain that he lost Ohio because Mary Poppins at 1234 Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious Way couldn't vote.

Kerry will win Ohio.

[ChumpDumper]

Nice of you folks to disenfranchise the homeless in one fell swoop.

You guys rock.

[Useruser666]

Fine Dan, I agree. But if you put SOME false information on your registration the I think you should be checked out. What's the big deal with that?

[Nbadan]

Really? These are "people" who had their voter registrations sent to invalid addresses...I think it's appropriate they prove their eligibility

I wonder how many registered Republicans were challenged? This is partisan bullshit. Let the state handle possible fraud cases.

[Useruser666]

Nice of you folks to disenfranchise the homeless in one fell swoop.

You guys rock.

Bring proof that you are who you claim to be. NO ONE IS ABOVE THIS!!!

[Hook Dem]

Nice of you folks to disenfranchise the homeless in one fell swoop.

You guys rock.
Boy, you are the spinmeister!

[Nbadan]

Fine Dan, I agree. But if you put SOME false information on your registration the I think you should be checked out. What's the big deal with that?

The big deal is that we are trying to encourage more people to participate in our democratic system. This is why we spend millions on get out the vote drives. Putting up barriers to discourage or keep people from voting when they are legally registered to do so is chicken shit.

[ChumpDumper]

Bring proof that you are who you claim to be. NO ONE IS ABOVE THIS!!!Actually, it's not a requirement--unless someone makes a stink about it.

I think state ID cards should be much easier to get to avoid this kind of problem.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I wonder how many registered Republicans were challenged? This is partisan bullshit. Let the state handle possible fraud cases.

Get over yourself Dan. When the democratic lawyers ran around the country and got Nader off the ballot for hokey names, it was upholding the voting process in your eyes.

Now Repubs are ensuring the same "standards" on "registered" voters, it's "partisan bullshit."

Whatever.

[ChumpDumper]

Boy, you are the spinmeister!
If they're registered, they should have a valid mailing address. Where's the spin?

[Useruser666]

The big deal is that we are trying to encourage more people to participate in our democratic system. This is why we spend millions on get out the vote drives. Putting up barriers to discourage or keep people from voting when they are legally registered to do so is chicken shit.

Barriers? Like I have to be able to see to drive a car? IF they can't get the info straight then they should be voting. You have to have the ability to prove that you are who you say you are. It absolutly necessary. If we can't get that then there is no reason to have an election. I have never said these people should not get to vote. But I believe it is perfectly fair to have your info challenge if you put down some bogus stuff. Isn't that common sense? If a cop stops me and asks where I live, and I tell him Sugar Road out by Candy Mountain, can he not challenge me to prove that?

[Yonivore]

I wonder how many registered Republicans were challenged? This is partisan bullshit. Let the state handle possible fraud cases.
I'm sorry, the Demoncrats were prevented from doing the same thing how?

[Hook Dem]

Where's the spin?
I really don't think we are talking about the homeless in this thread Chump. Nice try!

[Nbadan]

I'm sorry, the Demoncrats were prevented from doing the same thing how?

Democrats aren't trying to suppress the vote.

[Yonivore]

Democrats aren't trying to suppress the vote.
:lmao He typed that with a straight face, I bet.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Democrats aren't trying to suppress the vote.

Yeah, not at all. [/Ralph Nader]

[ChumpDumper]

I really don't think we are talking about the homeless in this thread Chump. Nice try!Sorry. It's about valid mailing addresses. If that's the litmus test, the homeless are disenfranchised. Is this not a valid conclusion?

[Yonivore]

Nice of you folks to disenfranchise the homeless in one fell swoop.

You guys rock.
I almost missed this one...

They are only challenging registrants who had mail returned from the address listed when they applied for the registration. How is that "disenfranchising the homeless?" If the voter put an mailable address on the registration, it should at least be a valid address...

Who in here remebers when they used to canvass voters?

[Yonivore]

Sorry. It's about valid mailing addresses. If that's the litmus test, the homeless are disenfranchised. Is this not a valid conclusion?
No, it's not.

[ChumpDumper]

You guys have never registered a homeless person.

[Useruser666]

Sorry. It's about valid mailing addresses. If that's the litmus test, the homeless are disenfranchised. Is this not a valid conclusion?

Sorry is right. Why would a homeless person put down an address if they were homeless? It doesn't make sense and therefore should obviously be challenged! If one party didn't challenge registered voters who's applications looked fishy, they would be morons for not doing so.

[Useruser666]

You guys have never registered a homeless person.

What does that mean, or prove?

[ChumpDumper]

Why would a homeless person put down an address if they were homeless?They are required to -- it's not a street address, more the general area in which they live.

Understand?

So, using those criteria, every homeless vote will be challenged.

[Nbadan]

Sorry is right. Why would a homeless person put down an address if they were homeless?

Could it be that registration information requires a address to be complete?

[Marcus Bryant]

Fuck yeah. You guys haven't been homeless like Chumper either.

[Useruser666]

Fuck yeah. You guys haven't been homeless like Chumper either.

Then put down a homeless shelter, or a welfare worker or department. Is this what it has come down to? The Dems need the homeless vote to put them over the top? If having an address is the requirement then you should have one. If you want that to change, then write your Congressman. This super finite haggling at the last minute is what causes such foul-ups. Such hee-hawing over very simple principals is absurd. Maybe you can house and feed these people with your words.

[Nbadan]

Fuck yeah. You guys haven't been homeless like Chumper either.

Last I heard ChumpDumper had a job.

[Nbadan]

Maybe you can house and feed these people with your words.

That's basically what W wants them to eat since he is cutting resources for the poor.

[ChumpDumper]

If having an address is the requirement then you should have one.They do -- just not one mail gets to. If you want that changed, call your congressman.
Fuck yeah. You guys haven't been homeless like Chumper either.No, I've always been quite fortunate in that regard -- but MB's thinking it's an insult says it all.

[Marcus Bryant]

That's right. Not all of us can walk on water like you.

Your abstention from penis has made you irritable and argumentative.

[ChumpDumper]

Maybe you can house and feed these people with your words.All I can do with those is explain to you how that scheme affects them.

[ChumpDumper]

That's right. Not all of us can walk on water like you.Hey, you can type with your foot in your mouth....
Your abstention from penis has made you irritable and argumentative.Ah, the misguided personal attack.

My work here is done.

Seriously though, PM Sequ.

[Marcus Bryant]

Oh, of course you've never engaged in a personal attack in this forum or elsewhere. Never.

It's not misguided to read your drivel and reach the conclusion that you are one angry bitch.

That's ok, you can keep Sequ all to yourself.

[ChumpDumper]

Oh, of course you've never engaged in a personal attack in this forum or elsewhere. Never.Of course I have. But you do it when you've been bested, cupcake. As the banner on the carrier says, "Mission Accomplished."
It's not misguided to read your drivel and reach the conclusion that you are one angry bitch.Your premise is fundamentally flawed.

BTW, what's your excuse for being an angry bitch?

[Marcus Bryant]

I do it whenever I feel like it. "Bested"? You wish.

I don't need an excuse, as I'm not one. What's your excuse for being a weirdo?

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not one.

Bested again, I see.

Too bad for you, angry bitch.

[Marcus Bryant]

Oh yes, it's quite normal to do what you have done.

Bested by who? You?

Ha.

[ChumpDumper]

Ha ha.

[Marcus Bryant]

Cute, yet pathetic. 'tis your history.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, take the high road and call me homeless again.

[Useruser666]

Isn't this what PMs are for?

[Marcus Bryant]

Maybe I should take your road. But then I would have to start digging.

[Yonivore]

If this doesn't make it to the classic threads, nothing will.

Priceless...

[RandomGuy]

If this doesn't make it to the classic threads, nothing will.

Priceless...

Probably should have. Decades later it is still the official policy of the Republican party.