McCain's ACORN attacks predictably dishonest

trq

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
I came across a particularly concise summary of why McCain's "concerns" about ACORN are intentionally misleading and thought it might be of interest. The bolding is, of course, mine.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/17/johnmccain-republicans

We know election day is approaching when Republicans start screaming about voter fraud, but the McCain campaign has reached a new low and the death rattle of the Republican party has entered its last violent spasm. At this week's debate John McCain accused the Association of Community Organisations for Reform Now (Acorn) of "one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy". His running mate, Sarah Palin, warned that they were trying to "steal this election". These kinds of allegations are absurd and obviously false and the McCain campaign knows it. It is McCain himself that is damaging to our democracy because it calls into question the legitimacy of our election process in a deceitful way.

Voter fraud and voter registration fraud are two different things and they are being deliberately conflated for political purposes. Voter fraud is simply bogus. Study after study, and major nationwide enforcement efforts by the department of justice and other enforcement agencies in the states have never, ever produced any evidence of anything more than a handful of cases, and I mean two or three, of actual voter fraud. The failure of many US attorneys to actually find cases of voter fraud to prosecute was the motivation for Karl Rove to push a scheme to fire nine of them and the resulting scandal ultimately led to attorney general Alberto Gonzalez's resignation.

Voter registration fraud is real, but the kinds of allegations about Acorn are actually frauds perpetrated on Acorn and not the political process. Organisations that engage in voter registration drives are required by law to submit every registration form that they receive, no matter how obviously fraudulent the information. That law is in place as an extremely important protection for the process so that organisations are not able to go on a mass registration drive and then throw out all the Republican registrants or Democratic registrants before they submit the forms to the state government. They have a responsibility to flag those forms that they believe are fraudulent or invalid, but they cannot disqualify them on their own. For example, Acorn goes and registers 100,000 people in Ohio out of which they identify 5,000 registration forms that are clearly phony that they flag, but they have to turn them in anyway. Then Republicans go around spreading malicious stories about Acorn turning in thousands of fraudulent registrations, but they know Acorn is required by law to turn them in and they know that those registrants will never be added to the voter rolls.

Acorn is uniquely susceptible to these kinds of problems because it engages in the questionable practice of paying its organisers by the number of people they register. I can understand why they do this – to give unemployed or low-income people a paying job – but it opens them up to fraud perpetrated on them by paying for sham registrations. They believe that the multi-layered system of first flagging questionable registration forms and then having the voting agencies provide further checks is adequate protection against actual fraudulent registrants ending up on the voter rolls and the benefits of helping these people earn a living outweigh these risks.

The reason why voter registration fraud does not lead to actual voter fraud is that voter fraud is hard and voter registration fraud is usually very transparent. The charges flying around right now – people registering as Mickey Mouse, or a guy filling out 73 registration forms – are simply not credible as voter fraud. It would require us to believe that an election board would place Mickey Mouse on the rolls and poll workers would then allow someone to vote who is claiming to be Mickey Mouse, or to allow the same person to vote numerous times. That is just ridiculous and impossible to imagine occurring in the real world.

For systemic voter fraud to occur, the organisers of such an effort would need hundreds if not thousands of people to participate in a massive conspiracy to show up at the polls claiming to be someone else (a felony) who had been fraudulently registered and placed on the rolls, they will often now need to have a government issue photo ID with that other person's information (another felony), then actually vote for the chosen candidate in a secret ballot, and then keep this massive clandestine conspiracy hidden in the face of numerous investigations designed to uncover that very situation. It's even harder for systemic mail-in voting fraud because the ballots can only be mailed to each voter's registered address meaning that hundreds of households would need to be part of this conspiracy that adds mail fraud to its list of felonies. It's more likely that Mickey Mouse would be allowed to vote than systemic voter fraud to occur undetected.

Republican officials know this. They know that this election cycle has seen an unprecedented surge in new voter registrations and that those registrations have been disproportionally Democratic. They are raising the spectre of imaginary voter fraud to further their efforts to disqualify a large number of those registrations through cumbersome requirements that elections boards cannot complete by November 4 to fix a problem that does not exist. It is a deliberate effort to delegitimise both their probable defeat and, combined with despicable efforts to portray Obama as a supporter of terrorism, an Obama presidency. Should Obama win, a large percentage of the country will think that he is a terrorist supporter who conspired to steal the election, that will present a real governing problem for Obama. The reason they will believe that outrageous suggestion is that the Republican presidential and vice-presidential candidates have told them it is true. This from the man who claims to put country first.

And on a related point:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h5P2f-dgLBCzuRdaaWR2BTYBb81AD93SBAJO0

High court rejects GOP bid in Ohio voting dispute

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is siding with Ohio's top elections official in a dispute with the state Republican Party over voter registrations.

The justices on Friday overruled a federal appeals court that had ordered Ohio's top elections official to do more to help counties verify voter eligibility.

Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, faced a deadline of Friday to set up a system to provide local officials with names of newly registered voters whose driver's license numbers or Social Security numbers on voter registration forms don't match records in other government databases.

Ohio Republicans contended the information for counties would help prevent fraud. Brunner said the GOP is trying to disenfranchise voters.
 
[quote name='trq']Voter fraud and voter registration fraud are two different things and they are being deliberately conflated for political purposes.[/quote]

Very good article, but I would just like to throw out another term into the mix: Election Fraud. That's also a term folks often confuse with Voter Fraud.

Where Voter Fraud places the blame on those casting the ballot, Election Fraud places blame on those COUNTING the ballot.

A pretty good website to bookmark is: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

Keep an eye on it in the next few weeks.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']I love how calling for truth in voter registration means Republicans are trying to disenfranchise voters.[/quote]

Well, like the article said there are only about 2 or 3 cases of voter fraud ever convicted. So, calling for truth isn't necessary and the republicans know this. However, if they make a big enough fuss about it - like they are trying to do - they can possibly have a number of valid registrations removed/not processed due to an intensified magnifying glass double take over all registrations by election officials. This will overwhelm them and the GOP is trying to take advantage of it because most new registrations are democrat.

edit: Also, by tying Obama to it, they can drag his name through the mud for something that isn't anyone's fault.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']I love how calling for truth in voter registration means Republicans are trying to disenfranchise voters.[/QUOTE]

I love how an organization *marking* voter registration forms as suspect and possibly fraudulent, and turning in all voter registration forms irrespective of completeness or suspicion, as organizations like ACORN are *legally obligated* to do, is a scandal in your eyes.

Oh, they're targeting the poor and minority vote? You mean they want PEOPLE to VOTE? Now I see your objection.

I'm willing to bet, despite the flag of individual liberties you fly (you'll know it when you see it: the tag says "Made in Korea"), you probably support felon disenfranchisement laws, too. Nothing like keeping down voters who are disproportionately likely to vote Democrat! THAT RIGHT THERE is freedom and democracy for ya!
 
Actually, I believe felons should be able to vote. They've paid their debt to society and should be treated as citizens, not felons. Unless they were convicted of treason, not to do so is criminal. And even if treasonous, suspect.

However, people who need to be canvassed, coerced, or engaged to register, shouldn't be voting in the first place. Registering to vote should require an active participant who understands the responsibility enough to take the initiative to register.

Of course, we could just make it mandatory, like selective service.


Edit: I mean EX-felons, of course.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='bmulligan']However, people who need to be canvassed, coerced, or engaged to register, shouldn't be voting in the first place. Registering to vote should require an active participant who understands the responsibility enough to take the initiative to register. [/quote]

Why would you disenfranchise all those people? Are you assuming that they'll screw up the election? Don't we all have the right to vote or not vote as we see fit?
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Actually, I believe felons should be able to vote. They've paid their debt to society and should be treated as citizens, not felons. Unless they were convicted of treason, not to do so is criminal. And even if treasonous, suspect.

However, people who need to be canvassed, coerced, or engaged to register, shouldn't be voting in the first place. Registering to vote should require an active participant who understands the responsibility enough to take the initiative to register.

Of course, we could just make it mandatory, like selective service.


Edit: I mean EX-felons, of course.[/QUOTE]

Wow. Color me impressed.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Why would you disenfranchise all those people? Are you assuming that they'll screw up the election? Don't we all have the right to vote or not vote as we see fit?[/QUOTE]
He's not disenfranchising anyone; they're disenfranchising themselves.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']He's not disenfranchising anyone; they're disenfranchising themselves.[/quote]

So shouldn't they be given an opportunity to redeem themselves? Not everyone finished school and they don't really know their rights. Since this is a country that would rather discard the ignorant and less fortunate (unless they're unborn babies), why shouldn't we work to educate them?
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']He's not disenfranchising anyone; they're disenfranchising themselves.[/quote]

I was registered the first time at the DMV. Motor-voter legislation - very straightforward. If I hadn't been registered there, I probably would have used the internet to print a registration form and gather info.

Now let's see - if I didn't have a car or computer, I might not know where to start. Does that mean I was asking not to be registered?

[quote name='mykevermin']Because they'll vote Democrat, unlike the more...erm..."educated" folks out there.[/quote]

:lol:
 
[quote name='camoor']I was registered the first time at the DMV. Motor-voter legislation - very straightforward. If I hadn't been registered there, I probably would have used the internet to print a registration form and gather info.

Now let's see - if I didn't have a car or computer, I might not know where to start. Does that mean I was asking not to be registered?

:lol:[/quote]

Great point. Not everyone has reliable access to transportation and that can be a barrier to voting. Why disenfrancise them?
 
I don't understand why registering to vote is some separate step, really. As an attempt to keep fraud to a minimum, perhaps, but I don't understand why it doesn't essentially just come with the social security number and birth certificate. If you move from where you were born, then there might be another step to change your registration from that state to the one you're currently in, but other than that I don't get it.
 
Because the political parties (and state and federal governments by proxy) are the biggest perpetrators of election fraud. By adding more red tape, they can claim that you didn't register the proper way and throw your vote away without repercussions.
 
I have done political canvassing before, and let me tell you they have some pretty high quotas. I hate quotes but they have also been pretty understanding. Also you often work by yourself across town from other workers and supervisors, so they kind of have to have quotas to show that one is working. Otherwise, to when the director drops you off at a ped mall and says see you in 5 hours, almost anyone would be like, "alright work for an hour get coffee and read comics at the comic book store for 4." 10 dollars an hour to drink coffee and read comics.

Anyway my point is, ACORN was paying canvassers to resistor people to vote, and I am sure the had at least a "goal" for each day. If you are having a rough time or lazy, then one would see the appeal of walking up to homeless man and asking them to fill out a few voter registration forms in exchange for a little coin.

So McCain's huge scandal probably went like this.

-16-18 (or older) needs job
-sees flyer for canvassing
-gets hired
-dropped off miles away from any other workers/supervisors
-workers realizes that its hard and takes patience to get a people to register
-realizes other workers/supervisors are miles away.
-makes up names and addresses and ask a few 15 year olds, friends and homeless to do the same
-smokes cigarettes on the curb
-comes back with his goal and then some
 
[quote name='gareman']I have done political canvassing before, and let me tell you they have some pretty high quotas. I hate quotes but they have also been pretty understanding. Also you often work by yourself across town from other workers and supervisors, so they kind of have to have quotas to show that one is working. Otherwise, to when the director drops you off at a ped mall and says see you in 5 hours, almost anyone would be like, "alright work for an hour get coffee and read comics at the comic book store for 4." 10 dollars an hour to drink coffee and read comics.

Anyway my point is, ACORN was paying canvassers to resistor people to vote, and I am sure the had at least a "goal" for each day. If you are having a rough time or lazy, then one would see the appeal of walking up to homeless man and asking them to fill out a few voter registration forms in exchange for a little coin.

So McCain's huge scandal probably went like this.

-16-18 (or older) needs job
-sees flyer for canvassing
-gets hired
-dropped off miles away from any other workers/supervisors
-workers realizes that its hard and takes patience to get a people to register
-realizes other workers/supervisors are miles away.
-makes up names and addresses and ask a few 15 year olds, friends and homeless to do the same
-smokes cigarettes on the curb
-comes back with his goal and then some[/quote]

Exactly.

Also, this may be far out there, but maybe there were some republicans that purposely set a plan in motion to come by and fill out fake cards to discredit ACORN and drag Obamas name around in the mud. I wouldn't be surprised.
 
[quote name='HowStern']Exactly.

Also, this may be far out there, but maybe there were some republicans that purposely set a plan in motion to come by and fill out fake cards to discredit ACORN and drag Obamas name around in the mud. I wouldn't be surprised.[/quote]


That wouldn't surprise me either. Also, how did the Republicans expect for all these people to actually vote on Nov. 4? You still need an ID or something of the sorts to vote and all these fake people aren't going to show up just to throw a wrench in the whole plan. There's going to be alot of registered voters that don't vote because some kid didn't want to actually canvas a neighborhood or put any sort of effort in.
 
bread's done
Back
Top