Democrats Worried SCOTUS Ruling Could Hamper Their Election Stealing Efforts
April 29th, 2008 at 12:29pm Matt Margolis
It’s such a horrible thing, isn’t it? To have to prove you are who you are in order to vote! How dare anyone ask such a horrible thing!
But seriously, if you believe in honest and fair elections, you should be happy about yesterday’s ruling… But it appears that the Democrats aren’t happy.
Democratic insiders fear that a number of states, particularly in the Midwest and South, will copy the Indiana law now that the Supreme Court has upheld it. “There’s the concern for our side that it can spread, other states can do what Indiana did,” said a Democratic strategist. “You may see a lot more of this now.”
That’s right. A lot more “one person, one vote” will ultimately result from the ruling and a lot of “one person, multiple votes” or “one dead person, one vote” will disappear.
Yesterday’s ruling protects my vote from being cancelled out by a fraudulent vote. The same goes for all of you. I can’t tell you how crazy it made me in recent elections when I’ve voted and I’ve never been asked to prove who I was. I’ve offered to show my ID to poll workers and been refused. There’s just something wrong with that.
Entry Filed under: Supreme Court
48 Comments Add your own
1. Canadian Observer | April 29th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Why is the U.S. election process so bloody long, complicated and so easy to manipulate?
Other democracies do not seem to have the problems associated with electing a leader as y’all do.
Perhaps it’s time to take a good look at a broken system and make some long overdue changes.
2. Magnum Serpentine | April 29th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
I too am concerned with the republican controlled Supreme court judicial activist imposing a Poll tax on the poor (who normally vote Democratic) to keep them from voting this fall.
3. OhioOrrin | April 29th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
does a person have a right to remain anonymous under any circumstance?
if the answer is no, then the argument is reduced to defining in which circumstance(s) ID is required.
my middle sch daughter had to prove her identity & age to play league softball.
course this was the same daughter who read then followed the instructions & sucessfully voted 4 me using the dreaded punch ballot WHEN SHE WAS IN 5TH GRADE!
voting is more significant than softball.
4. Rich | April 29th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Magnum- You are a joke. Calling it a poll tax repeatedly does not make it so. Go to family video and rent a movie and you will be required to show identification or you don’t get to rent. Proving you are who you say you are is an important part of society. You can get free i.d. cards in many places. Also, you could use your rebate check to get an i.d. card if you can’t afford one.
5. Matt Margolis | April 29th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
I wish the lefties here could be more creative and use something other than ridiculous DNC talking points to explain why people shouldn’t be required to have an ID to vote.
6. Timothy Horrigan | April 29th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
The big problem with elections isn’t who votes… it’s how the votes are counted.
In most cases, voters vote in small neighborhood precincts, and the precincts are run by people who take a fair amount of pride in running fair elections and who know who belongs and who doesn’t. And both major parties get to send a roughly equal number of election workers, even though a plurality of voters are independents. It would be risky sending in totally bogus voters. The ID requirement is only useful as an initimidation factor.
7. Chuckg | April 29th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Dude, I live in Chicago, home of ‘vote early and vote often’.
Yes, some precincts are indeed neighborhood affairs with honest vote counting. I used to work in one. But I could go ten miles over and find you places…
Suffice it to say, I entirely support anything that throws a monkey wrench into efforts to vote the graveyard, or mass-register people who aren’t actualy eligible to vote.
8. Democrats Worried SCOTUS &hellip | April 29th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
[…] Jonathan Singer wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt… prove you are who you are in order to vote! How dare anyone ask such a horrible thing! But seriously, if you believe in honest and fair elections, you should be happy about yesterday’s ruling… But it appears that the Democrats … […]
9. Carl Gordon | April 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
All stale and desperate rhetoric. McCain’s rigorous (perhaps intentionally) mind numbing ethnographic collage of disjointed people, places, ideas, and excuses disguised as discoveries, collectively encompass humanity’s innate desire for escapism, commutation, and euphoria, as it is ironically rumored he secretly prays for and yearns for damnation, an implicitly tragic reunion with the checkered demons of his lost humanity, who led him internally most of his inutile adult life in a fog of substance abuse and denial (he still won’t cop to the anal rape incident in prison).
It affords him nowhere to hide existentially, so the pathetic buggerer hides beneath his wife’s skirt. The question is how low is he willing to go for “victory” or, for that matter, can he go lower? Will he end up a pasty Reagan-like figure, hopelessly trying to gain some semblance of integrity and significance selling spoiled meat in cans, or will he obssess creep-like on pseudo-projections of female pudenda as it relates to overgrown “bush” in some backwater pisshole in Texas, no longer concerned nor troubling himself with how far he has fallen, like the current dickless moron presently residing in the dank and primordial swamp.
10. Casper | April 29th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
So here is a simple idea. Create a voter ID and don’t charge people for it.
11. extramedium | April 29th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
How about a Supreme Court Justice talking point:
It was pretty clear to the Justices, and anyone else who’s observing the case, that the motivation for this bill was a partisan one. Even so, there was no reason to strike it down, so the court upheld it.
So the Republicans won one - and if their tactic works, some amount of potential Democrats will be shut out of the voting process. This sort of “win at all costs” sentiment saddens me, but fair is fair. I’m sure the Dems will come up with their own tactics to counter it.
All this other chatter about some moral victory in stamping out non-existent voter fraud is just silly noise. Call a spade a spade, stop gloating and move on.
12. OhioOrrin | April 29th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
I forgot to ask the last cop who wanted my ID whether he was GOP or Dem.
voting’s more important than a speeding ticket.
13. js | April 29th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
what i was wondering was…do these dead people just vote for national elections…or do they get to vote for grave keepers too…i mean…it a democratic thing…you know…the right to vote for equal representation and stuff…for the guy that mows around your head stone…
14. SEW | April 29th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
9. Carl Gordon | April 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Carl, are you related to DP? Similar writing style. Quite an opening “sentence.” Too bad many readers here are from flyover country and not educated enough to understand such a remarkable post.
15. Peach Tree | April 29th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Voting is a RIGHT not a privilege. It is apples to oranges when comparing it to fishing, hunting or driving a car. Only convicts give up that right when behind bars.
If a state wants to do this they should be free of charge and provisional ballots should be awarded until id is provided. There should be no Florida 2000 or Ohio 2004 style turning away of voters.
God save us from the Cons and the activist SCOTUS
16. Diana Powe | April 29th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
The terrible problem the Indiana law was intended to remedy (emphasis added):
Well and good, Justice Stephens (by the way, stay away from any crème brûlée from Ann “Rat Poison” Coulter), but what about those historical examples? Can you put them in the footnotes of the opinion?
Why, yes. In footnote 11 we have the reputed words of an underling of William (Boss) Tweed from 1868 about voting “repeaters” needing to have whiskers. Umm. Anything more current? Oh, wait. Footnote 12 says that the trial judge noted “examples from California, Washington, Maryland, Wisconsin, Georgia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Miami, and St. Louis” but also noted that an amicus brief pointed out that “much of the fraud was actually absentee ballot fraud or voter registration fraud” yet “there remain scattered instances of in-person voter fraud”. Ah ha. Now, we’re getting down to cases. What about those “scattered cases”? Well, one, actually…in Washington State. Good thing those Indiana legislators were on the job to prevent this rampant lawlessness.
17. Magnum Serpentine | April 29th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Rich,
I will call it what it is. its a Poll tax and nothing else designed by the republicans to keep the poor from voting. There are only a few states with free id and most other states charge greater than 25 bucks. Many poor would rather pay for food than pay the poll tax.
Its a poll tax.
18. OhioOrrin | April 29th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
diana - successful voter fraud wouldn’t be detected.
then there’s this - mass confidence in voting stops the revolution.
lastly, do tell me who votes, tell me who counts the votes or please pass the hanging chad.
19. Zach | April 29th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
“diana - successful voter fraud wouldn’t be detected.”
Thats kinda what I was thinking OhioOrrin..
How is voter fraud by false ID detected? It seems to me that showing an ID to vote is a legit idea. I think stating that this is a partisan move is really quite a stretch.
20. Zach | April 29th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
“Good thing those Indiana legislators were on the job to prevent this rampant lawlessness.”
You know Diana, being a resident of Indiana, I feel slightly offended by this smart-ass comment.
21. neocon | April 29th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
CO,
RE: post #1. America is by far the most successful democracy in the history of the planet, yet you now feel the need to make changes to our election process, because it “takes” to long. For who?
Do me a favor, stay in, and worry about Canada. We don’t care what you think.
22. neocon | April 29th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Magnum,
Aren’t liberal all about helping the poor? How about pooling resources to buy ID cards for those folks who can’t afford it? What better way to actually demonstrate liberal compassion than by providing ID cards for those lees unfortunate and obvious victims of the eeeevil republicans?
Great way to get more votes. I mean you’re already buying the votes now, what’s a few more bucks?
23. js | April 29th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
lol
so, if getting a false ID is all it takes to vote….let the demoncrats get caught at that next…it will only go to show to what they will do to steal elections…
24. felix the cat | April 29th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
What all of you posters are missing in this thread is the operative words: “Election stealing”. Do these words portend that the only way a democrat can win an election is through deciet? Do these words portend that IF a democrat wins an election it is because he or she somehow manipulated the system and in reality a Republican should have won? If the later were true we would not have the Diebold issues surrounding the last presidential election would we??? Talk about deciet and manipulation…The operators of this blog are myopic authoritarian zealots who capitolize on the “see I told you so” justification for any and all disrepute exibited towards those that they demonize out of fear and paranoia. They dispise the fairness of the democratic process of electing officials be it a dog catcher or a president. And yet they taught it so highly as being quintessentially “American” and “constitutional”. And yet when things do not go their way the other side has somehow cheated.
Democrats stealing elections. Give me a break you eunich jelly thou….
25. Canadian Observer | April 29th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
CO,
you now feel the need to make changes to our election process, because it “takes” to long.
21. neocon | April 29th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Not only does it take too long, neocon, but there seems to be all these problems with voting machines, ballots, ID’s and of course there’s Matt’s contention of the one person-multiple votes, one dead person-one vote scenario.
If the system is so wonderful, why so many complaints from the voting public?
26. Brian | April 29th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Could it be that John McCain’s stay in the Vietnamese POW camp had a destructive effect on his cognitive thought processes? Is it possible that he is too old to remember why he cares very little for the welfare of America?
Go to the following URL for the full story.
http://seedburst.com/?page_id=35
27. neocon | April 29th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
felix,
Congrats. I was wondering how long it would take for some liberal to mention diebold. You didn’t let me down. Funny how in 2006, there was not one mention of voter fraud by either side. Can you guess why that might be felix?
CO,
So you have definitively claimed that the election cycle is too long. Quite an assertion from someone who has been alive for maybe 25% of our POTUS elections, and that’s only if you’re in your 60’s. Secondly, the number of people that complain about the process is maybe 5%. So in your opinion, a successful system that has been in place for over 200 years should be scrapped to appease 5% of the population and the “perception” of time.
Typical liberal.
28. phnx | April 29th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Voter ID is a good start, but that won’t stop vote fraud in big cities like Philly. During the last election one of the polling places was in the office of Dem State Senator Vince Fumo!!!!
Corruption will continue as long as the time honored tradition of WAM is continued. For the uninitiated this is “walking around money given by Dem precint captains to “get out the vote” Its a form of legalize bribery.
http://vocuspr.vocus.com/VocusPR30/ViewNewsOnDemand.aspx?ArticleID=100043_24093_19104243&Preview=true
In the inner cities where the Dem machines run the process, the vote fraud and corruption will continue. As Stalin said “It’s who counts the votes that matters”. The Dems have been schooled well by their predecesors.
BTW: DEMOCRAT State Senator and noted Philadelphia power broker Fumo is now under indictment for fraud and corruption.
http://inquirer.philly.com/rss/News/2007fumopressrelease.pdf
29. William Teach | April 29th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Oh, goody, Brian is going Barking Moonbat.
Interestingly, the Libs have been whining non-stop about voter fraud and such since they lost in 2000. There are still threads that pop up quite frequently at the DU, and some sites such as The Brad Blog are almost primarily about this stuff.
Yet, what have they done to at least limit fraud? Bueller? Bueller?
What’s that you say? Virtually nothing? Who knew?
30. Kahn | April 29th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
CO actually is in agreement with many liberals. Thats the way they feel about the constitution.
“It takes too long and its too hard to change. So let’s read up as down and green as purple and make the words say whatever we want them to say.”
The same part that says a fetus isn’t human said that blacks were not human and locked up Japanese in internment camps. That would be… the DEMOCRAT Party.
31. Diana Powe | April 29th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
Oh? If you search for a polling place using the Pennsylvania Secretary of State’s website and put in an address in the same block it doesn’t show the address of the Senator’s office.
32. Gaijin | April 30th, 2008 at 12:46 am
Casper proposes a rather easy solution in post number 10.
NeoCon,
“So you have definitively claimed that the election cycle is too long. Quite an assertion from someone who has been alive for maybe 25% of our POTUS elections, and that’s only if you’re in your 60’s.”
What do you mean by this? Do you need to have been around for the majority of POTUS elections to comment on it? So you would need to be what, about 150 years old? This is a moronic statement.
“Secondly, the number of people that complain about the process is maybe 5%. So in your opinion, a successful system that has been in place for over 200 years should be scrapped to appease 5% of the population and the “perception” of time.”
5%? Where did you get this figure? You completely pulled it out of your ass. Nice debating skills there champ! It’s like watching an 8 year old try to take part in the adults’ debate. Keep tryin!
No one has advocated “scrapping the system.” It does, however, need to be reformed. McCain even agrees with that, just look at his Campaign Finance law. I don’t agree with McCain on everything, but I did agree with him there.
Making up facts out of thin air and not being able to construct a coherent arguement…Typical Conservative.
Peace, Gaijin
33. dickvee | April 30th, 2008 at 2:28 am
There were several thousand more votes in Milwaukee last time, than the count of the people who voted. Now the dems think I.D’s are a bad idea…so no Gaijin, you are not correct. I don’t wish for lying dem fraud to be canceling my vote. Those certainly weren’t Repubs, as proven by the investigation of the names and addresses. Same thing in Washington State by the Acorn people…and I do mean NUTS.
34. Freedom1 | April 30th, 2008 at 4:32 am
Aaaaaaaah, now DEAD people won’t be able to vote!
The Audacity of Voter Fraud - Obama’s Connections to ACORN
John Fund, Wall Street Journal:
35. js | April 30th, 2008 at 8:04 am
Im not sure about ACORN in other locations, but in Florida, its about Hispanics, I could not more imagine ACORN in Miami being guilty of the same thing in ohter places…and Miami was a major foothold for the demoncrat’s in Florida….it all comes out in the laundry they say…and all that about stealing the election….what a farce…
36. phnx | April 30th, 2008 at 8:13 am
DP you are such a leftist tool. Read what I said, in the LAST election Fumo’s office was a polling station. You could verify this by googling “Fumo polling station”.
Let me help you out here:
http://www.seventy.org/electioninfo/news/1106/bellyupphillybars.html
Pretty weak on your part leftist
37. phnx | April 30th, 2008 at 8:48 am
js In Philly there has been a long tradition of intimidation at the polls, but not voter intimidation. The intimidation has been directed at Republican poll watchers. In many heavily dem areas, republican poll watchers are physically intimidated and preventing from observing the elections. This is done to perpetuate the fraud that has been part of Philadelphia electoral process.
Here is just one documented case:
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVarticle.asp?ID=21349&pid=1216
Here is another:
http://www.texasrainmaker.com/2004/11/05/election-day-behind-enemy-lines/
38. Diana Powe | April 30th, 2008 at 9:13 am
phnx,
Thanks for the gratuitous insult (which I won’t return). I didn’t notice anything in your comment about the fact that any change in practice had taken place and I don’t live in Pennsylvania so I don’t normally keep up with changes in Pennsylvania law.
It was also quite apparent that the implication of your comment, festooned with not one, not two, but four exclamation points, was that it was something peculiar to Vince Fumo when, in fact, apparently it was common practice. I would therefore assume that this meant that in the last election some people probably cast ballots in the offices of Republican office seekers.
39. phnx | April 30th, 2008 at 11:04 am
There you go ASSuming DP without any basis for you ASSumption.
Polling places are selectyed by the election committee, dominated by DEMS. There are no Repbluican majority districts in Philly so no polling places in “Republican locations” much less, Republican political offices.
So you ASSumption is wrong…again.
The change in the law, which took place in November 2006, AFTER the last election does nothinkn to address poll watcher intimidation. So DEM vote fraud will continue unabated in Philadelphia.
As an law enforcemnet officer, you should be opposed to such egregious breaches in the legal system, which compromise our electoral process.
But then again you are a leftist, so that explains why DEM vote fraud doesn’t faze you.
40. Diana Powe | April 30th, 2008 at 11:18 am
phnx,
When there are actual instances of voter fraud, by either party, instead of partisan allegations then, by all means, they should be pursued. It’s called the rule of law which is something that the Administration isn’t generally very interested in if it gets in the way of their partisan agenda. The current example, of course, is the embarrassing firing of Lurita Doan yesterday as head of the Government Services Administration after her Congressional testimony revealed her asking her subordinates after a White House presentation about Republican political prospects in the then-upcoming 2006 election, “How can we help our candidates?” That’s called violating the Hatch Act.
41. phnx | April 30th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
The Diana Powe MO…whenever faced with facts that can’t be refuted…change the subject.
Nice try leftist.
These are allegations against Doan. But that’s not important to you leftists, its the seriousness of the charge that counts, right???
Has she been indicted?…NO
Has Doan been convicted?..NO
Until then deal with the topic of voter fraud at hand or start your own blog…. leftist.
42. SEW | April 30th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Certainly DP never felt motorists needed drivers licenses or registration ID when policing the streets in Richardson. No need for proof of insurance. Right DP? And if not, did you tell them that was OK, or take them to jail, and or issue multiple tickets and take them to jail?
Clearly the Dems want to continue with the voter fraud racket. Clearly Sharpton, Wright and Jackson want to continue with the easy money highly lucrative race card business.
Dem voter fraud must stop.
43. OhioOrrin | April 30th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
wait a minute, I wandered into the wrong place.
cause I got my dk, er ck in hand & I’m lookin to buy dat good chinese crap, yes I am!
and don’t ask 4 my ID !
44. js | April 30th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
only a putz would think that dead people voting is legal…they dont have to violate the hatch act, and they been votin for demoncrats for decades now…just dig up you great grandads corpse and haul him up to the poll station, see if you get away with it…tryin to debate that with putz’s is like puttin tuna on apple pie…
45. yesterday&hellip | May 1st, 2008 at 12:06 pm
[…] if you believe in honest and fair elections, you should be happy about yesterday??s ruling?? But ithttp://blogsforvictory.com/2008/04/29/democrats-worried-scotus-ruling-could-hamper-their-election-st…Yesterday - Google Books Resultby Fern Michaels - 2001 - Fiction In "Yesterday", a sultry […]
46. Kindra&hellip | June 5th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
software
software
47. scotus&hellip | June 13th, 2008 at 1:16 am
[…] if you believe in honest and fair elections, you should be happy about yesterday??s ruling?? But ithttp://blogsforvictory.com/2008/04/29/democrats-worried-scotus-ruling-could-hamper-their-election-st…Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer, and Feld: SCOTUS BlogSCOTUSblog is the US Supreme Court weblog, […]
48. Vic&hellip | July 14th, 2008 at 3:25 am
ovulation+calendar
ovulation+calendar
Leave a Comment
Please report any inappropriate or abusive comments to abuse@blogsforvictory.com. Please include the blog entry title and the comment number.
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed