Link
Link
Link
It's been going on for a very long time. Most infamously was the not-so-secret voter fraud that delivered Illinois, and the Presidency, to John Kennedy in 1960.
Democracy depends on two things: the integrity of the vote, and the willingness of the populace to accept it's outcome. Without both, democracy is but a talking point for civics class.
It is up to the elected and appointed officials to guarantee and honest, integral vote. But most importantly, it is up to electorate to defend their own elections by holding officials accountable.
Al Gore almost got away with the stealing of Florida in 2000. In a surprising move to me, the Republican voting public rose up in anger, near riot in a few instances, over what was going on. As a result, Al Gore was foiled, but not until after a long court battle.
Republican voters, generally, tend to be naive 'play by the rules' people not as prone to such shenanigans, but I suspect the memory of 2000 is still strong.
Strong enough, maybe, that the current attempts of the Obama left to steal the vote in important swing states will not be met quietly on election day.
One can only hope.
But don't hope too much.
Republicans are notorious for selling out their voters in appeasement to some interest group on the left in the hope of luring a few of them their way next time.
And Republican leadership is notorious for letting elections be stolen.
But this year is different. The fraud is all out the open this year. It's not just the Chicago of lore. It's every where. And has been. But now is different because everybody knows it.
Whoever wins will still lose as these accusations become further documented.
Tell me again how we are supposed to bring democracy to the world when we can't even keep it for ourselves.
Tell me how President ObaMcain is going to lecture Syria, The Palestinians, Korea, or Russia about the legitimacy of free and fair elections.
Can we even call it democracy while keeping a straight face? Are we gonna keep fooling ourselves about it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
For that matter, since when have we had credibility as long as Barack Hussein Daley and his cronies are still in office?
its bigger than that.
Yup, but it's not a coincidence that Al Gore's campaign manager was Bill Daley, brother of the mayor. One of the big portions of the problem is host to Da Bears, I'm sad to say.
Republicans are hardly the innocent fuzzy bunnies on this that you make them out to be. I can match you link for link with stories about right wing shenanigans. But its not really important.
The reason the vote fraud/suppression has gotten so much attention in the last two elections, and the '60 election, is because those are the only 3 presidential races since the beginning of the 20th century that have been close enough that it would have made any difference. Between 1900 and 1996 the winning candidate received 403 electoral votes on the average. At the moment this race is shaping up to be one of the historically common blowouts rather then an atypical squeaker like the last couple.
Maybe it will tighten up significantly in the next couple weeks, but if not then both sides are going to have to put away the 'we wuz robbed' meme for the next four years.
Formerly SA
link for link? doubt it. history is history.
republicans dont generally control the political infrastructure of large cities, and this is where the climate for such shenanigans is most fertile.
GOP tactic is to supress the vote. a little different than fraud itself.
You're correct about voter fraud (or actually registration fraud usually) vs voter suppression. But that's a difference in means, not intent or frequency.
Anyway, my general points stands. Any of these things would have to occur on an unimaginably massive scale by either side for them to matter in most elections.
Right wing voter shenanigans to match the Daley machine? You're going to have to come up with some examples for that one.
Yeah, I don't think stating equivalence makes it so. Maybe Democrats are better at certain things, but electoral honesty ain't one of them. The prevailing attitude, sometimes admitted, sometimes not, is that the ends of a better society justify the means. (But of course you're welcome to your opinion.)
Post a Comment