Voting concerns for the upcoming election

Post by **Padme** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:12 pm

I have just also read that she made it up. The police said the backward B was an probably the best indicator that she made it up.

Post by **River** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:21 pm

Yeah, I noticed that in a pic I saw of her. It also looked very healed. The shiner was a bit...off too. Maybe just the way the camara did it. But I've bashed up my face a couple times and treated assault victims and that kind of bruising usually comes with more swelling (of course, if she took ibuprofen by the fistful that could help, and it depends on many days had passed between injury and photograph).

There're some really weird people out there.

Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:28 pm

What a sad story. I agree that she needs to be prosecuted for falsely reporting a crime, but the level of desperation that this shows really saddens me. What a depressing reminder of just how terrified some people genuinely are of the prospect of an Obama presidency.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:35 pm

That it was seized on so eagerly in some quarters in the media is also a bit dismaying.

Earlier today, John Moody, executive vice president at Fox News, commented on his blog there that "this incident could become a watershed event in the 11 days before the election. If Ms. Todd's allegations are proven accurate, some voters may revisit their support for Senator Obama, not because they are racists (with due respect to Rep. John Murtha), but because they suddenly feel they do not know enough about the Democratic nominee.

"If the incident turns out to be a hoax, Senator McCain's quest for the presidency is over, forever linked to race-baiting."

Link

That's some hyperbole I imagine he regrets now.

Post by **River** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:39 pm

It seems odd to me that, true or not, an incident like this could turn an election. Are candidates responsible for the actions of crazed supporters? I'm not about to hold her against McCain, nor would I have held her attacker against Obama if he existed. Some people are just nuts.

I wonder how the Obama campaign is feeling about issuing a condemnation of the attack last night?

Post by **ToshoftheWuffingas** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 9:01 pm

Unless she was prompted to do this of course. Is there a story waiting here perhaps?

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 9:08 pm

I can't imagine that, Tosh. If someone related to the campaign would stoop so low (please note that I don't believe it), they'd probably have done a better job of faking the event.

I don't think the Obama campaign has anything to regret. They deplored what appeared to have happened, and that was appropriate.

Post by **River** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 9:50 pm

If this was indeed campaign-directed, they deserve to lose on the grounds of sheer stupidity. And whoever came up with the idea will hopefully never work in the political campaign business again on the grounds that they are a moron.

But in absence of evidence to the contrary I'm content with the lone nut theory.

Post by **yovargas** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:45 pm

*adds to the pile of utter non-stories of this election*

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:50 pm

I have to agree, yov. But we were discussing it as a possible incident of voter suppression. This one was faked, but there are real ones, and that is a story.

Post by **Cerin** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:52 pm

Primula Baggins wrote:
Earlier today, John Moody, executive vice president at Fox News, commented on his blog there that "this incident could become a watershed event in the 11 days before the election. If Ms. Todd's allegations are proven accurate, some voters may revisit their support for Senator Obama, not because they are racists (with due respect to Rep. John Murtha), but because they suddenly feel they do not know enough about the Democratic nominee.

"If the incident turns out to be a hoax, Senator McCain's quest for the presidency is over, forever linked to race-baiting."
Link

That's some hyperbole I imagine he regrets now.

No kidding! How on earth would such an attack indicate to someone that they didn't know enough about the Demcratic nominee? That has all sorts of unsavory implications. And the idea that it would end McCain's quest is equally absurd.

Post by **yovargas** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:55 pm

Primula Baggins wrote:I have to agree, yov. But we were discussing it as a possible incident of voter suppression. This one was faked, but there are real ones, and that is a story.

I mean, yeah, but it's so odd to me that anybody would have made a national story about some lone nut case. It's not like it was being reported as some epidemic or something! Weird.

Post by **Frelga** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 10:56 pm

That poor disturbed woman.

Still, I don't see why it should affect either candidate, even if it were true. Neither candidate can be held responsible for what a lone crazy person, or a single mugger had this been true, decides to do. We all know that there are loonies on both sides of the election.

ETA: x-posted with Yov. I understand that some conservative news outlets made a big story out of the alleged attack. So it is only appropriate that the true story is widely heard.

Post by **yovargas** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:00 pm

(When I said "lone nut case" I meant the mugger in the original story.

)

Post by **Frelga** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:10 pm

And when I said loonies on both sides, I meant supporters, not candidates.

P.S.: the Twitter name for this story is Obama Zorro.

Sat Oct 25, 2008 7:50 pm

Now that the Ohio Republican Party has failed in its attempt to compel the state's Secretary of State to review new registrations through the court's they have turned to the executive branch. House Minority leader John Boehner has had President Bush forward his request for investigation to the Justice Department (after Attorney General Mukasey apparently ignored Boehner's direct appeal to him). There is no indication yet whether the Justice Department investigation will lead anywhere.

Justice Dept. asked to probe Ohio voter records

Meanwhile, some stunning news regarding ACORN's registration drive. According to the New York Times, their claim to have registered 1.3 million new voters was wildly inflated. In fact, they have only registered 450,000 new voters. What blows my mind is that they had 400,000 that were rejected by election officials for a variety of reasons. Thus, barely more than 50% of their registrations passed muster, a stunningly low figure.

Group’s Tally of New Voters Was Vastly Overstated

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:06 pm

Just an arithmetic note: They did apparently turn in 1.3 million registrations. 450,000 were registered new voters, 400,000 were rejected, and the remainder (another 450,000 if my math is right) were voters re-registering at a new address.

So the rejection rate was 35%, not almost 50%. Still not good.

Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:41 pm

Thanks for the correction, Prim. Although its not clear from the article if the 400,000 rejects were all supposed to be new registrations. Either way, it does show how faulty the ACORN operation is.

Take another look at that Times article, I noticed an item that connected the two stories that I linked to. The article mentioned that the Obama campaign's general counsel also wrote to Mukasey, stating that he was worried that Republican operatives would pressure the Justice Department into improperly involving itself in the election. That is perhaps the worst affect of ACORN's improprieties; they have provided a wedge issue to question the legitamacy of an Obama victory (particularly if the election is close in some swing states) where there need not be.

The article also makes it clear that election officials in at least some states have found many more potentially fraudulent registratiosn than the ones that ACORN flagged.

Finally, the article also discusses an investigation here in California into a Republican group that allegedly has been tricking voters into registering Republican. No charges have been made as of yet.

Post by **Frelga** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:43 pm

Yeah, not a great success rate.

Still, I have questions that the article doesn't answer. For instance, how many of the rejected registrations did ACORN flag as suspect. How many of the forms were rejected for clerical reasons and how many were clearly fraudulent. What is the typical percentage of rejected registrations, both from individuals registering themselves and making errors on the form, and from other organizations. In other words, just how outstandingly bad is the ACORN's record.

I do agree with the point that paying people to register voters, and especially paying people who do not have a very good track record, is just asking for trouble.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:54 pm

Those are excellent questions, Frelga. But given the number of different jurisdictions and procedures involved, I doubt it would be possible to get clear answers.

Fun fact: North Dakota has no voter registration. Every legal resident can vote.

Voronwë, I am increasingly hopeful (knock wood) that the margin of the election will be beyond question. There may still be individual states where the vote is close enough that voter registration fraud or voter suppression could affect the outcome for the state. But there won't be enough doubtful states to affect the result of the presidential election. I feel fairly confident, ten days out with no "game changer" in sight, that this prediction will be correct.

I think the excitement of a possible landslide will actually help energize Obama voters to get out and be part of it. It already seems to be.