Crying Over Bottled Milk
The elections haven't even ended yet and already Democrats are crying over how it's being stolen by Republicans.
Mr. Palast does make a very good argument that Democratic voters are being targeted by these election laws. The only problem is he kind of skirts around the issue as to why these measures are disproportionately affecting Democratic voters.
1) The registration issue. As has been rather common place, and is even referred to in an earlier post, liberal leaning organizations have had a very checkered past with their fraudulent registrations. The fact that he admits that new legislation which requires registrants to prove who they are first will affect Democratic voting is just an indirect way of admitting that Dems rely on the votes of such people as Daffy Duck and Dick Tracy to win their seats.
2)ID requirement. This pretty much is the same as #1. Democrats hate it when people are required to have a valid ID in order to vote. It greatly reduces the number of dead voters as well as multiple votes so therefore they are firmly set against it. Even in cases where the ID would be delivered to your door and fully funded by the state governments they oppose it. If nothing else, opposition to having to ID yourself is the best indicator of which party wants fair elections, in my humble opinion.
3)Spoiled ballots. This is quite simply a ridiculous argument. If the law requires a vote to appear a certain way to be legal then thats the law. Complaining that your constituents don't have the intelligence required to properly fill out a ballot in their district is why there are review processes prior to election day. Dumbing down the system to the lowest common denominator because that just happens to be where the vast majority of your followers happen to reside doesn't help anyone. It may seem harsh but if people don't have the ability to fill out a simple ballot then maybe they shouldn't be voting.
Mr. Palast does make a very good argument that Democratic voters are being targeted by these election laws. The only problem is he kind of skirts around the issue as to why these measures are disproportionately affecting Democratic voters.
1) The registration issue. As has been rather common place, and is even referred to in an earlier post, liberal leaning organizations have had a very checkered past with their fraudulent registrations. The fact that he admits that new legislation which requires registrants to prove who they are first will affect Democratic voting is just an indirect way of admitting that Dems rely on the votes of such people as Daffy Duck and Dick Tracy to win their seats.
2)ID requirement. This pretty much is the same as #1. Democrats hate it when people are required to have a valid ID in order to vote. It greatly reduces the number of dead voters as well as multiple votes so therefore they are firmly set against it. Even in cases where the ID would be delivered to your door and fully funded by the state governments they oppose it. If nothing else, opposition to having to ID yourself is the best indicator of which party wants fair elections, in my humble opinion.
3)Spoiled ballots. This is quite simply a ridiculous argument. If the law requires a vote to appear a certain way to be legal then thats the law. Complaining that your constituents don't have the intelligence required to properly fill out a ballot in their district is why there are review processes prior to election day. Dumbing down the system to the lowest common denominator because that just happens to be where the vast majority of your followers happen to reside doesn't help anyone. It may seem harsh but if people don't have the ability to fill out a simple ballot then maybe they shouldn't be voting.
posted by Bic at 5:36 p.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home