Sometimes the Daily Show Just Nails It

No one is defending this guy...he's an embarrassment. At least republicans aren't shy about cleaning house when these things come to light.

Joe changed the conversation to Voter ID...which should be a national law (imo).

 

When we actually have a problem with people voting fraudulently and it reaches the point where it could actually sway the outcome of an election, voter ID or some such measure will be championed by me personally. But as this thread points out very clearly, voter ID laws are not designed to deter fraudulent voters as much as they are designed to disenfranchise large numbers of poor, elderly, and young voters that primarily vote Democrat. This guy openly admitted as much and he isn't the only one that has done so. How many prominent GOP members is going to take before you believe that this is the intent of the laws not catching voter fraud? Republicans simply can't win in an honest election anymore so they have to rig the vote. This is their last gasp.

 

I love how you can think for all Republicans - or at least think you can. Not designed to deter fraud? Ask Franken. Ask Daley? Oh, hell, just ask Kennedy (if you can)?

 

1 case of voter fraud, when it can be prevented, is too many.
It sounds as if lil joe agrees voter ID's will curb voter fraud, he just doesn't think fraud exists to the degree he considers it a problem. Well, when should it be addressed? After a round of elections that were determined by fraudulent votes? Didn't the Franken election teach you anything, lil joe? The truth of the matter, though, is the dims know they can't consistently win elections if everything is on the up & up.

 

Ha ha ha ha ha ha... What a bunch of FOX sheeple!

Al Franken stole the election? Prove it or shut up

The recount shows that he won the Minnesota Senate race. The lying liars who say otherwise have no evidence of cheating.

By Joe Conason



If Al Franken were not a longtime public figure — and thus severely handicapped by American jurisprudence — he could file a powerful complaint for libel or slander against several of the most prominent wingnuts in the United States. From Rush Limbaugh to Bill O’Reilly to Richard Mellon Scaife, a chorus of familiar voices is loudly defaming the Democrat whose razor-thin win in the Minnesota Senate race will now be tested in that state’s courts. Ever since Election Day, on radio and television, on the Internet and in print, they’ve screamed that Franken is stealing, rigging, pilfering, scamming, thieving and cheating his way to victory.
These media figures, some of whom occasionally pretend to be journalists, have spewed such accusations repeatedly, without offering any proof whatsoever — in plain contradiction of the available facts. Not only is there no evidence that Franken or his campaign “cheated” in any way during the election or the recount, but there is ample reason to believe that the entire process was fair, balanced and free from partisan taint.
For Franken’s most famous adversaries, spewing lies about him may be a form of cheap revenge. A prime example is Fox News host O’Reilly, who has hated Franken for years, dating back to when the comedian and author berated him in a public debate, then exposed him in “Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them,” and ultimately provoked him into filing an ill-advised lawsuit that only generated vast amounts of free publicity for Franken’s book before the suit was thrown out of court. Of course O’Reilly was preceded by Limbaugh, that “big fat idiot” whose deceptions and bigotry were featured in the comedian’s first bestselling book way back in 1996.
advertisement
So Limbaugh, quoting an erroneous editorial from the Wall Street Journal, has been ranting about the supposed theft of the Minnesota election for months now. “We did not elect Al Franken,” he told a caller on Jan. 5. “He stole the race. They are stealing the race up there blind in front of everybody’s nose. They are counting absentee ballots [which election officials are required to do by law]. … They’re counting votes twice — votes that were rejected, all kinds of things [which election officials ordered after determining that some votes were rejected wrongly]. That’s just — the Democrats are stealing the election up there.” Even the Journal’s tendentious and sloppy screeds have never quite accused Franken of “stealing” the race or the recount. Rush just made that part up.
On Jan. 7, O’Reilly hosted an appearance by Dick Morris, the former Clinton consultant who lost his job for consorting with a prostitute and has gone into business selling himself to the highest Republican bidder. Aside from Fox News, Morris seems to appear with the greatest frequency on Newsmax.com, the popular right-wing Web site owned by Scaife and operated by Christopher Ruddy, a journalist known mainly for his fanciful theories about the Vince Foster suicide.
“Al Franken — you think he’s cheating?” intoned O’Reilly, as if he didn’t know the answer.
“Yeah, I think there’s funny business — funny business going on in Franken’s thing,” replied Morris, as if he knew exactly what he was talking about. “Sure, he’s cheating, and sure that Minnesota’s doing it for him. I mean, there’s no question that there’s cheating going on … This is outright larceny. This is just a total theft.”
But he offered no evidence to support that incendiary accusation, on the O’Reilly broadcast or in the Newsmax column he published that same day, headlined “Stop Al Franken From Stealing the Election.” (That column included a link to the Republican National Lawyers Association, which is raising money to assist Coleman’s election lawsuit, with a direct endorsement from Morris.) Instead he complained about a few instances in which he disagrees with decisions by the Minnesota courts and election officials, and in particular with the special panel that oversaw the recount. How those disagreements amount to “cheating” or “stealing” by Franken he did not bother to explain.
All the usual suspects have echoed these false charges across the airwaves and the Internet. What they invariably neglect to mention is that the Minnesota Canvassing Board, whose decisions have so displeased the Republican right, was impeccably nonpartisan. Nobody in their right mind in Minnesota believes that the board was biased — and, in fact, Powerline blogger Scott Johnson, no friend of Democrats or Franken, has specifically spoken up to defend it. “There was no noticeable partisan division among the board,” he wrote. “Minnesotans are justifiably proud of the transparency and fairness of their work.”
Two of its five members are Supreme Court judges appointed by Tim Pawlenty, the state’s conservative Republican governor, each with a long record of loyal service to the GOP; a third is a nonpartisan elected judge; a fourth was appointed by former independent Gov. Jesse Ventura; and only one, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, is a Democrat. At the outset, Coleman’s own lawyers accepted the panel’s membership, as did everyone else, including Franken, who might have protested that his own party had only one member.
Their decisions against Coleman, which led to Franken’s provisional victory by 225 votes, were unanimous. It is this group, composed of distinguished judges with spotless reputations, whose hard work has been described in odious terms by the likes of Morris, Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.
Here’s a challenge to all those lying liars. In essence, they have accused my friend Franken of a felony under Minnesota law. If they know of any evidence that would show he has stolen votes or violated any election statute, let them report it to the state law enforcement authorities. And if they don’t, perhaps they will at last have the decency to shut up.

http://www.salon.com/2009/01/09/franken_5/

 

Well...you admit voter fraud exists...Franken only "won" by a "razor thin margin" "by the slightest of votes" and a "disputed" 225 votes...how much voter fraud do you think exists in a Senatorial election? How much fraud is acceptable?

Oh, and by the way, I don't put as much faith as you do in this opinion piece where the writer calls the subject his friend.

 

You have got to go back to 2009/01/09 to find a story about Franken, Mr. RB? WOW! How long did you have to look for that?
At least OKC's article was 2012/08/08 and his came from an actual news source.

 

No it didn't, it came from FOX which has nothing to do with "actual news". Besides they are citing a Minnesota conservative group with a shady past that has refused to provide evidence of their claim. So that must mean it is true? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

 

Minnesota Majority's Dan McGrath on voter ID failure: "Voter fraud likely played a role"

By Aaron Rupar Tue., Nov. 20 2012 at 10:45 AM


Had his amendment passed, we doubt McGrath would be crying 'voter fraud!'
Minnesota Majority, the main organization pushing the voter ID amendment that was defeated earlier this month, has never been able to cite a case of voter fraud voter ID would've prevented. But that uncomfortable fact isn't stopping Minnesota Majority executive director Dan McGrath from citing voter fraud as one of the main reasons the amendment was only supported by 46 percent of voters.

SEE ALSO: MNGOP Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer blames voter ID failure on "misinformation"

In a post published on the conservative True North blog, McGrath tackles the question of "Why Voter ID Failed." His answers? Money, misinformation, and the thing that gives him night sweats -- voter fraud.

From McGrath's post (emphasis mine):

Ultimately, money was the principle factor in the defeat of the Voter ID amendment. Initial post-election research now being conducted by Minnesota Majority indicates that voter fraud likely played a role, but voter fraud is only effective in a close election. It shouldn't have even been close. Despite the defeat of the constitutional amendment, the people of Minnesota clearly support requiring photo ID to vote, but were misled to believe that the constitutional amendment was an egregious way to accomplish it. With adequate resources to counter the lies and scare tactics of the opposition, Voter ID could have been ratified handily.​

​

Despite what McGrath says, the vote wasn't that close. More than 177,000 additional yes votes were needed to hit the 50 percent threshold. In order words, unless the number of fraudulent votes cast roughly equals the populations of Duluth and Bloomington combined, voter fraud was far from a decisive factor.

In his post, McGrath repeatedly cites "misinformation" as another reason the voter ID amendment went down, but at no point does he cite even one specific example of a false claim made by amendment opponents. On the other side of the spectrum, electoral experts are in wide agreement -- voter ID is a solution in search of a problem.

But as the Minnesota Progressive Project's Jeff Rosenberg writes, McGrath's latest preposterous statements are par for the course:

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. McGrath has been seeing the Voter Fraud boogieman everywhere for years; it's only natural that he should see his amendment's defeat as further vindication of his paranoia. And I suppose there's just as much evidence behind this charge as any of his previous allegations.​

​

McGrath and his compatriots will probably continue to make the circular argument that voter ID lost because of fraud, but they can't prove it without voter ID. But judging from the election results, which were not close, nobody buys the argument.​

​

As the leader of the main organization pushing the amendment, McGrath admits he "must assume blame" for voter ID's defeat. But McGrath's says the fight has just begun -- "Riding high on the defeat of Voter ID, election integriity [sic] foes are already laying plans to erode the integrity of Minnesota's election system even further," he writes.

'Election integrity foes'? Strong words coming from a guy who has spent five years using dishonest arguments to push a constitutional amendment that would be about as beneficial as a third wheel on my bike.

 

Shut up, Joe and stop being an idiot.

View attachment 2074
http://www.truethevote.org/news/how-widespread-is-voter-fraud-2012-facts-figures

 

Here's one example from your home state, Joe:

View attachment 2075

http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/254593/3/Swansea-man-sentenced-for-tax-evasion-voter-fraud

 

Did You Know There are Voter Fraud Convictions and Prosecutions in 46 States?

Check out cases of voter fraud in your state since 2000:

1. 2012 - Alabama
2. 2012 - Alaska
3. 2012 - Arizona
4. 2012 - Arkansas
5. 2012 - California
6. 2005 - Colorado
7. 2012 - Connecticut
8. 2012 - Florida
9. 2012 - Georgia
10. 2012 - Idaho
11. 2011 - Illinois
12. 2012 - Indiana
13. 2011 - Iowa
14. 2004 - Kansas
15. 2012- Kentucky
16. 2002 - Louisiana
17. 2012 - Maine
18. 2012 - Maryland
19. 2012 - Massachusetts
20. 2012 - Michigan
21. 2011 - Minnesota
22. 2011 - Mississippi
23. 2007 - Missouri
24. 2010 - Nebraska
25. 2011 - Nevada
26. 2009 - New Hampshire
27. 2010 - New Jersey
28. 2012 - New Mexico
29. 2011 - New York
30. 2012 - North Carolina
31. 2012 - North Dakota
32. 2012 - Ohio
33. 2010 - Oklahoma
34. 2010 - Oregon
35. 2009 - Pennsylvania
36. 2011 - Rhode Island
37. 2008 - South Carolina
38. 2003 - South Dakota
39. 2010 - Tennessee
40. 2012 - Texas
41. 2008 - Utah
42. 2012 - Virginia
43. 2012 - Washington
44. 2012 - West Virginia
45. 2012 - Wisconsin
46. 2000 - Wyoming

 

Seems like you're fighting a couple of different battles here, lil joe. You've already admitted voter fraud exists so why would you choose this piece of your post to highlight?

 

Truethevote, just another Right-wing group with a solution in search of a problem. How many GOP officials have admitted that voter ID will help them get their candidates elected now? Still no sign of any real voter fraud that would skew the election either way but there is a mountain of evidence that Democrats will be disproportionally affected by voter ID laws. But apparently that is the point behind the laws in the first place. Even Yelton said that there were only one or two cases of fraud. And then of course we had this guy...



5 republicans have admitted the intent behind voter ID laws including Yelton and Turzai, and as well as Schlafly, Thigpen, and Posner. How many GOP members will it take for you to believe what the rest of us already know?

http://os.care2.com/care2/#!/entry/...bout-voter-id-laws,526e603a025312186c724478/2

P.S. It is unlikely that I will "shut up".

 

The vast, vast, vast majority of "voter fraud" is not people trying to get some guy elected, it is people that have either lost there privilege to vote and tried to vote or they simply were in the wrong precinct or other really innocuous reasons. Even those instance amount to nothing. We do however have a long storied history especially in the southern states of poll taxes, literacy tests, and the like to disenfranchise mostly poor and minority voting. When I see Republicans get as concerned about that type of voter fraud as much as they are upset about a few cases of actual intentional voting irregularities, maybe then I will believe their voter ID mantra. Why only be concerned about one type of fraud?

 

But haven't dims, for the most part, stopped doing these things? You shoulkd be thanking God everyday for the Republicans & the Civil Rights movement they championed.

 

If I were that stupid, I'd be a repuke.

 

Is there some specific number of GOP members you guys are waiting for to admit the real intent behind voter ID laws is to disenfranchise Democrats before you'll finally believe it or is there no number of GOP officials and Right-wingers admitting what we already know that will convince you? Wait, I think I already know that answer too.

 

Joe

Joe, that's like saying Republicans "shut down Government"...that's just Crazy! How's that claim any different than saying Republicans are keeping Democrats from voting if they don't show a Government issued ID?

Obama shut down government because he didn't want to keep it open if Obamacare wasn't fully funded.
The Government shutdown was all on Obama. He could have kept it open with a slap up-side Senator Reid's head.

Democrats claim Voter ID laws are "racist". Voter ID laws simply require EVERYONE to show a valid, Government issued ID to cast a vote. The US Post Office could issue them. They can do it on Saturday...when they're not delivering mail.

To suggest that people of one race or another are more or less capable of obtaining an ID is racist!
...and Racism is WRONG!!!

 

An estimated 700,000 young minority voters could be barred from voting in November because of photo ID laws passed across the country in recent years, according to a new study.
The number of minority voters under the age of 30 likely to be disenfranchised by these new voting laws -- passed overwhelmingly by Republican-led legislatures across the country -- is a conservative estimate, according to the study's authors. The actual number of voters in that category who could be disenfranchised is probably closer to 1 million, they said.
The projections include African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Native Americans and Pacific Islanders.
“It’s a reminder that our voting rights have always been under attack and probably always will be,” said Cathy Cohen, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago who co-authored the report, Turning Back the Clock on Voting Rights: The Impact of New Photo Identification Requirements on Young People of Color.
The study was created by the Black Youth Project, a nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization that aims to increase civic engagement and voter participation among minority youth.
“I don’t think this is new, but I think the scale of it is new… I think the brashness of hearing elected officials talk about how these laws will guarantee a win in their state for [Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney],” Cohen told The Huffington Post. “And I think there is a willingness to be visible and vocal, which I think is new for us in the modern era.”
The study estimates that the new laws, passed in 17 states, could cut turnout among young people of color in those states by between 538,000 and 696,000 voters, levels below turnout figures for those groups in the last two presidential elections.