Perhaps assuming The Nation’s readers would be thoroughly familiar with them already. But, here you go.
I think you are supposed to just drink the kool-aid and take it as a give that the 2004 election was stolen…STOLEN…STOLEN!!! No real proof is needed when you KNOW thats what happened…
Oh, as to the OP…I’m not sure if there is any way for an honest election in Ohio (taking ‘honest election’ to be a code word for ‘a Democrat is elected’)…I’m unsure of the Dems realistic chances in Ohio, not living there myself. 
-XT
I’m on record as to who I think should be running the elections, in every state. In any case, The Nation here is criticizing not the system in general, but the particular malfeasances of Ken Blackwell in Ohio.
I don’t support any candidate in the election, and I won’t be voting in it either (because I’m not eligible) – and I certainly don’t believe that an honest ballot leads to any particular party winning.
However, on the Dems’ chances, the Wikipedia article on the election has polls which shown the Democratic candidate Ted Strickland comfortably ahead in the polls since mid February. Scandals surrounding the Republicans (quite separate from electoral matters) and the abysmal popularity of the current Governor, Bob Taft, have doubtless not helped Ken Blackwell.
I think a better question would be "Is there any way Ohio could elect a Republican governor without the Democrats screaming “VOTER FRAUD!”’? The answer to that is likely no. The Democratic party has demonstrated a woeful lack of the ability to recognize that the general principles they stand for are not popular with the majority of the nation. Instead of adjusting the planks of their platform to appeal to a majority of the populace (something that would be pathetically easy to do because most of us don’t like the Republicans all that much either, they wouldn’t have to move that far), they prefer to kick and scream and throw temper tantrums about how they have been “cheated” and that elections have been “stolen”, and so the Democratic party continues on it’s determined march towards marginalization.
Cite for Dems screaming “Voter fraud!” during or after the 2002 election, which was conducted by Ken Blackwell and won by the Republican Bob Taft? Please?
Wow. That’s some impressive “string of baffling and nakedly partisan rulings” you’ve got there.
Requiring 80lb paper? While I agree that’s pretty baffling, I don’t understand how paper thickness is a partisan issue.
Then we’ve got a positive identification requirement at the polling place. What the heck is so underhanded about that?
An accusal of failure to process voter registrations? How’s that linked to partisanship?
Uneven voting machine allocation? Mebbe ya got one there. But as I understand it, each county in Ohio is responsible for acquisition of voting machines from a short list of equipment approved by the Sec State’s office. Blackwell and his staff ain’t shipping voting machines to predominantly Republican counties or precincts while diverting them from Democratic ones.
Because, unless you’re talking about cultural issues like gun control or “moral” :rolleyes: issues like gay marriage, that simply is not true. For instance, most Americans want a national universal health-care system, by a consistent two-to-one margin.
Dunno. I’m not a resident of Ohio, so I wan’t around in 2002. However, surely you aren’t asking me for cits of the Dems screaming “voter fraud” WRT the 2004 presidentian election in Ohio? Or the 2000 elections in Florida? Have you been living in a cave?
Brain, you’re beautiful. First of all, one issue does not a platform make. Second of all, the very article you linked to states that a majority of people do NOT support UHC when the question is expanded to include the cost of such a plan to them, and the vast majority do NOT support the idea of UHC when informed that such a plan would limit their access to health care. Thanks for giving a perfect example of what I’m talking about though. “We support universal free health care for all Americans, and that’s what most Americans want!” is a wonderful rallying slogan, but ignoring the real numbers when the actual mechanics involved in such a plan are discussed is EXACTLY what I was talking about.
Not at all. It says:
:dubious: And whaddaya mean, “informed”? It wouldn’t.
I once attended an SF convention in Toronto. Canada’s single-payer health-care system came up during a panel discussion, and I asked if there’s any downside to it. Fans being such a diversely opinionated bunch, I was expecting a heated debate. No such thing. Every member of the panel said simply, “No.” “No.” “No.” “No.” And nobody in the very crowded room ventured a dissent.
I was responding to your allegation:
by referring to the last time Ohio elected a Republican governor. Your original question had nothing to do with presidential elections, in 2000, or 2004, or any other year.
Weirddave, you just don’t get it. You see, most American’s, tricked by the Republicans, don’t get the plan. Basically this consists of repealing all those tax breaks to the rich…and having the money FLOOD in. We will be hip deep in all the cash we get back…plenty enough for things like balancing the budget, fixing Social Security, putting to rest the deficit and UHC on the side (as well as myriad other great programs). The people, you see, don’t know the plan.
And if by some unhappy mischance there isn’t enough money from this flood of revenew, they can go to plan B…SOAK THE RICH! Those rich bastards have gobs of cash under the mattress, plenty enough for UHC by god! Hell, it works for Europe after all…THEY know how to treat their rich bastards over there!
So you see, the public is being misinformed…the Dems just haven’t been able to get their message out there and make the huddled masses, yearning for UHC UNDERSTAND! But they will…they will.
(sorry, just having a bit of fun here…carry one guys)
-XT
Jesus Brain, read what you’re quoting for fuck’s sake. I’ll bold and underline to help you out:
You also might want to do some reaserch. Canada does not have unrestricted on demand access to any doctor for any condition at any time. You really need to do some more reaserch before you come in here pie-in-the-skying about UHC.
Since we had a honest election last time this would qualify as an op-ed generated straw man.
You don’t see how supressing new voters is a partisan issue? That’s a litttle ingenuous. Here is a link to a Pew poll describing the voting habits of the youngest cohort of voters. The most relevant finding is this:
“Presidential Choice – Young voters favored the Democratic ticket by a significant margin, with 18-24 year olds favoring Senator Kerry over President Bush by 56-43 percent, and voters under 30 favoring Kerry 54-45 percent.”
Now, you may be surprised by this, and are shocked to learn that by rejecting new voter registrations that you can change the demographics, and in a close state like Ohio it doesn’t take a lot of “unprocessed” registrations to swing an election.
Add to this that the uneven distribution of voting machines produced defacto disinfranchisement, as voters in predominately Democratic precincts had waiting times between 3 and 11 hours, while I, in good old Republican Warren county, strolled up and voted without any wait at all.
I con’t say that Bush wouldn’t have won a fair election in Ohio, but neither can you, because we didn’t have one.
Thanks to the efforts of Ken Blackwell, Ralph Nader, a candidate who never met the legal qualifications for being on the ballot in Ohio, was in fact on the ballot in Ohio in 2004. Many counties didn’t even reprint the ballot. Blackwell’s paper order most certainly caused a lot of confusion and problems, as Bill Door points out: problems that affect Democratic voters a lot more than Republicans. In general, Democratic voters are disproportionately affected by things that make voting harder and more confusing, so it’s always in the Republican interest to do so.
Blackwell also presided over the Republican’s tactic of sending mass mailings to Democrats and then using delivery failures or rejections to challenge people’s right to vote. Luckily, many of these tactics ended in courts throwing out the challenges and threatening the local Republican lawyers with sanctions for things like perjury when hordes of angry voters showed up demanding to know why their right to vote was being challenged and these local lawyers had to admit that they had no direct personal knowledge: they had just been told what to do by the party. And the people who were challenged had been forced to show up at workday hearings most had no time to attend or else be stripped from the rolls.
In the county where I worked, one of these people was a soldier away fighting in Iraq. He was… shall we say, not pleased that someone would try to strip him from the rolls just because he wasn’t around to keep up with his mail.
Anyone who tries to pretend that parties dont’ spend lots of their time trying to think of ways to get their people to the polls and discourage the other people’s people from getting there are living in a fantasyland. Sometimes these efforts are perfectly legal, sometimes outright illegal, and sometimes they skirt the edge, though while often bein pretty unethical.
I’ve worked in Democratic campaigns, and I’ve sat in on Republican “Keep in the Vote” meetings. But if you insist, then please inform the former White House staffer and head of the Republican Senate campaigns in 2004 that he’s actually NOT in jail right at this very moment for things like hiring a robo-call company to jam Democratic GOTV phone lines in New Hampshire.
Nitpick: Disingenuous.