Is Voter Fraud "Undermining the Fabric of our Democracy?"

In the last debate, Sen. John McCain's answer appears to have been yes. Republicans are up in arms over what they say is the potential for widespread "voter fraud," most evidenced by the activities of ACORN. The ACORN acronym has been thrown around in this election nearly as much as the name of Bill Ayers, but I doubt most Americans have taken the time to really find out what's going on. In truth, voter fraud is extremely rare in this country these days. What ACORN committed was voter registration fraud, which sounds the same but is extremely different in degree.

When Republicans say "voter fraud," they seem to be referring to some of the old-style techniques commonly thought to have been employed by the old political machines. Tammany Hall, the rulers of 1800s New York, used to take drunks off the street, dress them up nicely, and take them around from polling place to polling place, gradually changing their appearance as they went. This was before photo ID. You'll also often hear that President Kennedy beat Richard Nixon in 1960 because the Daley machine in Chicago counted votes from dead people. This is probably false, though it seems to have permanently entered American political lore (when Republicans accuse Obama of being a "Chicago politician," people are supposed to remember this). The key in both of these scenarios is that they involve people actually voting when they aren't supposed to.

ACORN stands for the American Community Organizations for Reform Now (Yes, Rudy, community organizers). It was founded in 1970 and since then has been an advocate and lobbying group for poor Americans. One of its many objectives is to register as many of the poor as possible to vote. In this particular election, what has come to light is that ACORN tried to accomplish two things at once by paying low-income individuals to register other low-income individuals. Unfortunately, in order to meet their quotas, some of these workers seem to have simply made up names and filled out the forms for those imaginary people. Some of these were extremely obvious frauds, such as "Batman" or "Tony Romo".

Now, this is of course illegal. ACORN immediately admitted that they had no good way of filtering out all of the fakes, since they're not the government, but also refused to simply throw out all the applications. So some fakes probably slipped through the cracks and actually ended up registered. But here's the thing: for this fraud to even start having an effect on the election, the fake people have to actually show up and vote. They have to show ID. Now, you can certainly fake an ID (just ask any 19-year-old college student), but for such a fraud to be widespread and organized, as the Republicans seem to suggest, there would have to be legions of people with valid fake IDs in the same identities that were registered. Since the fake names were blatantly made up by independent workers, this is not going to happen. A conspiracy in this manner would just not be practical.

In other words, in order for Batman being registered to really be a problem, Batman would have to actually show up and try to vote. One incident that happened in Illinois has gotten a lot of play in the media, where registration info was mailed to a dead pet goldfish. Illinois Republicans immediately claimed fraud. Not only would the fish have to actually appear and vote for this to be an issue, it wasn't registered in the first place... it was only sent information on how to register.

So really, Republican claims of fraud in this instance are just that... a fraud. They are an attempt to a) link Barack Obama to something that sounds like corruption, in the absence of actual corruption to link him to, and b) lay the groundwork for a possible challenge to the electoral results if necessary. Now, at the moment Obama seems to have a big lead in the polls, but if that tightens by election day, and I have little doubt that it will, we may see a long, drawn-out fight that Republicans have been preparing for some time now.

Bits: Wildflower Decapitation Edition

Awesome.

-A video from a random episode of the old Batman series has been making the rounds of the YouTubes because it appears to offer commentary on the 2008 election... 40 years in advance. There are several parallels that can be seen in this clip alone, which features Batman and the Penguin engaging in a debate prior to an election for Mayor of Gotham City. Of course, this campaign has become such a caricature of itself that it's no wonder it reminds people of a campy 60s TV series.



-Unsettlingly, anecdotal evidence increasingly suggests that early voting sites across the country are being targeted by angry protestors, specifically anti-Obama protestors. This article describes an incident in North Carolina, and features video. So... you're protesting voting? Why not protest Obama by going into the early voting place and voting against him? And I especially like the comment that "Sundays are for church, not for voting"... by the person who's spending her Sunday protesting instead of in church.



-All over the news today... the discovery on the Arizona/Utah border (within Vermillion Cliffs National Monument) of what is being termed a "Dinosaur Dance Floor." How did it get this name? To quote Newswise.com:

“Get out there and try stepping in their footsteps, and you feel like you are
playing the game ‘Dance Dance Revolution’ that teenagers dance on,” says
Marjorie Chan, professor and chair of geology and geophysics at the University
of Utah. “This kind of reminded me of that – a dinosaur dance floor – because
there are so many tracks and a variety of different tracks.”

The find apparently includes thousands of dinosaur tracks in a very small area, in some places a dozen per square yard. There are least four different species represented. The scientists are theorizing that the tracks were formed at an oasis in what that time was a huge area of sand dunes, larger than today's Sahara. I have to throw in one more quote here:

Seiler envisions the dinosaurs were “happy to be at this place, having wandered
up and down many a sand dune, exhausted from the heat and the blowing sand,
relieved and happy to come to a place where there was water.”

Ah, yes, poetical scientists.



-Rather interesting news from Switzerland today, a nation always on the cutting edge when it comes to government. A new law bans the humiliation of plants. Recently, the Swiss Parliament asked a special committee of philosophers, lawyers, geneticists, and theologians to determine the meaning of dignity as it pertains to plants. They have issued their report, which says that it is morally wrong to participate in "the decapitation of wildflowers at the roadside without rational reason", and it appears that parliament is acting on those guidelines. However, one wonders what the actual extent and/or enforceability of such a law would be. More here.



-Free TV On the Internet: Check out this past week's new Family Guy episode, "The Road to Germany". It's already infamous because it has Nazis wearing McCain/Palin buttons, which seems like an unlikely thing to have fixated upon in an episode that revolves around a port-a-potty time machine (which I suppose makes as much sense as a phone box) and a baby dressing up as Hitler.

Bits: Epic Fail Edition

-MemeWatch is spreading! I was seriously considering doing an installment of our favorite feature about the sudden mainstream acceptance of the netspeak "Fail." But Slate beat me to the punch, with this great article.

-Former Bush Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama this morning on NBC's Meet the Press. If nothing else, this should help Obama win the news cycle and allow him to continue to keep his lead.

-McCain spokeswoman Nancy Pfotenhauer stood by remarks this week that McCain is winning in the "real Virginia." Apparently this means the more southern parts of Virginia that aren't suburbs of Washington D.C. I'm sure this will help them win over voters in Falls Church and Arlington.

-This comes after Gov. Sarah Palin, while campaigning in Greensboro, North Carolina this week, saying she enjoyed coming to "pro-american parts of the country." Of course, Barack Obama's campaign immediately began asking "so, which parts of the country are anti-american?" And the Republicans have run into a problem trying to make talking points out of this stuff. Rep. Michele Bachmann caused a stir when she attempted to defend Palin on MSNBC's Hardball and ended up calling for an investigation into which members of Congress were "unamerican." McCarthy, anybody? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/17/gop-rep-channels-mccarthy_n_135735.html

-In more positive(?) Sarah Palin news, she appeared last night on Saturday Night Live and didn't really do much. Most thought this would put the spotlight on Tina Fey's Palin impersonation, but it was Fey's sometime partner-in-crime, the very pregnant Amy Poehler, who stole the show during Gov. Palin's appearance on the "Weekend Update" segment. Check this out: http://www.hulu.com/watch/39808/saturday-night-live-update-palin-rap

-Today's Free TV on the Internet: You read my review of the Crusoe pilot, "Rum and Gunpowder." Now watch it for yourself: http://www.hulu.com/watch/39786/crusoe-rum-and-gunpowder

Presidential Smackdown III: The Final Battle

The third Presidential Debate just finished at Hofstra University on Long Island. It was the most combative and personal of the debates, and I think certainly the best debate and the one most useful to the voter. Someone with a moderate level of skepticism and/or media literacy could gain from this debate a basic grasp of the contrast between the two candidates on a variety of issues, including energy policy, tax policy, trade policy, health care... the real substantive issues. There was also a long exchange about "negative campaigning," in which the debate moderator, CBS anchor Bob Schieffer, asked them if either of them would make the accusations they'd been making on the trail to each other's faces, something that has bothered me throughout and earned Schieffer my biggest cheer of the night.

The candidate story seemed to be that McCain was either "combative" or "feisty," depending on your point of view, and Obama was mostly playing defense, with a few very clear explanations on issues I hadn't heard from him on that I enjoyed but I'm not sure will go over soundbyte-conscious pundits. McCain's supporters have been asking him to really take it to Obama, and he did. (ACORN is fundamentally undermining American democracy? Really? But that's another post...) However, I think it might be a mistake for McCain to dial up the anger. He's been falling farther and farther behind the more angry he seems. He doesn't wear it well. So he's placed in the bad position of having to attack to make up ground but not coming off well when he attacks. Obama was cool and collected, and McCain was attacking and sometimes not very coherent.

Even MSNBC thinks McCain may have "won on points," and it's entirely possible he had good arguments. You'll notice here I'm talking about his presentation. It got to the point sometimes that I didn't know what he was getting at. He brought up "Joe the Plumber" at least 20 times (CNN was counting), and I'm not sure what he was getting at. We'll see if that resonated with people who, y'know, aren't me. But I want to go back to the presentation, because I think the policy speaks for itself and you can make your own decisions. More than pretty much any other debate I've ever seen, this debate was in split-screen. McCain seemed angry when Obama criticized him. Obama smiled and shook his head when McCain criticized him. That is a big difference.

People will remember the section on "negative campaigning." McCain spent a long time harping on Rep. John Lewis' recent comments, basically demanding an apology from Obama which he didn't get. Obama actually brought up the McCain supporters literally calling for his head, which surprised me, and McCain's response was basically, as far as I could tell, that some of his supporters were veterans. I think McCain didn't do himself favors in this section, despite the extremely vocal demands of his supporters.

So this is the last debate. If you're still undecided... who are you? Are you living under a rock? Or maybe you're like my dad, who spends weeks shopping around for the simplest items. The vote's in 19 days.

MemeWatch: Republican Rage

Nearly every news outlet (except, of course, for FoxNews, which seems to be pre-occupied with the fact that Sarah Palin's face is too wrinkly on the latest cover of Newsweek) has run a story in the past few days about the rising level of anger at McCain campaign rallies. The McCain campaign has always had him asking things like "Who is the real Barack Obama?" but lately when the Senators pulls out that line he's been met with angry screams of "traitor," "terrorist," and even "kill him!" When he takes questions from the audience, as he often does, they have mostly turned into supporter after supporter begging him to "take it to" Obama. With Obama pulling away in the polls, the raw nerves of the Republican base are exposed, and they're showing up on primetime network news.

So, is all this overblown? And where is it coming from? Well, the answer to the first question is both "yes" and "no." Helpful, huh? The McCain campaign has no control over the fact that they're going to attract some crazies (just as Obama has no control over the far left's support). This is a situation that some on the right thought would never occur again, that they had built a permanent majority, so there's a level of anger. And it's true that Obama's a true liberal, something that hasn't been successful on the national stage since JFK, (I would argue that we've had several true conservatives) so that has led to the usual (in my opinion outdated) charges of "socialism." And that's fair game. If they want to talk about how "liberal," Obama is, as they did with Gore and Kerry, that's fine. And this is, of course, nothing new. Republicans did their best to imply that John Kerry was French because he liked windsurfing. I can't make something like that up.

The problem is two-fold. The tone with Kerry and Gore was more mocking (chants of "flip-flop, flip-flop"), but now it seems more like an angry mob, who if pointed in the right direction would be ready with a rope and tree branch. That may sound extreme, but I didn't make it up. It's being implied and outright stated across the left two thirds of the media spectrum, from Chris Matthews to David Gergen. And because Obama is Black, it adds a racial tinge to some of this stuff. The other issue is that people weren't seeing McCain and/or Palin doing anything about it. When you hear one of your supporters yell "kill him," about your opponent, something needs to be done about that. McCain started to do that a little yesterday, assuring a woman in his crowd that there was no need to be scared of the idea of Obama as president (after she said "I hear he's an arab."), but it should have been reflexive, and it obviously wasn't.

There is the perception that at least some of this has come from the official mouthpieces of the McCain campaign, which is interesting because it's a new twist (Bush denied all links to "Swiftboat Veterans for Truth"). They're running official ads about Bill Ayers, the Chicago politician, and Palin actually said in Florida this week that Obama "thinks this country is so imperfect that he's palling around with terrorists." McCain's campaign has openly said that they're going negative in response to falling poll numbers. So it's a difference of source from previous years.

Here's a question that may or may not be relevant... will it work? I doubt it, and I'm normally a believer in the power of negative advertising. The Bill Ayers business doesn't hold up under any sort of scrutiny, and all it takes is a one sentence explanation ("So... you're blaming me for something that an acquaintance I hadn't met yet did when I was eight?") to make the Republicans look like they're making something out of nothing (which, of course, they are). Perhaps more importantly, the economy is such an overwhelming issue at this point that it's hard to take anything else seriously. And, as someone said on MSNBC's Hardball yesterday, "Most Americans today think the Weather Underground was a rock band fronted by Lou Reed."

I don't mean this as a partisan screed. McCain has tried to calm things down a little in the past few days, though it's mostly resulted in him appearing to be at odds with his base. Lately he's spending a lot of time looking surprised at how bad things have gotten. And this meme only hurts his campaign, no matter what they did to cause it. In any case, don't take my word for it. Here are articles from the past day or so from CNN, Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/10/obama-called-traitor-agai_n_133613.html), Talking Points Memo (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/bomb_obama.php), New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/us/politics/11campaign.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin) Yahoo! (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081011/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_42;_ylt=Ak4Do42TCidwdG1eix_J5IJh24cA), and Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/?last_story=/opinion/walsh/election_2008/2008/10/11/current_mccainsdishonest/).

Enjoy.

Presidential Smackdown II: Return of the Awkward Q & A

Some initial reactions on my part to the second Presidential debate, which just finished in Nashville, Tennessee. It wasn't real spectacular in any respect. After the two nationwide campaigns threatened to reach levels of animosity unprecedented in a mass media-era election this week, the debate was relatively free of that, on the surface, anyway. They clearly don't like each other, which is interesting on one level, I suppose. What we got, actually, was something approaching an actual, substantive debate.

These candidates have big differences on a lot of issues (which, after the looong primaries, is a bit refreshing), and they, for the most part, did their best to elucidate them. But there wasn't much new for those of us who've been paying attention, with the possible exception of McCain's poorly explained proposal about the government buying mortgages. Overall, things were just very stilted. Part of that was the format and rules, part of it was Brokaw's somewhat weird follow-up questions (which came off more as what one particular old guy was interested in than what the country wanted to hear) and part of it was the candidate's determination to stay relentlessly on-message. So, though we ask for substantive debates, we got one here and it was pretty boring.

The general media consensus is probably going to be that it was basically a tie, and a tie goes to Obama because he's ahead. I can't really dispute that in any way. I find it hypocritical that they can yell at each other day-in-day-out, and then show up and smile at each other. It's one of the things that drives me nuts about my day job, probably the biggest thing, because that's the fundamental disonnect in politics, and it bothers the crap out of me.

I feel like I'm not saying much, but neither did the candidates.

Breaking News: Bailout Passes on Second Try

The US House of Representatives passed the "bailout" of our nation's financial institutions earlier today, by a comfortable margin of 261-171. The bill gained substantial support among both Republicans and Democrats. I guess Republicans weren't as insulted by the package of "sweeteners" as I would have been in their shoes.

The bill was then rushed to the desk of President Bush, who signed it this afternoon. The largest group that switched its votes from no to yes were probably members of the Congressional Black Caucus (all Democrats), who were reassured by recent pledges from Sen. Barack Obama that, if elected, he would support legislation that would assist homeowners who are currently facing foreclosure. Republican Sen. John McCain was also credited with helping to secure votes on his side of the aisle, especially among the delegation from his home state of Arizona.

The vote was far from unanimous, however, and opponents voiced dire concerns. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) told us to "Pray for our Republic," while a better known Ohio Rep., Dennis Kucinich, delivered an impassioned speech highlighting the case of a 90 year old Akron resident who shot herself yesterday after authorities attempted to enforce the foreclosure of her home.

It is too early to tell what the final effect of the legislation will be, but here's hoping our government did the right thing here. It'd sure be more convenient than them being wrong. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said he would move swiftly to begin the distribution of the funds.

Vice Presidential Smackdown: Vice Harder

Some quick thoughts on the Vice Presidential debate that just finished. I personally was bothered by Sarah Palin, but I don't think a lot of Americans will be. This is where I have a fundamental difference with a lot of my countrymen and women. I don't think it's too much to ask the Vice President to put gs on the end of words when they go there, or to use words the way they were actually meant to be used. And yet afterwards on CNN the commentators, on either side, universally praised how "folksy" Palin was. Just because people seem to like it doesn't mean it's actually a good thing. Is she going to be in the room with Putin, as the current cliche goes, saying "I'm hopin' and wishin' we can find some positive impacts for our folks back home"?

Okay, rant over. I'm going to try not to do that too often. In terms of actual analysis, I think that Biden did a fairly good job of calling Palin on any outright lies she made without seeming petty (he didn't call her on calling Gen. McKiernan "General McClellan," for example). Palin tried her darndest to do the same, but I don't think she made many of her points with the same specificity. She also said a few things that may come back to bite her. She said she agreed with Vice President Cheney on the subject of expanding the powers of the Vice Presidency. She said she is not convinced humans are responsible for global warming. These are positions that I'm not sure are in tune with what people are looking for.

I think it was a decent strategy on Palin's part to try to link Obama and Biden to "looking backward" when Biden tried to link McCain to the failed policies of the Bush administration. It worked rhetorically to shape the debate the way she wanted it. Biden, however, did not let that effect his own strategy, which was to do just that. In my opinion, "looking backward" or not, every time McCain/Palin talks about changing something from the status quo, Obama/Biden should come back with "Republicans have had the Presidency 20 of the last 28 years. Republicans have controlled the Congress 10 of the last 12 years. Why hasn't any of this happened before now?"

It was sometimes frustrating how much Biden insisted on sticking to the "3rd Bush term" idea, at the expense of offering more coherent versions of his own ideas. It may come off as overly negative. However, I don't think that will be an issue in the long run in a campaign where Democrats seem to often say good things about John McCain but Republicans resolutely refuse to say anything positive about Barack Obama. The "attack dog" role is a traditional one for a Vice President candidate, so the Presidential candidate doesn't have to get their hands dirty.

The usual question after these things is "well, who won?" That is of course completely subjective. I think Gov. Palin gave Sen. Biden the openings he needed to really ram home any advantage he may have had, and I'm not sure he followed through on those. I think he may have performed better overall, but I recognize that many reasonable people may disagree. Many people thought Palin's performance here would hurt the McCain campaign, and I don't think it really did. However, McCain's been steadily losing ground lately in several key states, and I doubt Palin did anything here that would change that.

In other news... wow, the Cubs are in trouble. You'd think I would have seen that coming, but I definitely didn't.

Updates: As the Bailout Turns

-The Senate voted for a version of the bailout today, 74 to 25. Both Barack Obama and John McCain voted in favor of the bill. The current version is very similar to the one the House rejected earlier this week, except for "sweeteners" (and yes, that's apparently the official term) that were added, especially tax cuts. Said cuts are apparently intended to lure Republicans. If I was a Republican, I would feel insulted by that. "They'll vote for anything with tax cuts, it doesn't matter how much they hate the rest of it." And of course, that makes it even less likely that we actually have the $700 Billion dollars to use for this.

-Scientists now say the AIDS virus jumped to people as early as 1884, much earlier than previously thought. I'm not sure what the implications of that are, but it's interesting stuff.

-Sarah Silverman, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Jonah Hill are among an all-star cast that doesn't want you to vote. That reverse psychology won't work on me! http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1832128

-The Baseball playoffs are underway here in the States. Early victories for the Phillies, Dodgers, and Red Sox.

-Comic books too... booky for you? Ever thought "this is great, but I wish it was more computerized?" Comic book stories animated through machinima, now on the intertubes. http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DF54DE54A3BAA597

-Real life blind people have apparently decided that the upcoming film "Blindness" is offensive in its depiction of blind people. Shocking!

Bits: Theater of the Absurd Edition

-The Machinist today has a great entry on how digitized today's entering college students are, focusing on the Amherst College class of 2012. 99% are on Facebook, 99% have only cell phones, 99% have only laptop computers...

-Michael Grunwald has a great article on Time.com... "Oh, the Drama! McCain in the Theater of the Absurd".

-Watch the Sarah Palin/Katie Couric interview on YouTube. "Saturday Night Live" hardly had to change the words in order make this hysterically awful.

-io9 tells the bizarre story of the recent Season Finale of the Sci-Fi Channel drama "Eureka"... which I recently watched most of without actually realizing it was the series finale. Sci-Fi Channel apparently repeatedly rejected entire plotlines, resulting in the finale basically being improvised by the writers as the episode was filmed... thus lending credence to all those viewers who think "they're just making this up as they go along." "Eureka" is a fun show, but in the end it's inherently "small"... something that, based on my possibly mistaken impressions of what's going on here, may have been Sci-Fi Channel's problem. In other weird news, there's a rumor going around the intertubes that the Sci-Fi Channel wants to change its name to "Beyond." Kay.

-This week's WalrusFile free internet TV pick is the season premiere of "The Office." I'll be trying to come up with a full review of it in the next day or two. In the meantime, discuss amongst yourselves.

-Overlooked News Story of the Day, from the Dayton Daily News: Chemical Irritant Empties Dayton Mosque. An apparent major hate crime not that far from where I live. Sigh.