How Barack Obama Loses In 2012

I actually wrote this as a comment on The First Street Journal, but I thought it worthy of its own article.

 

Obama will not win any states he lost in 2008. I guarantee that. So, Obama has to hold onto the states he won in 2008. And he will lose some of those states. I guarantee that, as well.

Obama will lose Indiana and North Carolina, two states he won in 2008. That’s “settled science.” Trends show Obama losing Florida. Ohio and Virginia are sliding toward the Republican column. Nebraska split its electoral votes in 2008. The Democrat Cornhusker Kickback was so roundly despised by the Cornhusker State that I project a full slate of Republicans in their electoral college. And it is likely that New Hampshire returns to its Conservative tradition (or New England Conservative, which is far squishier than the vast majority of the nation’s Conservatives).

Here’s a map showing the 2008 US Presidential election results from US Election Atlas.org, which I’ve previously used on more than one occasion (for more detailed information or to look at previous election results, click the above link and not the map itself):

So, breaking down what I wrote above:
Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire, Virginia flip from Democrat to Republican, and Nebraska goes from split electors to a full slate of Republican electors.

That is all that is necessary to boot the Socialist from the Oval Office.

But Obama cannot just focus on those states. Round about 50 million Union dollars spent in Wisconsin to get rid of the Republicans (who righted Wisconsin’s economic ship and reduced Wisconsin’s tax burden) all for naught. The Republican Governor and the Republican Government survives. In fact, the Republican Governor could very easily win with a double-digit margin, making the Recall election a Republican Mandate — to the horrors of a great many Democrats, who are suddenly down-playing the Wisconsin Recall after they had previously declared it something far more. Democrats had pointed to Wisconsin and declared, basically “this is what happens when you go against the Unions and Democrats.” But what happens? You win and the Unions and Democrats (same thing, really, Socialists, all) lose. So they’re now down-playing the Recall Election after they basically spent 50 million dollars leading up to it.

So Obama could lose Wisconsin, the “birthplace of American Progressives”. Meatchicken (I’m from Ohio, and that’s how any honorable Ohioan would spell that State Up North, as Woody always called it) is in play. Obama could lose Meatchicken. Pennsylvania is looking stronger and stronger for Republicans this cycle. Maine could go Republican this cycle. Nevada is not a Democrat lock, by any stretch of the imagination. Iowa could flip Republican.

There are actually rumblings that New Jersey, with Chris Christie being rather liked for his major fixes to that chronically damaged and chronically Democrat state, might be ready to go Republican this cycle.

For various scenarios, do view 270 To Win.

There are essentially 3 main reasons why Barack Obama is doing so poorly:

  • Barack Obama himself, and his massively over-reaching, totalitarian Socialist agenda that too many patriotic Americans hate.
  • The TEA Party and their Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, Patriotic aims.
  • The exploding blogosphere, breaking through the Hard-Left agenda of lamestream media.

Those three points should very likely mean the death of the contempt of Federal Court Barack Obama Regime.

(The chart on the right, of the top political contributors from 1989 to 2011, with its absolutely one-sided Democrat nature was provided to prevent a standard Liberal lie concerning political money. Look at all the Union money going almost all Democrat and the dearth of corporate money doing anywhere near the same for Republicans. Also note the absolute absence of the Leftists’ chosen fall-guy, the Koch Brothers, from that list. Source: Open Secrets.)
___________________________________
Article originally published on Truth Before Dishonor.
___________________________________
***Note:The standard rules regarding articles I write are amended for this article I wrote as follows: Wagonwheel is permitted to comment on this article, provided he stays fully on the topic of this article and doesn’t stray. Personal attacks stand a very high chance to be deleted. As to what constitutes a personal attack, I am the decider (and I have deleted many comments by several Conservative/Libertarian commenters in the past, so I am not averse to doing so again).

59 Comments

  1. Right now, I’d say that Governor Romney’s prospects look decent, but I’d never count my electoral victories until they have actually been won: too many things can happen between now and November.

  2. An additional note of interest: changes in population have changed the composition of the electoral college. In 2000, George Bush won by three electoral votes, and could not have lost any of the states he won, including the three electoral vote states like Wyoming and Alaska. With the electoral vote map for 2012, he could have lost Wyoming and South Dakota, and still won. For example, Texas had 32 electoral votes in 2000, 34 in 2004 and 2008, and will have 38 this year. Ohio, one of the supposed swing states, has 18 electoral votes for the coming election, had 20 in 2004 and 2008, and 21 in 2000.

    Personally, I am in favor of the Maine/Nebraska division formula, where the candidate who wins a congressional district receives the electoral vote for that district, and the overall statewide winner receives the two electoral votes which coincide with two senators. In 2008, while Senator John McCain carried Nebraska, Senator Barack Obama carried one congressional district, and thus the state’s five electoral votes were split, four for Mr McCain and one for Mr Obama.

    There was a proposal to split Pennsylvania’s electoral votes in that fashion, but it was not passed. Pennsylvania has 20 electoral votes for the 2012 election, and it’s very possible that Barack Obama could have carried the state, yet Mitt Romney receive a majority of the state’s electoral votes, as Mr Romney will probably carry a majority of the state’s congressional districts. Our good friend Wagonwheel has already stated that such a method of dividing a state’s electoral votes is “more democratic.:) I agree.

  3. Had the Nebraska/Maine systems been in effect in 2000, there’d have been no Florida debacle; George Bush would have won easily, 288 to 250, and in 2004 would have won 317 to 221.

  4. If Barack Obama wasn’t black his chances for reelection would be lower than a snake’s belly. Without the issue of race, and judged exclusively on his record in office, Obama couldn’t get the Democrat Party to nominate him for reelection. He’s a joke, a failure of such proportions the media can’t report it for fear of the consequences.

    The Emperor has no clothes, everyone can see his naked rear end, and the watchdogs of democracy avert their eyes and fill the air with happy talk of imaginary jobs created or the absurd pretence of reduced spending. And, all because a black man has failed in such a prominent role and our national leaders fear to say out loud what anyone with open eyes can see.

  5. John, whether your analysis is accurate or not, I think most agree that this is going to be a very close election, and a crucial one as well, each side considering it to be a must win, otherwise the country will collapse.

    As you know, in my view President Obama has done a credible job under severe external and internal conditions, therefore I think he should be reelected.

    A lot depends on the direction of the economic headwinds, which could readily swing the election result in either direction.

    Another factor which could be crucial is the impact of the red state voter suppression efforts now underway full force. I note that Florida officials have decided to ignore the federal court order to cease and desist, which is an indication of how important this effort is to the Republicans. This is most unfortunate, because it could cloud the outcome of a close election, as happened in both 2000 and 2004.

    That “270 to Win” will be a good one to monitor as the 5 month campaign plays out.

    I agree with Dana on one thing, that the Maine/Nebraska approach to split electoral votes should be incorporated nationwide. If we must continue with the electoral college, then this approach comes closer to representing the will of the American population than the way we do it now.

  6. Another factor which could be crucial is the impact of the red state voter suppression efforts now underway full force. I note that Florida officials have decided to ignore the federal court order to cease and desist, which is an indication of how important this effort is to the Republicans. This is most unfortunate, because it could cloud the outcome of a close election, as happened in both 2000 and 2004.

    [Koolo's response to the above radical Leftist dishonest boilerplate has been deemed a personal attack against Wagonwheel, thus deleted. -- JH]

  7. Again whith the voter suppression myth, Wagonwheels? So you “note that florida officials have decided to ignore the federal court order to cease and desist”. I can only assume you disagree with removing 160,000 dead people from the voter registration lists. Why? You say it’s because it could cloud the outcome of a close election. Well, I guess it could if the Democrats loose a dependable group of dead people voting. I myself dont think dead people should vote.

  8. Our current Justice Dept. has made it well known what they care about — only those who traditionally vote Democratic. New Black Panthers (left unprosecuted), people who vote fraudulently (suing states who use voter ID), and dead people (big cities and now Florida).

  9. I was thinking the same thing, Koolo. To a leftist Black Panthers standing in front of the polls with clubs is not prosecutable as either voter suppression nor intimidation, but remove one dead guy from the voting rolls and all hell breaks loose. Can’t wait to see their response if felons and illegal aliens are also purged.

  10. Expect Perry to continue to regurgitate every old tired false narrative in the Democrat playbook, anything they can spin, misconstrue, twist, or lie about, anything at all. Otherwise the focus will be right square where it should be: on Obama and his string of monumental failures.

    BTW, you do know it’s racist to call attention to failure when it’s a black man who has so completely failed America. Much better to pretend Obama’s failures are all George Bush’s fault, and if it can’t be pinned on GWB, then Obama’s failures just have to be defined as glorious successes.

    Now, all repeat after me: Barack Obama is infallible, he’s the one who healed the Earth, he caused the oceans to recede, he reversed global warming, he created (or saved) millions and millions of (union and government) jobs, he reduced spending more than any other president in history, balanced the budget, eliminated world hunger, brought peace to the Middle East, figured out who put the overalls in Mrs Murphy’s chowder, and discovered a cure for the common cold.

    Barack Obama, um…um…um. We’re sure lucky to have him. Why, God in heaven must be jealous that Obama isn’t up there sitting by his side to instruct him on the ins and outs of creation.

  11. Another factor which could be crucial is the impact of the red state voter suppression efforts now underway full force. I note that Florida officials have decided to ignore the federal court order to cease and desist, which is an indication of how important this effort is to the Republicans. This is most unfortunate, because it could cloud the outcome of a close election, as happened in both 2000 and 2004.

    LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES …

  12. WW wrote:

    Another factor which could be crucial is the impact of the red state voter suppression efforts now underway full force. I note that Florida officials have decided to ignore the federal court order to cease and desist, which is an indication of how important this effort is to the Republicans. This is most unfortunate, because it could cloud the outcome of a close election, as happened in both 2000 and 2004.

    ‘Twould have been a bit more accurate had you mentioned just what Florida is trying to do, that the Obama Administration is trying to halt. From the Miami Herald:


    Feds to Florida: halt non-citizen voter purge


    By Marc Caputo

    The Justice Department ordered Florida’s elections division to halt a systematic effort to find and purge the state’s voter rolls of noncitizen voters.

    Florida’s effort appears to violate both the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which protects minorities, and the 1993 National Voter Registration Act – which governs voter purges – T. Christian Herren Jr., the Justice Department’s lead civil rights lawyer, wrote in a detailed two-page letter sent late Thursday night.

    State officials said they were reviewing the letter. But they indicated they might fight DOJ over its interpretation of federal law and expressed frustration that President Barack Obama’s administration has stonewalled the state’s noncitizen voter hunt for nine months.

    “We are firmly committed to doing the right thing and preventing ineligible voters from being able to cast a ballot,” said Chris Cate, spokesman for Secretary of State Ken Detzner, who was ordered by Gov. Rick Scott to conduct the search for potentially ineligible voters.

    DOJ’s written demand came hours after the agency refused to comment on the matter to The Miami Herald. It also followed a federal court ruling Thursday that struck down a Republican voter-registration law that a judge found too onerous.

    Why, it seems that the Sunshine State is trying to shine some sunlight on the voter registration rolls and remove anyone from there who is not a citizen, who is not eligible to vote . . . and the Obama Administration thinks that that’s wrong!

    According to the story, about 2,700 potential non-citizens have been identified, out of 11.3 million registered voters. But, horrors! 58% of those flagged as potentially being non-citizens are Hispanics, which is exactly what you would expect. It’s also true that independents and Democrats are more likely to be the ones flagged as not being citizens, while non-Hispanics and Republicans are less likely, which is also what anyone with any common sense would expect would be the case with fraudulent voter registrations.

    George Bush carried Florida by a mere 537 votes, so even 2,700 non-citizens being allowed to vote could be crucial, given that one would normally expect the greater number of fraudulent votes to be cast for Democrats.

    Wagonwheel will deny it all, of course, but the Democrats aren’t stupid: they know that they are by far the greater beneficiaries of fraudulent voting, and it is to their advantage to see as much of it as possible. That’s why they don’t want to see non-citizens removed from the roles and that’s why they don’t want to see measures for positive identification at the polls passed.

  13. Yep, Eric, they’re lies alright. But wait, they’re not just idle little lies, the kind ordinary people tell to each other.

    These are great big lies told to deceive hundred of thousands of voters, lies told for the calculated purpose of tricking Americans into rejecting the outcome of an election. Lies told to pervert the expressed political will of an electorate.

    The same dirty liars who just can’t bring themselves to acknowledge that requiring a photo ID would go a long way toward making sure only registered voters could actually vote are curiously exactly the same people who make claims similar to Perry’s that “voter suppression efforts are now underway full force.”

    In the same way that a fox smells himself first, those who subvert elections accuse others of suppressing the vote. Their lies reveal their very own crimes.

  14. Perry sez:

    I note that Florida officials have decided to ignore the federal court order to cease and desist

    I need proof that it was a Federal Court Order and not merely the Eric Holder Department of Injustice, as it is my understanding the Eric Holder Department of Injustice is the one that issued the “cease and desist removing illegals and the dead from your voter roles” order, and not any court.

    But, it is an absolute fact that a Federal Court held Barack Obama in Contempt of its Court Order re: drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico.

  15. According to the US Census Bureau, the fastest growing part of the US is the South (not to be confused with the southwest). And, with the Census Bureau’s delineations, the South consists of 38 percent of the US population. (There are four regions.) The Northeast and the Midwest combine for 122.2 million people. The South alone stands at 114.6 million people. And the West has 71.9 million people. And nationally, Democrats are pretty much giving up on the South as a whole, ceding basically 38 percent of the electoral college to Republicans right out the gate. That means Democrats must win the states in the other 3 regions basically 9 – to – 1 (by electoral college numbers). An 8 – to – 1 Democrat win in the other 3 regions would mean a Democrat loss nationally.

    So, the Democrat Party, with Obama as its titular head, has given up on the South. How is he doing with the rest of the nation? Reports have him giving up on white, middle class blue-collar workers, who did a lot of work to get him elected in 2008. Oops. Lost votes, some of which will vote Republican this time and others who will not vote for President or will cast a protest vote for a Third Candidate. Baraka alienated a great many Catholics, who traditionally vote Democrat, by telling the Roman Catholic Church that it absolutely must commit immoral acts if it wants to continue its charitable work. Big oops. Baraka alienated a not-so-small number of black pastors, who lead black churches (and thus, their flocks give much heed to what they say) by declaring himself a homosexual “marriage” proponent. Big oops.

    Now, while The RCC constituency which traditionally vote Democrat could very well swing Republican — doing great harm to Barack’s goal of winning a second Presidential election — the black church constituency will likely not vote Republican in any major way. There will be more blacks voting Republican this time around than last time (percentage-wise), as Obama won an historic 97 percent of the black vote (making blacks the most lock-step, monolithic voting sub-group in US history), but overall, this huge outcry of horror from black pastors will mostly suppress the black vote. Many of these black pastors, who hold sway in their churches, have declared they cannot, at all, vote for Obama, but they will not, at all, vote for a Republican. That leaves not voting or protest voting Third Party. And Obama loses those votes, without picking up any votes (only scads of cash from rampant radical Leftists).

    Every step of the way, these past 3+ years, Obama has alienated one base sub-group after another, without adding a single sub-group to his re-election bid. Every state’s voting output will shift more Republican as a result. Every state. It’s only a matter of degree. It’s called “focusing on the margins” and it’s not looking good for Obama at all. However, it is looking very beneficial for the survival of the US.

  16. Let us look at exactly what is going on in FL, using a reputable and unconnected source supplying the facts:

    * “Voting rights groups are celebrating a significant victory against what they claim is the pernicious spread of anti-democratic legislation across America after a federal judge in Florida blocked key sections of a new state law that discourages voter registration drives.” (For example: Florida League of Women Voters has had to shut down registration operations.)

    * “The justice department has warned that the practice, which critics describe as “voter suppression” by Florida’s Republican administration aimed at stripping the ballot from people more likely to support Democrats, is illegal under federal laws.”

    * “Last week, a federal judge struck down another part of Florida’s recent election law which critics said was aimed at deterring voter registration groups from signing up electors.” (This is the one you questioned, John)

    * “Federal authorities say that the state is obliged to get justice department approval for changes to its voting laws under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which was introduced to end practices that prevented African Americans from exercising their democratic right in many southern states.” (This ruling will hold true for all states who are attempting a Florida-like purging of the voting rolls.)

    * “The justice department move comes after the attorney general, Eric Holder, last week warned that gains of the civil rights struggle hang in the balance in the face of a determined effort by many states to roll back laws ensuring the right to vote.”

    * “Florida’s governor, Rick Scott, has justified the purging of the voters roll as necessary to prevent fraud by people who are not American citizens. But there is little evidence that this has been a significant problem in the past and the effect has been to remove many people who are entitled to vote.” (Note well the second sentence.)

    * “This year Florida has notified more than 2,600 registered voters that they may not be entitled to be on the electoral roll. The Miami Herald reported that in Miami-Dade County so far 385 people who were removed from the roll have been shown to be citizens while just 10 have not.” (Thus, for 38.5 voters are wrongly disenfranchised for every potentially fraudulent voter. That’s unjustified purging!)

    * “Those tasked with purging the rolls compares voter lists with driving licence files, which record citizenship. But critics say that system is flawed in part because many people obtain citizenship after applying for a driving licence.”

    * “Among those wrongly removed from the voter roll was Bill Internicola who was born in New York 91 years ago and earned a medal in the Battle of the Bulge during the second world war.

    Florida authorities sent him a letter in May saying that it had received information that he was not a US citizen. The onus was then on Internicola and others who received similar letters to prove they have the right to vote. Internicola is a Democrat.” (The burden of proof should be on the Florida Department of Elections to prove the ineligibility of a citizen, not the other way around.)

    Florida is the bell-weather state for this questionable purging of the voter rolls going on in other mostly red states with Republican governors. The purpose is crystal clear, to remove voters of demographics which tend to vote Democratic, especially young and minority voters.

    Principled Republicans especially should speak out against these undemocratic voter purges by some of their colleagues. Let us have our elections run in a fair and square manner, so that the victors, Republicans and Democrats alike, can represent the choices of all the people whom they will represent in doing the people’s business.

  17. But there is little evidence that this has been a significant problem in the past and the effect has been to remove many people who are entitled to vote.

    Note the bold. Again, as with the issue of voter ID, the PAPs and other radicals concentrate on this term — “significant.” Yet, as Editor has pointed out in this thread, and as PAP has harped on virtually every day since even CSPT’s creation, the 2000 election in FL ended up with a difference of less than 600 votes. Are 600 votes “significant?”

    Further, why do Democrats always come down on the side of fraud? They’re against voter ID (well, not a majority, but many more Democrats oppose it than the other side), and now they don’t care if non-citizens remain on the voter rolls.

  18. “But there is little evidence that this has been a significant problem in the past and the effect has been to remove many people who are entitled to vote.”

    If that statement is true the only reason for it is lack of voter ID. If one is removed from voter registration in error, one needs only to prove his identity and re-register. Illegals, felons and the Dead need not apply!

    There can be only one reason the left is so transfixed against voter ID and that is they endorse voter fraud. They actually want the under age, those not in their own districts, illegals, felons and dead people to be able to cast a ballot. We must assume merely to cancel out the legitimate votes of others.

  19. First of all, koolo, it is hardly “radical” to be concerned about assuring that our elections are carried out in a fair and accurate manner.

    Secondly, regarding voter fraud being an insignificant problem, the State of Florida, assuming that it has been a significant problem, has a history of enacting significant purges of voter rolls. These practices had an unfortunate impact on the year 2000 election result for President, which disturbed me at the time, and has troubled me more since, because this undemocratic event changed to course of history of my country for the worst, in my opinion, from which we may never recover!

    Now Florida (and other states) is again setting the stage for a repeat performance which could very well have another history changing impact for the worst. So naturally I am very concerned.

    For a better understanding of said history, I recommend that you read this carefully.

  20. “There can be only one reason the left is so transfixed against voter ID and that is they endorse voter fraud. They actually want the under age, those not in their own districts, illegals, felons and dead people to be able to cast a ballot. We must assume merely to cancel out the legitimate votes of others.”

    No, Hoagie, my reason is that I want our elections to be as fair and accurate as we can make them. If this effort happens to favor the Dems, so much the better!

    It has been shown that about 11% of voting age citizens lack a photo ID, the majority of whom are the young and minorities, therefore requiring photo ID’s discriminates against these voters.

    Moreover, you, Hoagie, have not shown that voter fraud is a significant problem in the absence of requiring voter ID’s.

    All you have done is provide us with unsubstantiated opinions of your own. That is hardly convincing, Hoagie!

  21. If as you say 11% of voting age citizens lack a photo ID then the answer is to provide them with one. BTW, just because your 11% are voting age does not mean they vote. You do realize a bunch of people out there don’t give a rats ass about voting, don’t you? However, one way or the other it is no excuse to allow a loophole wherein people who shouldn’t be able to vote can, now does it?

    And Wagonwheel, I don’t need to show fraud is a “significant problem”, any fraud to me is significant. At what point does voter fraud become acceptable to you, Wagonwheel? And at what point is said fraud a significant problem?

  22. First of all, koolo, it is hardly “radical” to be concerned about assuring that our elections are carried out in a fair and accurate manner.

    Then why are you against FL doing what it is doing now? It has asked the Dept. of Homeland Security to coordinate with it to ID non-citizens so the non-citizen purge is as accurate as all possible. But the DHS has thus far refused. That doesn’t sound like a concern for “fair and accurate.”

    Secondly, regarding voter fraud being an insignificant problem, the State of Florida, assuming that it has been a significant problem, has a history of enacting significant purges of voter rolls.

    That’s right. And the state wants to improve such to the maximum level possible. As for the “unfortunateness” of 2000, you’ve been shown innumerable studies about how thousands of convicted felons were still left on the rolls in FL in 2000, so to act as if the “irregularities” were all in one direction in completely dishonest. (Typical.)

    Now Florida (and other states) is again setting the stage for a repeat performance which could very well have another history changing impact for the worst. So naturally I am very concerned.

    Then tell the DHS to begin cooperating.

    It has been shown that about 11% of voting age citizens lack a photo ID, the majority of whom are the young and minorities, therefore requiring photo ID’s discriminates against these voters.

    Then these people are being “discriminated” against regarding a great many things now, aren’t they? Including entering the Democratic National Convention.

  23. “And Wagonwheel, I don’t need to show fraud is a “significant problem”, any fraud to me is significant. At what point does voter fraud become acceptable to you, Wagonwheel? And at what point is said fraud a significant problem?”

    Hoagie, to suppress many more votes in order to attack a proven insignificant voter fraud problem is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Why should we do that, except to favor one political party over another, which obviously is not a valid reason. Yet this is what the red governors of the red states are attempting to do!

  24. Hoagie, to suppress many more votes in order to attack a proven insignificant voter fraud problem is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Why should we do that, except to favor one political party over another, which obviously is not a valid reason. Yet this is what the red governors of the red states are attempting to do!

    Thank God PAP is on the lunatic fringe on this issue.

  25. “That’s right. And the state wants to improve such to the maximum level possible. As for the “unfortunateness” of 2000, you’ve been shown innumerable studies about how thousands of convicted felons were still left on the rolls in FL in 2000, so to act as if the “irregularities” were all in one direction in completely dishonest.”

    In the first place, why should convicted felons who have paid the price and been freed, be disenfranchised? I’ve never understood the reasoning, except to note that these folks are predominantly minorities, which gives Republicans motivation for continuing this practice. In the second place, as I just mentioned to Hoagie, throwing the baby out with the bathwater is not a justified tactic.

    “Then tell the DHS to begin cooperating.”

    Voters should not be disenfranchised preemptively because a government agency is not doing its job.

    “Then these people are being “discriminated” against regarding a great many things now, aren’t they? Including entering the Democratic National Convention.”

    This is a false equivalency statement: Security measures do not correspond to voting requirements. Moreover, the DNC is a private gathering, open only to those invited, whereas voting is a privilege open to each and every American citizen.

  26. “Thank God PAP is on the lunatic fringe on this issue.”

    Hardly! I’m not the one in favor of suppressing the vote, you are, koolo.

    I ask again, how is it radical, as you implied earlier, to expect the voting process to be fair and accurate? On the other hand, voter suppression efforts by your Republican Party, is precisely what is radical in the context of our basic principles.

  27. “In the first place, why should convicted felons who have paid the price and been freed, be disenfranchised? I’ve never understood the reasoning, except to note that these folks are predominantly minorities, which gives Republicans motivation for continuing this practice.’

    First off Wagonwheel, I can agree somewhat that non-violent felons be granted their voting rights as well as their Second Amendment rights. But I disagree that “these folks are predominantly minorities”, as they are not. And it is not just evil Republicans who want to continue this practice, where have you seen any prominent Democrats advocating felons voting rights?

    Furthermore I am not advocating throwing the baby out with the bath water (can’t believe I just typed that silly cliche) I’m advocating secure, honest voting. I can’t understand why you don’t seem to care if an illegal cancels out your vote. I know damn well I do.

  28. WW wrote:

    In the first place, why should convicted felons who have paid the price and been freed, be disenfranchised? I’ve never understood the reasoning, except to note that these folks are predominantly minorities, which gives Republicans motivation for continuing this practice.

    Because law-abiding people do not want criminals to vote, and the Fourteenth Amendment specifically recognizes felony disenfranchisement as legitimate, in Section 2:

    But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

    The states are free, within the restrictions of the federal Constitution, to structure eligibility to vote as they choose. Your Editor absolutely supports permanent felony disenfranchisement, as part of the penalty for committing crimes.

  29. In the first place, why should convicted felons who have paid the price and been freed, be disenfranchised?

    That’s an entirely separate issue. But you knew that, didn’t you?

    Voters should not be disenfranchised preemptively because a government agency is not doing its job.

    You’re right. FL should go ahead and do it on its own if DHS refuses to assist.

    This is a false equivalency statement: Security measures do not correspond to voting requirements.

    Come again? There’s not a thing called “voting security?”

  30. Hardly! I’m not the one in favor of suppressing the vote, you are, koolo.

    No, I am the one advocating common sense vote integrity measures. You support fraud in our elections w/your stance.

  31. The one group that is ostensibly the most impacted by Voter ID laws, the Hispanic population, supports Voter ID by super-majorities in states that matter, due to the very large Hispanic population: Florida, New Mexico, Colorado, each with over 70 percent Hispanic approval (Florida with nearly 90 percent Hispanic approval).

    Voter ID laws prevent a wide range of vote fraud. That Democrat power-brokers are fighting against the very clear majority of We The People, including very clear majorities of minority groups, shows that Democrat power-brokers realize they need vote fraud to win.

  32. Perry says he wants to assure that “our elections are carried out in a fair and accurate manner. Yet he rejects the best way we have to achieve fairness and accuracy.

    Fair and accurate elections depend on making sure only properly registered US citizens vote, and without the ability to verify a voter’s identity with a photo ID card there’s no way to keep corrupt officials from improperly influencing election results.

    None of this is new information, everyone knows it, even children, it’s common sense, yet we still have people like Perry pretending that poor and downtrodden would-be voters who don’t have photo ID cards TNFOTO, (through no fault of their own, of course) are being disenfranchised in droves. Well, that’s just poppycock.

    But it is the laughably stupid and intellectually insulting excuse Democrats use to keep the door of the voting booth open wide enough for them to stuff the ballot boxes with fraudulent votes. Anyone (I’m talkin’ to you now Perry) opposed to requiring photo ID at the polls is supporting voter fraud and is an enemy of the people.

  33. I want to note that, due to my jpeg proof that Democrat money has ruled the roost for a pant-load of years, Perry hasn’t pushed his radical Leftist boilerplate dishonesty that “Citizens United is going to destroy politics” on this article. But, after reading and commenting on this article, Perry went and did just that on a different article.

  34. Greg Pollowitz at Media Blog says, “Another good column by Marc Caputo in today’s Miami Herald on what’s really going on in Florida and the attempt to clean-up the voter rolls prior to the election:

    Gov. Rick Scott’s administration created a mess by trying to get rid of noncitizen voters.

    And President Barack Obama’s administration helped him do it.”

    From the The Miami Herald:

    First, Obama’s Department of Homeland Security stonewalled the state’s noncitizen voter hunt for almost nine months by refusing Florida access to an immigration database. Then, on Thursday, Obama’s Justice Department ordered the purge to halt, in part because time had run out.

    Ironically, DOJ’s order cited the so-called “Motor Voter” law, which actually calls on states to purge ineligible voters. One former DOJ lawyer and critic, conservative J. Christian Adams, blogged that the former Obama appointee in charge of the voting section announced early on that it would ignore Motor Voter’s purge obligation.

    “We have no interest in enforcing this provision of the law,” he quoted Julie Fernandes as saying in 2009 when she was an assistant attorney general. “It has nothing to do with increasing turnout, and we are just not going to do it.” She has since left DOJ.

    So to recap: The feds delayed and then said “time expired” under a law it selectively enforces.

    And it’s not the only selective reading by the feds.

    A 1996 immigration crackdown law gives Florida the right to access the Homeland Security database known as SAVE, which stands for “Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements.” The federal law provides for “customer agencies to use SAVE for any legal purpose such as background investigations and voter registration.”

  35. Kollo, take a second look at Creepy Caputo’s article. He can’t help himself but to blame the Obama Administration’s stonewalling on Governor Rick Scott. Caputo’s bias is front and center in his opening sentence.

    Later on in the article Caputo even tries to imply Florida’s Jim Crow past is somehow Scott’s responsibility when in fact it was Democrats who were responsible for suppression of black civil rights, including voting rights.

    Examples of Creepy Caputo’s bias are evident throughout the article. He’s an extremely partisan Democrat and a dishonest writer.

  36. rope: I think he’s pretty balanced overall, but I take your point about the Jim Crow past and the party responsible for it.

  37. You’re just accustomed to dealing with Perry, Koolo. That’s enough to distort anyone’s perspective, he actually thinks he’s pretty balanced too, but that only proves there’s no accounting for the fact that lots of people believe things rather fervently that just ain’t so.

    PS: Creepy Caputo cleans up for the Sunday TV talk shows and he tries to present himself as fair and objective, but it’s all a recent act put on to advance his career under false colors. In South Florida he’s got a reputation for writing like a yellow dog Democrat and looking like Kurt Cobain on a 2 week binge.

  38. Sounds like you know this dude pretty well, rope. National Review seems to like his reporting on this; that’s where I’ve gotten the links from.

  39. If Caputo was even attempting to appear fair he wouldn’t be blaming Governor Rick Scott for the Obama Administration’s stonewalling.

    Scott’s attempt to purge the voter list of dead, duplicate, and fraudulent voters should be acknowledged for what it is, an legal and necessary effort to ensure the results of Florida elections reflect the will of Florida voters, uncontaminated by corrupt election practices.

    Instead, Caputo blames Rick Scott for creating a mess. That’s flat out crooked reporting and it should be denounced for a hatchet job by a smear merchant.

  40. ” I’m advocating secure, honest voting. I can’t understand why you don’t seem to care if an illegal cancels out your vote. I know damn well I do.”

    Again, Hoagie, we already have fair, secure, and accurate voting. The problem is that we have citizens who are being systematically disenfranchised. Republicans are currently doing their utmost to be selective about just whom they wish to disenfranchise, like in Florida, minorities and young voters, by requiring a photo ID.

    Moreover, perhaps you can explain to me why this disenfranchisement is predominately a red state/battle ground state phenomena, with the state of Florida just now being the most visible poster child?

  41. Moreover, perhaps you can explain to me why this disenfranchisement is predominately a red state/battle ground state phenomena, with the state of Florida just now being the most visible poster child?

    It’s not. It’s that red states actually care about the integrity of the system, whereas blue states just wanna win and don’t care who the hell votes — illegal aliens, dead people, people voting multiple times, etc.

  42. Again, Hoagie, we already have fair, secure, and accurate voting. The problem is that we have citizens who are being systematically disenfranchised. Republicans are currently doing their utmost to be selective about just whom they wish to disenfranchise, like in Florida, minorities and young voters, by requiring a photo ID.

    So, you’re saying “Minorities” are too stupid and/or lazy to get an ID whereas white people aren’t. Racism, anyone?

  43. Instead, Caputo blames Rick Scott for creating a mess. That’s flat out crooked reporting and it should be denounced for a hatchet job by a smear merchant.

    I wouldn’t be so quick. The article did say that FL changes in elections have to be approved by the feds since the state is covered under the Civil Rights Act. But, of course, the feds are now going “nyah nyah” and not only refusing to assist the state, but telling them to stop what they’re doing, period.

  44. So, you’re saying “Minorities” are too stupid and/or lazy to get an ID whereas white people aren’t. Racism, anyone?

    That’s exactly what Passive-Aggressive Perry is saying, Eric. If minorities didn’t have people around like PAP, where ‘o where would they be in life, for goodness sake! He CARES!!!

  45. Koolo, the reason Florida gets special scrutiny under the voting rights section of the Civil Rights Act is because for almost 100 years following the Civil War Florida Democrats systematically disenfranchised black voters.

    Caputo is trying to blame the Democrat Party’s crimes on GOP Governor Rick Scott which pretty much tells the tale. Read the headline and the opening sentence of Caputo’s article.

    How can a story about stonewalling by the Department of Homeland Security, and refusal to enforce the law by DOJ be introduced as a mess created by Governor Scott?

  46. rope: Because it says Scott went ahead without getting prior approval of the feds. Look, it doesn’t matter what party holds power now and what party was responsible for Jim Crow. I see your point and agree that the feds are the ones stonewalling. I said this from the start. But if this is accurate, Scott, needed federal approval before signng off on any election changes.

  47. Wagonwheel gets it backwards:

    Moreover, perhaps you can explain to me why this disenfranchisement is predominately a red state/battle ground state phenomena, with the state of Florida just now being the most visible poster child?

    The real question is: why do the Democrats who control the blue states want to retain the ability to have fraudulent votes cast?

    We know the answer, naturally: it is because the Democrats know that the majority of fraudulent votes will be cast for Democrats.

  48. Agreed Mr. Editor. I can’t understand why its okay to disenfranchise honest, legitimate voters by allowing even the possibility their votes be canceled out by fraudsters. As usual, the left is back assward on this one as they want to protect the fraud vote all while claiming they’re for fair and honest elections.

    And I still don’t understand how obtaining a FREE voter ID card is such a hardship for people. Is it an outrageous hardship for them to go get an iPad or a cell phone? Somehow they manage to do that. Are the young and minorities that Wagonwheel moans about so damn stupid and incapable they can’t obtain a free ID? No wonder they vote Democrat, if they’re that dumb and lazy who else could they vote for?

    What’s next, we wipe their butts too?

  49. “No, I am the one advocating common sense vote integrity measures. You support fraud in our elections w/your stance.”

    We already have common sense voting integrity measures, koolo. Maybe I missed it, but none of you have demonstrated that we don’t, with the exception of a few anecdotes.

    Face it, this is a concerted effort by your Party to disenfranchise voters who usually vote Democratic. It’s all so obvious! How can you persist in this with a straight face? Oh, I know, thank god for the internet, and a biased blog at that, with only one Progressive here to deal with all of you people’s misinformation.

  50. “The real question is: why do the Democrats who control the blue states want to retain the ability to have fraudulent votes cast?”

    No, no Mr Editor. The real question is where are all these fraudlent votes you folks are talking about. A few anecdotes don’t count, unless one is as stupid as Hoagie claims poor people are. And btw, there is your typical Republican class warfare statement, of which Hoagie is quite adept!

  51. “Koolo, the reason Florida gets special scrutiny under the voting rights section of the Civil Rights Act is because for almost 100 years following the Civil War Florida Democrats systematically disenfranchised black voters.”

    That’s true, ropelight. You are talking about Dixiecrat Democrats who, after the Voting Rights Act was passed, became Republicans, many of whom have the same racist attitudes they had had since before the Civil War. Thanks for the enlightenment!

  52. We already have common sense voting integrity measures, koolo. Maybe I missed it, but none of you have demonstrated that we don’t, with the exception of a few anecdotes.

    Actually we have; you saying so is just your usual — and laughable at this point — parlor tricks.

    Face it, this is a concerted effort by your Party to disenfranchise voters who usually vote Democratic. It’s all so obvious! How can you persist in this with a straight face?

    If it’s so obvious, why are YOU the one in the distinct minority on this issue? Face it, yours is a concerted effort to allow voter fraud, using voters who usually vote Democratic. It’s all so obvious! The polls reflect this time and and time again! How can you persist in this with a straight face?

    (Once again, it’s everybody else, not Passive-Aggressive Perry. Always. Forever.)

  53. unless one is as stupid as Hoagie claims poor people are.

    Hoagie didn’t claim that. YOU do, when you say people getting FREE IDs somehow “disenfranchises” them.

    And you didn’t answer Hoagie’s question: What’s next — wiping these people’s asses, too? I’m sure you yourself probably need assistance in this regard at this point in time. Maybe that’s why you’re so sympathetic!

  54. That’s true, ropelight. You are talking about Dixiecrat Democrats who, after the Voting Rights Act was passed, became Republicans, many of whom have the same racist attitudes they had had since before the Civil War. Thanks for the enlightenment!

    How about “enlightening” us further with the actual numbers of each party who supported the Civil Rights Acts, Passive-Aggressive Perry? Never mind, I’ll make you look like an idiot yet again.

    Breakdown by party votes for Civil Rights Act. Now, explain to us why in the world these southern Democrats would be so anxious to defect to the party that so overwhelmingly supported these measures! Before you “attempt” to answer, here’s a key phrase from the link: “The South, which had started to vote increasingly Republican beginning in the 1930s, continued that trend, becoming the stronghold of the Republican party by the 1990s …”

  55. Wagonwheel wrote:

    That’s true, ropelight. You are talking about Dixiecrat Democrats who, after the Voting Rights Act was passed, became Republicans, many of whom have the same racist attitudes they had had since before the Civil War. Thanks for the enlightenment!

    That’s really amazing! I’d never have guessed that there are people in Florida who were around before the Civil War! :)

    Of course, WW errs: the “Dixiecrats” stayed Democrats, as Democrats on the state level throughout the South remained mostly conservative. It was their children who, upon seeing how the national Democratic Party had abandoned conservatism, registered as Republicans.

Comments are closed.