U.S. Electile Dysfunction 2016

[Xyzzy]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

All I can say is that I appreciate he has admitted he was wrong.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ercent-remarks

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by Xyzzy

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ercent-remarks

Does anyone think those 47% remarks actually cost Mitt Romney the presidential election in 2012? (As an outsider I had little insight in the political dynamics of that election so I would appreciate any education on the subject!)

[kladner]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

Does anyone think those 47% remarks actually cost Mitt Romney the presidential election in 2012? (As an outsider I had little insight in the political dynamics of that election so I would appreciate any education on the subject!)

He sure seems to think so. I believe it had considerable impact. I believe the same about "Corporations are people, my friend."

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by kladner

He sure seems to think so. I believe it had considerable impact. I believe the same about "Corporations are people, my friend."

I'd forgotten about that one. Makes me wonder if Romney also had some percentage of corporations in mind about which he would not worry because they would never show any responsibility anyway (and would always choose Obama for their corporate vote).

[kladner]

Huzzah! Also, a federal judge in Corpus Christi, TX blocked enforcement of that state's voter ID law, saying it amounted to an unconstitutional poll tax.
Texas Decision here.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/wi...d/#more-218958

Over a mild protest by three Justices, the Supreme Court on Thursday night barred Wisconsin from enforcing a requirement that voters must produce a photo identification before voting, by absentee ballot or in person. The Court majority’s one-paragraph order gave no reason, but the fact that this year’s election is less than a month away may have been the key factor.

The Wisconsin law, challenged by civil rights and citizens’ advocacy groups, was described by them as “one of the strictest voter ID laws in the country.” It would require voters to show one of only nine specific forms of identification to cast a ballot. Apparently, thousands of Wisconsin voters have already cast ballots without producing the kind of ID required, and tens of thousands reportedly do not have the right kind of ID. November 4 is the general election day this year.

The Court’s order was unsigned, but apparently had the votes of at least five Justices, since that would have been the minimum necessary to set aside a lower court’s order.

Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., joined in dissent by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, would have allowed the law to be enforced for fairly technical legal reasons, but they conceded that “there is a colorable basis for the Court’s decision due to the proximity of the upcoming general election.”

Reflecting what must have been part of the internal discussion of the issue, Alito wrote that “it is particularly troubling that absentee ballots have been sent out without any notation that proof of photo identification must be submitted.”

[ewmayer]

From an actual news story spotted on the Interwebs:

‘President Obama blasted Republicans as the party of “billionaires” on Tuesday while mingling with high-rollers at the $26 million estate of Rich Richman — yes, that’s his real name — in Greenwich, Conn.

Whenever O visits the SF Bay area he attends one or more fundraisers hosted by local tekno-squillionaires, so perhaps he really meant "the party of those other billionaires." (Presumably the bad naughty wicked evil ones.)

[kladner]

Yeah. Sigh.....

[only_human]

(Salon.com)

GOP voter ID law gets crushed: Why Judge Richard Posner’s new opinion is so amazing
Conservative icon/federal judge changes mind on photo ID laws, issues blistering dissent against them.

And remember, once again, this is written by Richard Posner, the conservative Republican icon of a federal appellate court judge — the judge who wrote the opinion on behalf of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals approving of the first such Photo ID law in the country in 2008, the very case that rightwingers from Texas to Wisconsin now cite over and over (almost always incorrectly) in support of similar such laws — now, clearly admitting that he got the entire thing wrong.

One last point (for now): Our legal analyst Ernie Canning, who (along with me) will undoubtedly have much more to say on this dissent in upcoming days, suggests we award The BRAD BLOG’s almost-never-anymore-bestowed Intellectually Honest Conservative Award to Judge Posner. And so it shall be.

[ewmayer]

@only_human: The SCOTUS fab 5 just upheld Texas' photo-ID election law.

====================

Voters Excited To Use Midterms To Put Country Back On Different Wrong Track

[kladner]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;385511]@only_human: The SCOTUS fab 5 just upheld Texas' photo-ID election law.

[Primeinator]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Voters Excited To Use Midterms To Put Country Back On Different Wrong Track

The Onion is perhaps one of the greatest ideas ever conceived by mankind.


How many of you live in areas where your vote has a high probability of inconsequential? In my state I would say that the vast majority of people vote an entirely straight ticket every election cycle regardless of whether it is the Sandman, a rotting raccoon carcass, or a rich white man pretending to relate to his constituents. As long as you have the right letter beside your name it doesn't matter.