Poor minorities must wait to vote

By Frank Moraes

The following graph comes from Up With Chris Hayes of data from the AFL-CIO. Part of this is just that America is a racist country. But another big part of this is the result of Republican efforts to stop Democratic-leaning voters. It is disgusting.

Frustrations courting the youth vote

 By Richard K. Barry

When you're on the left, or even a Democrat, one of the more frustrating things about politics is how well you tend to do in public opinion surveys with younger voters. It's frustrating, of course, because so few younger voters, relatively speaking, get around to actually voting.

The latest Gallup poll tells us that President Obama has a 35-point edge over Mitt Romney among those under 30. Unfortunately, only 60 percent of that demographic is registered to vote, the lowest percentage among any age group.

According to The Hill, the percentage of young voters who say they will definitely vote is only 56 percent. Other age groups registered 80 percent or above.

Though this is hardly a nonpartisan comment, I would like to personally ask everyone, especially younger people, to vote. Please.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Vote or STFU

By Mustang Bobby

Okay, folks, this is it. We've heard all the predictions and the prognostications; we've seen all the ads and the junk mail; we've gotten all the robo-calls and the countless e-mails and press releases; now it's your turn.

It's an old cliche that the only poll that matters is the one you visit when you vote. Well, yeah, it is. But it's also true. All of the pundits and the Very Serious People inside the Beltway can natter on about trends and waves and all that stuff, but it all starts in the solitude and relative silence of people standing in a little booth set up in parish halls and school gyms where volunteers, usually your retired neighbor (who else can get the day off?) has you sign the book and hands you a ballot and sends you off on your own to make your choices. Outside in the parking lot there are competing campaign staffers waving signs and handing out "guides" imploring you to make up your mind at the last minute, but you've left them all behind, thankfully out of earshot. If you're a studious citizen, you've studied all the questions, you've read up on all the candidates, and your mind is made up long before you run the gauntlet. Or maybe you haven't; you know who you'll vote for in the big races -- governor, senator, representative -- but the list of names in the local races mean nothing to you except for remembering whose name was on the yard sign of a friend whose insight into local issues you respect, or just sounds familiar. The dizzying language of the charter amendments and ballot initiatives makes you wonder how anyone figured out that we the people could make sense of this question that needs to be answered in the voting booth. And then there are the down-ticket races for judges and local mayors.

The choices are many, and you start to feel like you've just pulled up to the world's largest menu at a drive-through and you have to make your decision while the scratchy voice from the clown's mouth asks for your order and the family with three screaming kids in the minivan crowds your rear bumper. So you almost choose at random while the memory of what Joe Pesci said in Lethal Weapon 2 about what happens at the drive-thru rings in your ear.

Relax. Take a deep breath. No one is timing you. There is no one looking over your shoulder, there is no one telling you to hurry up. There are other voting booths, and the other people are probably grateful to have a moment to collect their thoughts. You can change your mind, too, before you hit the big red VOTE button.  You can decide whether or not to vote for someone, or calculate that voting for someone else will actually help your side win because the one you really like doesn't stand a snowball's chance and you really don't want That Guy to win. Or you can cast a vote regardless of whether or not you think they'll win because you believe in what they say and a vote for them is a statement. The choice is up to you. But it doesn't mean anything unless you actually show up.

I'm not going to tell you who to vote for. I never have. For one thing, I don't want the responsibility, and for another, I don't have any more insight about a particular candidate or ballot measure than you do, and the only piece of election material that matters is the ballot and the little sticker that says "I Voted Today!" But I will demand that you do vote, because if you don't, you forfeit the right to complain about how terrible our city, county, state, and federal governments are run. As far as I'm concerned, your opinions about anything to do with how angry or worried or concerned you are about the way the world is going will ring hollow and I don't want to hear it. If you're fed up with it, today is the day to do something about it. Put your pencil or your touch-screen where your mouth is. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

I voted

By Mustang Bobby.

I did my duty as a citizen. I stopped off on the way home and voted in the Florida primary today.

The driveway to the polling place was lined with signs, people waving signs, and candidates handing out literature. When I parked, one of the candidates ran up to me with his flier and said, "I'd appreciate your vote." The flier told me this particular candidate had been endorsed by Jeb Bush. I think I actually recoiled. He went on, "I've never been in politics before," as if that was a selling point. I replied, "I wouldn't go to a doctor who had never practiced on a patient," and went in to vote.

The place was practically empty, and filling out the ballot -- using a pen to fill in the little bubbles -- was pretty easy. I did not vote in the races where I'd never heard of the candidates, and read with interest the ballot measures.

When I handed in my ballot to have it scanned, I saw that the counting machines had totaled 435 ballots since 7:00 a.m. It was now 5:17 p.m. so that's a little more than 43 voters per hour. I asked the poll watcher, "Is that a lot?" He replied, "I don't know." "Has it been busy?" "For me."

This election doesn't seem to be incredibly inspiring. But then, in some countries people have given up house, home, family, jobs, and even sacrificed fortune and risked their lives to do something that took me two blocks out of the way on the drive home and required as little effort as a trip to the store. It would have been just as easy to drive home; no big deal. But I did something that actually will count, and that's more than all the blather from the talking heads, the demonstrations by the people in funny hats, and all the threats of Armageddon from a man who owes his job to people who did what I did today, and who can just as easily vote him out of office. And that's why it is so important.

(Cross-posted from Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Craziest Conservative of the Day: John Derbyshire

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Derbyshire, who writes for the National Review, is one of those retrograde conservatives who wants to take America back to the '50s. The 1850s... or the 1650s... back to some idyllic right-wing Dark Age.

Appearing on Alan Colmes's radio show the other day, and asked by Colmes about a section in his new book called "The Case Against Female Suffrage," he actually argued against women having the right to vote:

DERBYSHIRE: Among the hopes that I do not realistically nurse is the hope that female suffrage will be repealed. But I'll say this – if it were to be, I wouldn't lose a minute's sleep.

COLMES: We'd be a better country if women didn't vote?

DERBYSHIRE: Probably. Don't you think so?

COLMES: No, I do not think so whatsoever.

DERBYSHIRE: Come on Alan. Come clean here [laughing].

COLMES: We would be a better country? John Derbyshire making the statement, we would be a better country if women did not vote.

DERBYSHIRE: Yeah, probably.

Now, one would hope that Derbyshire was joking. But he wasn't.

And what is Derbyshire's argument against women's suffrage?

The conservative case against it is that women lean hard to the left. They want someone to nurture, they want someone to help raise their kids, and if men aren't inclined to do it -- and in the present days, they're not much -- then they'd like the state to do it for them.

So he's against it for partisan (women are anti-Republican) and ideological (women are pro-government). Of course, that's partly true, but what Derbyshire's argument amounts to is the desire to take away the vote from anyone who doesn't vote the right way, Derbyshire's extreme right-wing way. And of course he also wants to silence women along the way.

Nice to come clean, Derbyshire (no doubt speaking for many on the right). You don't just want women in the kitchen, obeying your orders and reduced to non-citizen status (if you don't have the right to vote, you're not really a citizen, are you?), you want to rig the political system so that you're guaranteed to win each and every time. Why not just come out against suffrage for blacks and Hispanics, too?

Hey, here's an idea, and it's certainly no crazier than Derbyshire's: I think America would be a better country if Republicans didn't vote. I'd lose a little sleep, I suppose, given my liberal support for universal suffrage, but I'm sure I could put country first and support what's best for America.

Anyone with me?

Ann of God

By Capt. Fogg

I can fool you once and I can fool you twice and there's no shame on me, you Godless Liberal, says Ann Coulter. Ann weaseled out of felony election fraud charges in 2006 even though the evidence that she used someone else's address when she registered to vote in Palm Beach County, Florida is there in black and white. An "unofficial" phone call from a FBI boyfriend about a "stalking" story bullied the local authorities into dropping the case. No such calls were made concerning the voting rights of tens of thousands of other Floridians illegally deprived of their voting rights, but then few of them wear black pointed hats and fly around on brooms.

OK, so that's water under the bridge, but it seems she's done it before. Ann of God voted in Connecticut in 2002 and 2004, although she lived in Manhattan, illegally using her parents' address. I guess that's the kind of behavior that shows "Liberals" just how bad it is to be Godless.

Private investigator and blogger Joseph Culligan wrote to a State of Connecticut staff attorney informing him of her misdeeds, and Theodore Bromley confirmed that a registered Connecticut voter must list "a residence address in the state where you actually live. It is not enough to claim a relative’s house where you may visit." So far, the Connecticut Elections Enforcement Commission is waiting for someone to bring charges under oath, but apparently nobody is sufficiently Godless to take Ann of God. Ann can only offer hysterical mockery of Culligan and Bromley, who have never met, according to the New York Daily News:

Do they have private parties where one of them pretends to be a real attorney and the other one dresses up like me?

No, and they probably don't hold Black Masses or dance naked aournd bonfires either, but she continues her obsession with mysterious stalkers by accusing them of it, adding:

Tell them both thanks for the flowers and also to please stop killing my pets.

Of course, that's falsely accusing them of a felony, which is a serious thing to do, when you do it to a lawyer and State's attorney, but thusly do the Godly speak.

Of Sean Hannity, who apparently does not want her on his show, she offers:

Being [Hannity's] love slave, I had no choice but to comply. Won't somebody please rescue me from this awful dungeon [where Hannity] keeps me locked up?

Actually, I had pictured a less erotic prison cell for and perhaps, suggests the Daily News, some 9/11 widow who takes umbrage at being called a witch and harpy by this witch and harpy would like to step up. If I had been accused by her of rejoicing in my spouses' death, I would be happy to do the honors, but then I'm "Godless," you know.

(Cross-posted from Human Voices.)

Franken edges closer in Minnesota

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The Minnesota Senate race, now in its post-election, pre-recount phase, is nothing if not intriguing.

I wrote yesterday evening that Coleman's margin over Franken had narrowed to just 239. Well, it's now down to 204, according to the Star Tribune (via Chait) -- though CNN has it at 209 (with five extra votes for Coleman). The CNN figure is newer, updated just minutes ago.

So: 209. Which is truly remarkable... Wait, it's down to 204 now. (Seriously, the numbers just moved.)

Which is truly remarkable, given that almost 2.9 million votes were cast (or have been counted so far), including 437,389 for independent candidate (and Ventura supporter) Dean Barkley. As of right now -- 12:17 pm ET -- the totals are as follows:

-- Coleman: 1,211,560
-- Franken: 1,211,356

UPDATE (3:15 pm): The margin is now 206. Coleman has picked up four votes, Franken two. (Again, CNN has the latest numbers here.)

For more, make sure to read Nate Silver's latest take (a fascinating, if extremely wonky, analysis of recounts and error rates).

Basically, Franken has a fairly good shot to win the recount if, as is probable, the undervotes (which occur "when the machine is unable to record a vote for any candidate in that race") turn out to have come disproportionately from so-called "vulnerable voters" (whom Nate defines here as "minorities, elderly voters, low-income and low-education voters, and first-time voters"), given his strength among such voters (other than the elderly, who "split their votes almost exactly evenly between Franken and Coleman").

Stay tuned.

Reflections on the elections

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I've been trying this morning to put my finger on just how I feel about yesterday, to find the right word for it. I still feel overcome, overwhelmed. I'm euphoric, but not deliriously so, immensely happy, but not without a sense of the difficulties and challengies that lie ahead. Joyous, but also sober. Incredulous, on one level, but also humble. Aware of what happened, but not yet fully.

As I've been telling people today, we have been witnesses to history, to something very, very special, and, in the end, I think we all made a difference.

Obama's victory is our victory, and we are right to celebrate it, and to be deeply moved by it. But now comes the even harder part: governing. There is no time to waste.

**********

I will continue to post on the election today and well into the forseeable future, of course -- for example, I have a "now for the bad news..." post planned for later -- but here, for now, are some quick notes and reflections:

ITEM #1 -- The complete transcript of Obama's victory speech is here.

ITEM #2 -- There was huge voter turnout in this election, relatively speaking: 64 percent, certainly the hightest level in a long, long time. Looking at the figures at the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), an invaluable resource, I see that it would be just higher than turnout in 1960, which was 63 percent, and therefore the highest level at least since 1948. (For more on turnout in the U.S., see here.) Note, though, that is this much lower than turnout in most other mature western democracies (which mostly have parliamentary systems). One notable exception is, alas, Canada, where there was record low turnout for last month's federal election (under 60 percent of registered voters). And so, despite the obvious importance of the election, despite what seemed to be all the excitement, 36 percent of the electorate didn't vote. That's pretty depressing.

ITEM #3 -- Did anyone else notice the awkwardness between McCain and Palin after McCain's quite gracious concession speech last night? It's like they didn't quite know what to do. McCain extended his arm, as if to shake hands, and they did, but only hesitantly. Then they hugged and air-kissed, but coldly. And that was that. They all just sort of stood there, not quite knowing what to do. Even McCain's handshake with Todd was awkward: quick and done with. McCain may have picked her in part because he was smitten with her (and because the right wanted her on the ticket), but, by now, there certainly seem to be some hard feelings between them. And understandably so. It may even be that they don't really like or respect each other anymore. It was a shotgun wedding, a short, intense marriage, and then, implosion. Last night, they might just as well have been a divorced couple signing papers with their lawyers. Let the recriminations begin in earnest.

ITEM #4 -- I'll have more on this later, but it looks like the Democrats may have been held to 56 seats in the Senate, short of what some of us (most of us?) projected. (I didn't think they'd make it to 60, but I thought 58 or 59 was likely.) Of the four races yet to be decided, the Dems may pick up one more, perhaps Alaska or Oregon, giving them 57, or perhaps even both, giving them 58. And I suppose it's possible that a recount in Minnesota could give them that one, too, bumping them up to 59. Possible, but unlikely.

In Oregon, incumbent Republican Gordon Smith, an Obama-friendly moderate, maintains a 48-46 edge over challenger Jeff Merkley. UPDATE (3:45 pm): With 72 percent reporting, it's now 47-47. Smith is still in front.

In Minnesota, in a much-watched race, incumbent Republican Norm Coleman, once thought to be possible veep pick for McCain, barely leads challenger/comedian Al Franken. With almost 2.9 million votes cast (and with 100 percent reporting), Coleman is up by just 694 votes (which means it's tied 42-42, with an independent candidate pulling in 15). There will be a recount. UPDATE (3:48 pm): Coleman is now up by just 462. What an incredibly close vote.

In Georgia, incumbent Republican Saxby Chambliss, one of the more reprehensible Republicans on Capitol Hill, is ahead of challenger Jim Martin 50 to 47 (with a Libertarian pulling in 3). Chambliss has clearly won, but, in Georgia, a run-off vote is held if no candidate wins at least 50 percent of the vote. Actually, Chambliss has 49.9 pecent of the vote, and both he and Martin are already preparing for the run-off. I suspect it is still Chambliss's race to lose.

Finally, in Alaska, incumbent Republican Ted Stevens, a convicted felon, continues to hold off challenger Mark Begich, 48 to 47, with 99 percent reporting. The race has tightened, and still to be counted, as the Anchorage Daily News points out, are about 40,000 absentee ballots (with more still coming in), about 9,000 early votes, and thousands of questioned ballots. "If the lead holds, Stevens will shock the nation and be the first person ever re-elected to the U.S. Senate after being found guilty on criminal charges. Polls had shown the Republican down by at least 8 percentage points on the day before the election." Here's hoping Begich pulls this one out.

ITEM #5 -- It looks like Obama has tapped Rahm Emanuel to be his chief of staff. Emanuel, a long-time Clintonite, is, as you may know, a Democratic Congressman from Illinois. He and Obama apparently have a strong relationship, and he is an insider who would help manage relations with Capitol Hill, but he's not exactly well-liked among the more progressive elements of the Democratic Party. I'm not sure this signifies much. It's too early to conclude that Obama will govern from the "center," or that he will align himself with the less progressive side of the party. What is essential is that Obama have a chief of staff in whom he has full confidence and can place his full trust. Emanuel, in that regard, may be right for the job. He hasn't yet given his answer, or his answer hasn't yet been reported. As Steve Benen suggests, while Emanuel's legislative record may not be terribly to our liking, "his work in the Clinton White House was impressive, and in many ways, he's always been more of an executive branch kind of guy anyway." All I can say is, I hope Obama knows what he's doing. (I suspect he does.) UPDATE (3:54 pm): Emanuel has accepted. Or maybe not -- it's being denied.

ITEM #6 -- Finally, a hilarious headline (and short article) at The Onion: "Black Man Given Nation's Worst Job." Yeah, there's a lot of truth to that. Thankfully, though, it's the right man for the job.

Voting stories

By Libby Spencer

This first one is from yesterday, but I'm including it anyway. Hecate passes on a beautiful story and photo from an Obama rally in Raleigh, NC.

Hecate also pulls a Tarot card. It's a very good omen. Might be NSFW if you work in very straight-laced place. It's just a picture of a card with a naked female angel, but use caution.

Pete Abel in Missouri saw lots of young people excited about voting.

1000 students lined up at Penn State.

Twitter the vote.

Turn out stories from many different locations.

(Cross-posted at The Impolitic.)

Moved to tears

By Libby Spencer

Although I weep at the end of It's a Wonderful Life every year, I'm not really one to cry over every little thing. I've been surprised how often a story about this race has made me so teary-eyed. Today's tear jerkers: First a voting story from Glen.

And I have a wonderful image from my small precinct to share. A young African-American mother can to vote with her three young daughters — we have those partially-enclosed plastic "booths." When she went to mark her vote, she told the girls "come, touch my hand, be a part of this — it's something you're going to remember the rest of your life."

Obama's first statement about his grandmother's death.



I'm just crushed that she didn't live one more day to see him to the end of his long journey. One bright spot in this dark moment is that yes, her vote will count.

(Cross-posted at The Impolitic.)

Yes. We. Can.

By Libby Spencer


Election day at last. People in my internet circles are reporting long lines and no lines. Everyone is in a good mood. You can feel the hope. It's so palpable, you could eat it for breakfast.

Dixville Notch, NH, traditionally the first to report results, has it for Obama in a landslide, 15-6.

Obama closed out his campaign with 90,000 at a rally in Manassas, Virginia last night. This morning in Richmond, all their voting machines broke down. Some confusion at first, but they now have paper ballots. Good. Harder to steal the vote that way.

Sean is on the road and takes a look at the Obama ground game in Georgia. I'm too superstitous to make predictions, but that state could surprise us.

Over in Right Blogstantinople and Wingnut Punditryville, heads are already exploding. Take your pick of comical coverage here. Breathless posts on McCain's optimism, horrified indignation over imagined voting fraud, or dire warnings about our country lurching to the left.

Meanwhile, I don't know how much blogging I'll be doing today. I'm not much for hour-by-hour analysis, but I expect to be sharing voting stories as they come in.

In the interim, visualize victory.

[Photo credit]

(Cross-posted at The Impolitic.)

Barack to the future

By Carl

I went to vote today.

I got to my polling place at 7:15 am. I like voting early. I like getting home at night and knowing I've fulfilled my obligations for the day.

Normally, I vote somewhere around 7:45. Usually it's me, the poll workers and maybe one or two poll watchers, depending on how tight the local races are. My district is reliably Democratic, more so as it has become something of a haven for artists.

I get to talk to the poll workers, usually ladies of a certain age in my neighborhood who make a few bucks by jotting down numbers on a card and a sheet of paper and wishing you well. Sometimes, I'll bring coffee because I know they've been there since 5 or so, and have a long dead stretch of time until 9 or 10 pm.

Usually, I'm voter number four in my ED. In NYC, we divide our precincts up into Assembly Districts and then Election Districts. That means my ED is basically the four square blocks around my house. My immediate neighborhood is a mix of deeply blue-collar homeowners, one or two who are pretty Republican, and a large dollop of single men and women, with a sprinkling of young families. Usually, this means I'm one of the first people up in the morning, nevermind out and voting.

My polling place is the local elementary school. On a good day, say when Clinton ran for re-election in 1996, there might be twenty people voting at any one time that early.

Today, I had heard rumours that the turnout was already gearing up to be spectacular. That's why I decided to get there early. I wanted to witness it.

In one ED, just one, there were some seventy five people lined up when I got there. Think about it: usually, twenty people across something like 20 EDs. Today, 75 in just one. I was fortunate. It wasn't mine. I did have to stand in line.

I was voter number 25 in my ED. Remember, I'm usually a half hour later and number four or so. Six times as many voters in three-fourths the time in my ED alone.

I get the sense there's a welling up in this nation. A repudiation of the evil attempts to take this nation back to a time when things were better... for white men.

I'm not sure what finally woke America up. Katrina? Perhaps. Iraq? Possibly. September 11 and the watered down accusations of the 9/11 Commission's report? Likely.

Somewhere along the line, Americans looked at government-by-Republican and said "enough". In drips and drabs, to be sure. We'll put up with a lot, and will be very forgiving, very... Christian.

There is, however, an undeniable momentum to the future, towards progress. We are, to coin a phrase, heading Barack to the Bridge to the 21st Century.

I can write this on election morning, November 2, with the results unknown, much less unannounced, because frankly, it doesn't really matter. Obama can win, Obama can lose, but this boulder will not endure Sisyphian efforts to roll it up the hill of reactionary thinking any longer, it will flatten those who choose to get in its way. If Obama somehow manages to lose this election -- no matter, in 2012, Hillary will prevail. There is no stopping this motion. The inertia is too great.

If Obama loses, it just means the right wing has thrown John McCain in front of the rock to momentarily bounce it around a bit, but McCain with a fully Democratic congress, and a GOP torn asunder, will be less of an impediment than many on the right would wish.

In 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, and 2004, I had hoped that America would finally see the sham being foisted upon them by the Republican party, shackling us to our jobs and to an indentured servitude of lifelong indebtedness while the government does nothing for the "little guy", the "Joe the Plumbers" of America. It worried me that, as we rode deeper and deeper into the abyss, as Republican leaders became less and less coy about the rapine of America's bounty, that Americans might wait until it's too late.

And indeed, they may have. It might be impossible to pull our great and wondrous nation back from the brink. But we have a chance. We have hope.

We have change. And I have never been prouder to be an American than I was to be voter number 25 this morning.

Maddow on a new poll tax

By LindaBeth

Today my student asked me if I thought that a professor would let her leave class early to vote since she has class all morning and has to work immediately after. I told her what I thought, and I really felt for this student, who at 18 had the desire to vote, yet to do so meant hurting her at work or school. I teach at a community college, known for having significant percentages of students who work and attend school full time, and many are mature students returning to school for a better job. These student lead very complex, full lives and schedules.

I had that conversation in my head as I watched Rachel Maddow's live Sunday special (thank you, DVR!). I was incredibly moved by Maddow's scathing characterization of the long, long early voting lines as a poll tax. I was moved because of the way that Maddow pleas with the audience -- as voters, employers, public officials -- to persevere to vote in this historic and all-important election, and then demand that we, as a nation, fulfill our democratic values and eliminate what is effectively a poll tax. I couldn't agree with her more.

Watch her assessment here:

(Cross-posted to Smart Like Me.)

Monday before TUESDAY marks the 11th hour

By Carol Gee

What can you say when time is running out? Talk to yourself:

• If you are a candidate, you would hope to say, "I have done my best; now the voters decide."
  
• If you are a voter who has already voted, you can say "Thank goodness!"
  
• If you haven't voted yet, you can say, "Whatever it takes . . . I'll prevail."
  
• If you are refusing to vote, even for McCain-Palin, you can say, "Shame on me."
  
• If you are a member of the media, you can say, "I'll do my honest-to-goodness best."
  
• If you are a blogger, you can say,"Hang in there; a bit of respite is coming."
  
• If you are from outside the U.S., you can say, "Good Luck to America!"

Where are we at this 11th hour? Campaign funds have been spent at an incredible rate. (Obama's "infomercial" was watched by 33.5 million people). The time for big new ideas on how to win has expired. The papers have all made their endorsements.* More Conservatives have endorsed Obama# than Democrats have endorsed McCain. The candidates that head both parties have either reconciled or split. The Republican Party is more well known# to voters, as candidates are revealed at their best and worst over time.# Most voters know where the Democrats stand on the issues after four debates. New methods for getting out the vote emerged, and old methods for suppressing votes have shown up again.

After Tuesday's election results are final, we know that half of us are going to be bitterly disappointed at the outcomes. We all know that things will change# in a new administration, such as not keeping campaign promises, raising or lowering taxes,# and resolving the problems of the economic crisis in different ways than what is being tried now. New coalitions will be formed. Old groupings will break up. Democracy will again prevail.

Hat Tip Key: Regular contributors of links to leads are "betmo"* and Jon#.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

The lion sleeps tonight

By Carl

A large part of me is thinking that Barack Obama is going to walk away from the election tomorrow with the largest mandate a president has had since Ronald Reagan.

If not more.

And part of me, the part of me that roots for the Mets, the Rangers, and yes, the Democrats, is worried. This is no time for complacency and if we are to be accused of anything, better we should be accused of running up the score than in losing graciously.

Al Gore lost graciously, thanks in large part to the spiteful vendetta of Ralph Nader. Did anyone want a repeat of the past eight years?

Not that I believe, in his heart of hearts, that John McCain and George W Bush are soulmates, cloned from the same dreck and flotsam that would see this country drift rather than take the reins of its own destiny. I don't. I believe McCain sincerely wants to do right by doing good.

I just don't think he has either the energy or the capacity anymore after selling his soul, one slice at a time, for the past eight years.

This was why, despite a bruising and at time bitter primary campaign in which my candidate lost, I was able to instantly support Barack Obama. The John McCain of 2000, the one able to speak his mind and be funny from time to time, the one I was able to disagree with without being disagreeable, him I might have had a harder time turning down.

Not this guy:

Not ever. How could I even respect a man who was so thoroughly humiliated, even to the extent of having his adopted baby's parentage questioned, by the very man he now had to kowtow to in order to get the nomination?

It is an ignominious epitaph for "The Maverick" that his political career should end in such a shabby way.

I say "end" because I assume at his age that he might even resign the Senate given the amount of animosity he has had to raise on both sides of the aisle in this campaign. He doesn't have the luxury of two or more re-election bids to re-establish his respect.

His chance came eight years ago, and he blew it. I suspect one reason he was practically given the nomination is that he deserved his shot.

That and the fact that ultimately, he and his campaign were about the strongest contenders against an Obama or Clinton ticket. I don't claim to understand the Republican mindset, but my guess is the thinking went something along the lines of "Well, we're going to get creamed this year, the economy will be in the tank, we need to send out the person who has the best shot of keeping the moderates on the sidelines."

He ran, I think, perhaps the best campaign he could, given the circumstances. You know the old saw about being given lemons and making lemonade.

McCain was given rotting lemons and a moosehunter and managed to make something not quite as nasty as moose piss. If that is damning with faint praise, it is nonetheless praise.

It troubles me, this other side of me, the one that obsesses about the possibilities of losing. I realize an awful lot of is was created by the media, who don't want to pronounce the race over until it is over, even if it is over, even if McCain himself believes it is over.

After all, what's going to draw voters to watch on Tuesday night? Not the spectacle of the first minority candidate to win the Presidency, no, of course not. It's all about "Does the old white guy stand a chance still?"

It's a sad state of affairs for our nation when even our Presidential elections have to be sold like a season ending cliffhanger.

Complacency, then, is our worst enemy. If everyone who said they would vote for Obama would simply get out and vote, then my fears would be allayed.

So that's job one for tomorrow: get out the vote. Take the day off and take five people to the polls to vote.

Job number two: remind people why you support Obama. You don't need talking points to do this. You don't need to know that his healthcare plan is better than McCain's or his tax cuts will provide three times the relief for you that McCain's will.

All you need to do is make it personal. So ask yourself, why ARE you supporting Obama? If you can't answer that question easily, then you need to think it through a bit more.

This is your vote, dammit, your birthright, and at the risk of losing a vote or two to McCain or worse, Nader, you ought not to waste it. Be sure you understand why you are voting the way you are voting, even if it's for some silly emotional reason. It doesn't matter. In our emotions are often the most compelling arguments made.

Number three: after you've voted, make sure to tell your friends you have (hell, Starbucks is giving away coffee for free to people who voted!), because while the five you take to the polls might vote, there are going to be huge numbers of people out there who will forget. Every reminder helps.

That means emails, Twitters, blogposts, phone calls, and casual run-intos in the street. Talk it up. It's important. This election will be historic, people might actually brag about their vote. Get a jump on the bandwagon!

Finally, once you have voted, and are in for the night, find a comfortable place to sit, and be sure to have plenty of relaxing music on hand. It's going to be nerve-wracking by design. The networks won't have the guts to call it for Obama the way Fox called it for Bush in 2000. It will last into the early morning and it will be tense.

I think the Pennsylvania results will be the place where the networks milk it for all its worth. Just my opinion, but if I was going to try to steal an election, that's where I'd put my resources, and the "tell" has been in for weeks now that McCain's focused on that area: Ohio and Pennsylvania.

I don't think ultimately it will matter, but I'm not willing to bet the next eight years on it.

Get out and vote.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

GOP will steal another election if we don't stop them

By Libby Spencer

Once again, here we are at the 11th hour and it's becomes increasingly clear that our biggest problem is not the polling but rather the polls, meaning the ballot box. Early races are turning up disturbing problems with the voting machines that remain unresolved eight years after the debacle of 2000.

Palm Beach County held an election on August 26. One of the races for judge ended up extremely close, only 60 votes separated two candidates. As election officials began preparations for a recount, they found that 3,500 ballots were missing.

Rumors abounded that the ballots ended up in a landfill. Assistant County Administrator Brad Merriman, who was investigating the missing ballots, found them at the vote-tabulating center.

A somewhat proud-sounding Merriman reported, “The ballots were found in this room, not in garbage bags, not in the trunks of cars.”

Some of the uncounted votes came from an electronic cartridge on a voting machine. The votes were counted but were never transferred to the tabulating center.

These are not Diebolds. This is the Sequoia Voting Systems, the other major machine in use across the country. And this is not the only anomaly that's turned up in just the past week. Brad blog pointed to this WaPo report yesterday.

D.C. election officials blamed a defective computer memory cartridge yesterday for producing what appeared to be thousands of write-in votes that officials say did not exist.

The glitch caused initially inaccurate results in several contests, including two high-profile council races, ...

Those answers were still in short supply yesterday, although the board said the confusion did not change the outcomes of the contests. They included the defeat of longtime Republican council member Carol Schwartz.

The episode has sparked uncertainty over whether the board, after apparently botching a routine local primary that drew about 13 percent of registered voters, can handle the general election in November. Officials expect the presidential race to drive a record number of voters to the polls.

I'd like to know how they can be so sure that the glitch didn't affect the outcome and who were the mysterious write-in votes for anyway? The piece doesn't say. One thing is clear though. The problems are unlikely to be resolved before November.

So the question is, what are we going to do if the GOP steal another election? And is it too late to raise a demand for paper ballots? I know that's not perfect either, but at least there's a little more transparency.

(Cross-posted at The Impolitic.)

Final showdown on FISA

By Libby Spencer

Following up on Carol's excellent post, I also want to take a moment to urge you to take action on FISA today. The vote is scheduled for tomorrow so it's time for one last push to try and browbeat our feckless Senators into upholding the rule of law. Christy has the latest tools. I'm sure you need no further instructions outside of this info.

We are asking Senators to vote IN FAVOR of the Dodd-Feingold-Leahy Amendment (S.A. 5064 to H.R. 6304). We're asking for a NO vote on cloture, and a NO vote on the final bill as well.

Be sure to include this in your communications, since I've found the staff is often woefully uninformed on what legislation is pending. So call, send a free fax, or just send an email but do it today -- please.

(Cross-posted at The Impolitic.)

Leadership lives at a little Texas caucus

By Carol Gee

Our Texas "Two-Step" Democratic primary was held all day Tuesday, March 4, in the church activities room of a typical little old white Southern Baptist church. This polling place has long served two precincts at the far edge of the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex. Nestled in a 1950's neighborhood, sociologists would define it as "in transition." The church building evidently grew as its members could afford to buy an old house, convert it for worship, and finally add a new sanctuary years later. They are happy to share it with their community.

As is the practice, this polling place was used by both Democrats and Republicans -- Dems on one side of the room, Repubs on the other. The mood of the workers was cordial, attentive to proprieties and helpful. There was nothing at all out of line as far as I could tell, as a former poll worker. Voters shared the small number of curtain-less "booths," but used separate paper ballots (bubbled-in), that we then optically scanned into the counting machine: two more for Obama.

At around 7:00 PM, our two "precinct conventions" (Texas "caucuses" to most readers) were gathering where we had voted earlier in the day. There were probably about 200 of us standing in the dimly lit and chilly parking lot and spilling over onto front lawn of the church. Men and women, old and very young, Black and Hispanic and Anglo -- people were visibly excited to be there, though a bit cold and fairly confused about what to do next.

We were among the lucky precincts, however. A middle-aged man, who had somehow gotten the necessary manila envelope of instructions and forms, volunteered to get us started. He had been through it before, he said. The man got up into the bed of a pickup and called for nominations for leader and secretary of what I now call the "evening festivities." A man behind me was nominated, a woman volunteered to record, the nominee agreed to serve and they were elected by unanimous and enthusiastic voice vote. We then became stalwarts in waiting mode until the last people in line had voted so the polls could close and the primary vote count (what will amount to 65% of the final total) could start.

Neither my "roommate" nor I had dressed for an outside winter evening with bright "Orion" visible overhead. So we made a quick trip home for ear-muffs, heavy coats and a flashlight. Upon our return people were sorting themselves into two precinct groups by asking those nearby the precinct number in which they voted. Because we have done this for over fifty years now, we were able to explain the caucus procedure to those nearby who asked us.

Our two lines stretched to the dark at the street. Voters moved gingerly across the poorly illuminated lawn, avoided the bushes, and moved up the steps to the tiny front porch of the church sanctuary. At the legally correct time, our voter lines began to register as caucus attendees. We moved slowly, getting to know each other. We visited with a young school teacher,so very excited to be involved. She holds a 5th grade "leadership class" in an elementary school in a nearby town. She and her husband, a Republican who was elsewhere, kept in touch on her colorful cell phone.

Under two little porch lights those of us ending the line wrote our names, addresses and for whom we had voted. We borrowed pens and used whatever we could find that was firm enough to support the forms. Blessedly, we were welcomed into the warm church, 72 people "for Clinton" on the right side of the aisle, and 97 of us "for Obama" on the left. I must note that no African-Americans sat across the way. We sat behind a couple who appeared to be professionals who had brought their voting age son to participate.

Filling the leadership roles for the separate Obama and Clinton contingents became the next tasks. A confident and willing African-American woman, whose husband happened to be white, volunteered to chair our very multi-ethnic group. Everybody easily agreed to that. The Clinton people chose their leader in the same volunteering style. Our Chair immediately got to her job. She asked people who would like to attend to stand; those standing along the wall, including our young teacher friend, raised a hand. Amazingly there were the necessary number to send 10 delegates to attend the March 22 County Democratic Convention. The chair gathered her 10 alternates. The Clinton group elected 7 and 7. And we were through and on our way home in a reasonable length of time.

As one trained in the social sciences, I was very struck by how group leadership emerged out of nowhere when they were needed. I was also impressed by how excited the newcomers seemed to be as they joined in something they saw as historic and unprecedented. Texas mirrors the nation in that. I send heartfelt "Congratulations" to Senator Clinton for her Texas primary win and the same to Senator Obama for getting a majority of the caucus delegates.

(Cross-posted at South by Southwest.)

After Iowa

By Carol Gee

The party caucus news has lacked perspective. One or two state outcomes does not a victory make. There are other crucial things happening that are getting crowded off the news pages too easily.

Wyoming held its "forbidden" Republican primary a few days later. Gov. Romney came out ahead because his son showed up, the campaign spent some money, and maybe because there are Mormons living in Wyoming.

Free and fair elections? This is the year of the elections - yes, this year - and the voting machine problems are not fixed. No matter who the two nominees are, if you cannot be sure of honest elections, none of this matters at all. TMCnet recommended a very good (10 page) fairly new article in the New York Times Magazine, from which I quote:

The earliest critiques of digital voting booths came from the fringe — disgruntled citizens and scared-senseless computer geeks — but the fears have now risen to the highest levels of government. One by one, states are renouncing the use of touch-screen voting machines. California and Florida decided to get rid of their electronic voting machines last spring, and last month, Colorado decertified about half of its touch-screen devices. Also last month, Jennifer Brunner, the Ohio secretary of state, released a report in the wake of the Cuyahoga crashes arguing that touch-screens “may jeopardize the integrity of the voting process.” She was so worried she is now forcing Cuyahoga to scrap its touch-screen machines and go back to paper-based voting — before the Ohio primary, scheduled for March 4. Senator Bill Nelson, a Democrat of Florida, and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, have even sponsored a bill that would ban the use of touch-screen machines across the country by 2012.

Delegates and conventions are still to come. Steve Clemons' recent Washington Note post reminded me of what the "real deal" is all about. The presidential nominations rests on the delegate counts, according to his IHT link. To quote TWN:

A candidate in the Democratic race needs 2,025 delegates -- and because of the lead Hillary Clinton has in securing "superdelegates", she's still first in the overall delegate allotment so far. . . In overall delegates now, Hillary Clinton has 175; Obama has 75; and Edwards 46.

Dealing with Iraq is still to come - Speaking of numbers, thanks to Juan Cole for linking to McClatchy's regular report on recent Iraq violence. To quote numbers of two days ago that Cole included provides useful perspective:

7 civilians were wounded in an IED explosion inside a mini bus on al Salam bridge that links between Doura and New Baghdad neighborhoods around 3,00 pm.

Police found 12 anonymous bodies in Baghdad today . . .

Diyala

Six civilians (3 men, 2women and a child) were killed and three others (2 men and a woman) were injured in an IED explosion that targeted a mini bus on Sa’adiyah- Khanaqeen Street northeast of Baquba today morning.

A civilian was killed and another was injured while a carriage was passing near the IED near the Silo in the center of Baquba city today morning. When the members of Sahwa (the awakening) council came to help, another IED exploded in the same place injuring three members of Sahwa.

18 civilians were injured when an IED exploded inside a local market in Jalawla city northeast Baquba city around 5,00 pm. Two of the injured people were moved to Sulaimaniyah hospital because of their critical conditions.

An American soldier was killed in an IED explosion that targeted his vehicle while conducting a military operation in Diyala province. US army confirmed the news in a press released issued today.

Kirkuk

Police found a body of a young man near Sargaran area west of Kirkuk city. Police said that the body is of a young man from Arbil province and his name is Mohammed Ali.

After Iowa I am avoiding getting too caught up in the latest about who is ahead in what public opinion poll. Candidates' fortunes come and go, the pundits gossip about who was snarky to whom, and millions of us around the nation await our turns to make our own wishes known to our political parties. We must honor the process and not get ahead of ourselves. This election is just too important to turn into a mere horse race, with pundits and pollsters flogging the candidates towards an arbitrary finish line. And too many are unable to look past the ends of their turned up noses.

Cross-posted at South by Southwest

Iowa's brand of democracy

By Edward Copeland

The Iowa caucuses are a strange beast in general, with multiple locations where Iowans brave whatever winter weather might be occurring to stand in a room and publicly declare their support for a candidate. However, what's not so well known is Iowans who work night shifts are disenfranchised BY STATE LAW. Their employers are not required to let them off to go vote. From the Des Moines Register story:

Ruth Kennedy's boss won't let her take time off from her night-shift job so she can caucus. She's not alone — emergency workers and other Iowans on the night shift will miss the marquee political event in Iowa.
Three weeks ago, Kennedy asked to leave her customer service job at Mediacom at 5:30 p.m. on Jan. 3 so she could caucus for Democrat Hillary Clinton. She said her supervisor waited until Christmas Eve to deny the request, saying that they couldn't spare her, that they hadn't had such requests before and that one fewer person at the caucus wouldn't make a difference anyway.
"It made me so furious," said Kennedy, who lives in Des Moines. "I raised such a fit I'm surprised they didn't send me home."
Nothing in the law requires Iowa employers to give workers time off so they can stand up for the presidential candidate of their choice.

In something that's certain to hurt Dodd, emergency services in Des Moines are fully staffing firefighters and then some for caucus night, meaning the union that endorsed him will have a lot of members unable to caucus.