PDA

View Full Version : Michelle Bachmann: Insane


nikkibong
06-19-2009, 07:24 PM
Bachmann '08!!!

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/17/exclusive-minn-lawmaker-fears-census-abuse/

Starwatcher162536
06-19-2009, 09:25 PM
Is there any credible reason to think any of ACORN's voter fraud would even marginally change an election?

My understanding is that the whole fraudulent voter thing was about minimum to just over minimum wage workers that were registering fictious people to meet their quotas and get through the day with a bare minimum of effort.

I fail to see how this would change any elections, as most likely Mickey Mouse isn't going to show up at a polling station.

I can see how they could potentially alter the balance of power by giving left leaning counties artificially high populations, I just see no reason to believe that any alterations to the actual counts would be a net benefit to the left.

I do find it troubling that a organization with such a terrible work record is getting more government work, I just don't think this is really about left wing dirty politics as much as inefficiency in the government, unlike most Republicans it seems.

AemJeff
06-19-2009, 09:35 PM
Is there any credible reason to think any of ACORN's voter fraud would even marginally change an election?

My understanding is that the whole fraudulent voter thing was about minimum to just over minimum wage workers that were registering fictious people to meet their quotas and get through the day with a bare minimum of effort.

I fail to see how this would change any elections, as most likely Mickey Mouse isn't going to show up at a polling station.

I can see how they could potentially alter the balance of power by giving left leaning counties artificially high populations, I just see no reason to believe that any alterations to the actual counts would be a net benefit to the left.

I do find it troubling that a organization with such a terrible work record is getting more government work, I just don't think this is really about left wing dirty politics as much as inefficiency in the government, unlike most Republicans it seems.

There's an important distinction between "voter fraud" and "voter registration fraud." ACORN has not been associated in any way with the former, and was the victim (not the perpetrator) of the latter. What happened was that people being paid per head by ACORN for getting peopled registered to vote were exaggerating and falsifying registration records. So, no, there's absolutely no credible reason to believe that an election could be particularly affected by that fraud.

pampl
06-19-2009, 09:38 PM
I have two problems with your summary: one, population counts aren't related to registered voter counts. AFAIK the # of registered voters isn't used for anything; even if there was no fraud it would be a pretty useless number for almost anything. Two, being a useful political tool to the right is different from having a poor record in performing work. The voter registration fraud that the right supposedly cares about is all reported by ACORN when it submits its voter registration results. Voter registration organizations are not legally allowed to discard fraudulent results on their own so any attempt to help people register to vote will result in the exact same kind of paper trail as ACORN creates and submits to the government. There may be some other evidence that ACORN performs poorly, but if it exists it apparently can't be distorted into a useful bogeyman so is never mentioned.

bjkeefe
06-19-2009, 09:49 PM
[Added] Sorry if some of the following seems repetitive. I see now that pampl is a faster typist.

==========

Is there any credible reason to think any of ACORN's voter fraud would even marginally change an election?

Correct in spirit, but as Jeff noted, there is a world of difference between "voter fraud" and a worker submitting a phony registration. It's also important to remember that once a form has been turned in by a worker, ACORN is required to turn that form into the government. They can flag it as something they don't stand behind, but they have to turn it in. So, when you hear stories about "ACORN submitted X forms shown to be false!!!1!," odds are very good they'd marked them as such beforehand.

I can see how they could potentially alter the balance of power by giving left leaning counties artificially high populations ...

I don't see this. Populations are not counted by registration forms.

And if you just mean that the local group could report that they'd registered an inflated number of voters, all I can say is that there is no evidence to show that anyone at ACORN above the level of those few temp workers in the street has ever knowingly submitted phony registration forms.*

I do find it troubling that a organization with such a terrible work record is getting more government work, I just don't think this is really about left wing dirty politics as much as inefficiency in the government, unlike most Republicans it seems.

What do you base "such a terrible work record" on? Hearing a lot of news stories about ACORN? Which when you think about it, are almost all news stories about Republicans/conservatives accusing ACORN?

And how much do you know about GOP-connected voter suppression efforts, which do, in fact, have real effects at the polls?

If you'd like to read some more in-depth reports, I followed these two stories (http://bjkeefe.blogspot.com/search/label/the%20myth%20of%20%22voter%20fraud%22%20and%20the% 20reality%20of%20voter%20suppression) for a while last fall and gathered up a bunch of links.

==========
[Added2] Which, as I indicated in my first segment, would be a pointless claim to make in any case, since most of the phony registration forms would be caught easily enough, and the few that slipped through would not be matched with actual voters. Therefore, someone running the local division of ACORN would have higher registration numbers (maybe) but correspondingly lower percent voter turnout. There is just no incentive, in other words, except for those bottom rung people trying to get paid one day for hitting a quota of pieces of paper turned in.

kezboard
06-20-2009, 04:19 AM
Will someone please explain to me how ACORN became this enormous boogeyman for the right? Until last October, the only time I had ever heard of ACORN was in the context of something to do with low-income housing here in Chicago, and then John McCain mentioned it in one of the debates, and then the next day I heard these two old men railing about it in a diner. Has it always been such a useful punching bag?

AemJeff
06-20-2009, 06:05 AM
Will someone please explain to me how ACORN became this enormous boogeyman for the right? Until last October, the only time I had ever heard of ACORN was in the context of something to do with low-income housing here in Chicago, and then John McCain mentioned it in one of the debates, and then the next day I heard these two old men railing about it in a diner. Has it always been such a useful punching bag?

It seems to me that when they found themselves facing a a possible loss to a black Presidential candidate, that an organization whose mission could be mischaracterized as mobilizing black people to vote became a convenient bogeyman for the GOP. It's just another iteration of Nixon's "Southern Strategy," I think.

bjkeefe
06-20-2009, 08:31 AM
It seems to me that when they found themselves facing a a possible loss to a black Presidential candidate, that an organization whose mission could be mischaracterized as mobilizing black people to vote became a convenient bogeyman for the GOP. It's just another iteration of Nixon's "Southern Strategy," I think.

I concur. I think another thing that might have made it stick (in the right kind of ears) back during the campaign was that it tied in with Bill Ayers -- it suggested more of those 1960s-era radicals. And/or that it tied in with the meme of "Chicago-style politics," where, as everyone knows, the Democrat machine controls everything because people vote early and often. And of course, it closely paralleled the attempt to belittle Obama as "just a community organizer."

It's also possible that as Democratic registrations surged, it became a convenient excuse for those who felt like part of a shrinking group; something like "We are a center-right nation, so the only reason the liberal media and liberal pollsters keep saying so many more people are identifying themselves as Democrats these days is because they're cheating to inflate their rosters."

Now, it seems, it's become a handy talisman for the mouthpieces. It's easy to say, it's a memorable word, that it's spelled in all caps adds something ominous (think SPECTRE, KAOS, USSR, BATF, etc.), and it's vague enough in concept ("surely no group would exist just to register voters") that practically anything can be attributed to it as part of its agenda. And, of course, people like Bachmann, not to mention Limbaugh et al (http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amediamatters.org+acorn), keep hammering on it -- just another example of the right-wing noise machine's belief that saying something often enough makes it true. We're now at the point where i doesn't really have to have a meaning in the speaker's mind anymore -- the beauty of it is that the listeners will fill in the evil connotations for themselves. It's the new "liberal."