RNC Could Strip You From the Voting Rolls for Voting for Kerry in 2004: Here is How

From Bradblog, read about how anyone, even a private citizen can find out who voted for whom in Ohio's elections:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4980



Bradblog reports that EES systems are used in 38 states. Similar concerns have been raised about Diebold.

What does this mean for voters in 2008? At this very moment, the Republican operatives may be pouring over lists of votes and voters, matching up the names of people who voted for Democratic candidates in previous elections, say Senate races in 2006 or Kerry in 2004. They may be compiling a list of voters whom they will challenge in 2008 in their time honored sneaky Republican fashion---by sending them "do not forward" letters when they are away from home serving in the military or away from their college dorms for summer vacation. A mass mailing to all Democrats during the summer would catch a certain percentage away on vacation. When no one responds to the letter, the voter gets removed from the rolls. Or, they may have their friendly Republican Secretary of State strip them from a state voting roll for no reason at all the way that Ken Blackwell did in Ohio in 2004.

Stripping lawful voters of their voting rights has been a very profitable endeavor for the RNC. Up until now, when they have been caught it has been because they have been using racial profiling. They have sent their mass mailings to African-American communities, knowing that these voting blocks are more likely to vote Democratic. However, if they know whom a voter has voted for in the past, they can ignore demographics and target anyone without regard to race, which will make it harder to catch them.

Congress must act. The Department of Justice has not enforced the Voting Rights Act since W. took office. Ashcroft and then Gonzales were a large part of the problem. Gonzales must go, even if it means impeachment. The administration is fighting tooth and nail to keep him, because it needs the politicized DOJ for the 2008 election. The civil rights division of the DOJ needs to be cleaned up. That is what Congressional oversight is for.

If the people sending out the "do not forward" letters designed to strip Democratic leaning voters of their rights believed that the Department of Justice would enforce voting rights laws, they would be much more hesitant to abuse the rights of America's soldiers and college students. None of them wants to go to jail to help get Rudi or Mitt elected.

status before the cut off for registration...

Don't take anything for granted...

Having said that, I know in Cuyahoga County they do not strip people from the voting files because of one returned letter...

How do I know this...

Because I sat on the Board durring the 1990's...

You should know all about how elections are run here in Cleveland...

Whatever...

Just saying that things can change, and not always for the better. You still have contacts on the board? Have there been any changes in policy, or procedure, or personnel that they aren't comfortable with?

I have no reason to doubt you. What I'm asking is, do you have any reason to doubt them after the last 8 years since you left?

I posted something about this a few days ago...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3460747

Thanks.

:hi:

Simply the fact I live near the Universiy of Cincinnati in a liberal leaning neighborhood would give the RNC a hint about my political leanings.

In 2004 my husband got RNC mailings, even though he is black and always votes D. They targeted him and not me because he drives a BMW & I drive a Subaru. In 2004, the RNC used consumer data demographics to predict R leaning voters in D precincts so they could microtarget them.

For instance, a period of no votes cast coupled with the no return address would give them grounds to send out a letter on their own..

GOP operatives.

I really think we should send a whole mess of African Americans out to the most repulican suburbs on voting day to challenge votes...

Then we would see an out cry...

We really should do it...

Am I loving my lever as I post?? I'll never tell!!
:freak: :freak: :freak: :freak: :freak:

LOVE THE LEVERS!

If you can get that data, you can take random samples and ask people to confirm that they voted the way the machines say they did. Another opportunity to track down election fraud pissed away, IMHO.

The entire blogosphere was screaming about Inherent Contempt during this entire subpoena fiasco, but the CHAIR of the Judiciary Committee had never heard of it?

This indicates that there is a firewall between the grassroots and the elected representatives.

Some call it "beltway wisdom", but I know where the firewall lies.

The reason Democrats do not know what is going on in goverment and are not gettiong information from their constituents is because there is an entire culture of "advisors" that the Democrts hire for advice, and these advisors have lost election after election with absolutely no consequences.



Paul Begala....Democratic advisor to Clinton.



Donna Brazile...personal friend of Karl Rove and coincidentally the Democrat most in charge of Al Gore's campaign. I blame her far more than Ralph Nader for 2000, but the Supreme Court and Katherine Harris far more than that.



James Carville. Betrayed John Kerry after he lost in 2004 by signposting Kerry's post-election strategy of challenging Ohio to his Republican advisor wife.

These political advisors continuously undermine the grassrooots...because face it, if the grassroots could talk to our reps...our reps would have the benefit of the advice of thousands of lawyers and economics experts and military experts and scientific experts within the blogosphere and might actually start putting together an effective opposition strategy. That would put these Grima Wormtongue do-nothing underminers out of a job.

But one has to admit- they're some of the most egregious.

I like your notion of a "firewall," because that's about what it is. I'd go one step further though and say that it's a firewall against reality.

There are many more....an entire culture of paid consultants that have no victories under their belts. What they do have under their belts is a lot of advice to gauruntee their own jobs and to guaruntee that lobbying money keeps flowing.

That river of lobby money is a significant potion of the firewall. The consultants tend that river like greedy ferrymen.

Jennifer Brunner. Though certainly your "friendly Republican Secretary of State" comment applies in some other states.

but mind you, she refuses to investigate the destroyed votes from the last election, so she is not exactly 100% with the idea of clean elections if it means doing some extra work and taking a few political risks.

A LOT of Ohio Democrats are way too timid to be an opposition party....much like our national Dems.

I do not like breaking bad news to other DUers who have their hopes up, but the story is true.

Election Issues

The criminal cover-up of Ohio's stolen 2004 election sinks to the fraudulent, the absurd, the pathetic
by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
August 2, 2007

The illegal destruction of federally protected 2004 election materials by 56 of 88 Ohio counties has become a fraudulent "dog ate my homework" farce of absurd justifications and criminal coverups.

The mass elimination of the critical evidence that could definitively prove or disprove the presumption that the 2004 election was stolen has all the markings of a Rovian crime perpetrated to hide another one. Indeed, under Ohio law, that's precisely what must be presumed here.

But what makes the situation downright pathetic is that Ohio's new Democratic Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, has publicly stated she sees "no evidence" of intentional destruction in the disappearance in more than 60% of the state's counties of the ballots from the 2004 presidential election.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2007/2730

Like I said many times, timid Democrats do us no favors.

My guess is that most (if not all) states will supply a list of voters; but the order in which they voted? How do they even know? When I vote, I usually have to pick up a ballot from a registration desk, and then go to a voting machine. There is usually more than 1 person in a voting booth at any one time. If there are multiple voters voting at one time, how can they tie any vote back to an individual? I'm not saying they can't do it; I'm just not sure how it would work.

Maybe I'm wrong, but the order that voters sign in and enter is not necessarily the order that they voted. Some people take a lot more time than others and if multiple people are voting at the same time, I don't know how they could make a precise link.

That said, I would not be surprised to find out there is something to this and the Republicans are very busy at work trying to find out who to purge. They have become the all-time experts at thwarting the very democracy they claim to champion. I wonder if this ever crosses their minds and if they laugh maniacally when it does.

This really saves a lot of postage.

You wouldn't be able to tell who voted for whom from that. There are multiple booths so the order you sign in isn't necessarily the order you vote. It takes some people longer to vote than others.

:shrug:

We used ES&S optical scan ballots, and there were a lot of problems with the scanners not working on Election Day 2006. Ballots were not scanned until later, or so they said.

that possible working is in a place sl small, they only had ONE voting machine. Where we vote, three are at least 15 different machines, and two lines of people. When you reach the head of your line, you simply go to whatever machine opens up first.

My guess would be, if a polling place is so small it only needs ONE MACHINE, that town is small enough that everyone knows each other well enough to already KNOW how each one was going to vote anyway!

And I want our votes to be counted, so don't get me wrong...

But in the elections I've been in (and I have only voted from small states), you get checked off when you enter, as a voter, go to a booth, and vote. No one checks WHEN you voted, just simply that you did vote.

Now, asking for accountability, we know when the votes were entered, and for whom.

Traditionally, you were just in the voting place, got a single ballot, and placed a vote. No one knew who you voted for, just that you were there and voted.

So, for voting machines, where you can theoretically place multiple votes, perhaps we need some kind of "permission" card. You get it when you walk in, it entitles you to place one vote on the machine. No one needs to know who got what card, just that it's one card per person. We record that a card was received and a vote was placed.

There does not need to be any logging of the sequence or identity of voters.

Even geeks understand the basics of free and fair and secret elections.

I received one in 04, I went to the county elections office and damn near got arrested. I ultimately was not removed from any voter roles and cast my vote for Kerry as I had planned. The senders name and address were on the letter. If I get another one of those letters in 08, I'm going to pay a "visit" to the sender challenging their right to fucking take their next breath. Yeah, I'm still a little pissed...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/08/embattled-bush-.html



They will just replace him with another Schlozman, mark my words. The problem is the leadership.

I worked for the Ohio Democratic Party as a volunteer in 2002. It was my duty to purge the party's computers of old data and type in new material for any currently elected and some unelected officials in Ohio. To do this, I was given access to an old computer with Excel on it. It had the complete voting list for the previous xx years loaded onto it. This was a list that was supplied to anyone for a relatively cheap price by the state of Ohio and for which the Dems had purchased this copy. So finding out who voted for whom and when is not a big deal. You describe a way in which it would take months matching up names and information by hand. Someone handy with databases and using 2007 computers could do that in an afternoon now!

I discovered 2 interesting things when I was searching for all those names 5 years ago. It seems that, at least in Ohio at the time, your name stayed on the rolls if you moved. I would imagine that the unique qualifier was not someone's name. However, I believe it was their address. For instance, John Quincy Jones lives at 111 Main St. He then moves to 222 High St. He now has 2 entries on the state voting rolls. There were people who had 3-4 such entries. There were unique qualifiers that allowed these names to stand out. At the time I imagined that was the reason why, at least in my county, voter fraud was brought up. It was stated that there were some 100,000 more names than there were eligible voters in the county. I looked at all the duplicate names and knew the reason.

The second is something that I noticed. This is not scientific and will probably upset several people. However, I found it rather funny at the time. While searching for names back then, I came across many single initials for first names. The middle name would be complete and finally a last name. So the above mentioned name would become J. Quincy Jones. I can't remember how I first started checking, but the ratio was more than 10:1, Republicans over Democrats, that had that way of name recognition. I reasoned out that Republican males were not 'Honoring' their parents by using their second name and first initial. To me, that was funny.