Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   1 comment

General News

4-5 MILLION Voters Disenfranchised in 2008

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 1   News 1   Supported 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 3/11/09

From: newsfromunderground@googlegroups.com  Mark Crispin Miller

And this refers only to those who "encounted registration problems or failed to receive absentee ballots."

The former category would include, along with those sidelined by the voter ID laws in Indiana and Georgia, all those who were registered, but showed up at the polls only to find that they'd been stricken from the rolls. And such disenfranchisement was either "legal," as BushCo's DoJ had been conducting quiet voter purges nationwide, or illegal, as partisan free-lancers cleansed the voter rolls of those who would have cast a ballot for the Evil Ones. (Those voter rolls now being electronic, such deletion is a snap for anyone with access to them.)

Now, the number of those disenfranchised certainly was even higher than MIT's report suggests, since it refers exclusively to registration hurdles and missing absentee ballots.

There were also many voters who could not wait on the endless lines that formed in Democratic precincts only, there having been too few machines placed there, and/or machines that didn't work. (The same thing happened in 2004 and 2006.)

And then there were those citizens whose votes were not suppressed, but electronically erased or altered: a type of disenfranchisement not noted by the researchers at MIT, who looked exclusively at vote suppression, not election fraud. But, just as in 2004 and 2006, so in 2008 there were numerous firsthand reports of voters seeing their votes "flipped" right before their eyes--a problem that afflicted many Democrats and just a handful of Republicans. And those reports point only to a fraction of the ballots altered
electronically, since it's quite easy to flip votes without its being perceptible.



It's therefore very likely that the number of those disenfranchised in this last election, by whatever means, was actually far higher than the 4/5 million here reported. We may conservatively estimate that it was more like 7 to 8 million US citizens who couldn't vote; and we may add with confidence that most of those blocked voters would have voted for Obama, and also would have voted Democratic in their local House and Senate races.  

What this means is that (a) this president won by a landslide, not merely a "decisive" margin, and that (b) the GOP is, more than ever, a fringe party--and (c) a party that relies on every dirty trick and tactic in the book to "win" in our elections, so as to push their program on the rest of us despite the will of the electorate. And what this means is that (e) our degraded voting system now needs radical reform, or else that undead party will keep "coming back" until they've ruined everything.

MCM

 
Based on a NY Times article, Hurdles to Voting Persisted in 2008 excerpted below. 

Four million to five million voters did not cast a ballot in the 2008 presidential election because they encountered registration problems or failed to receive absentee ballots, which is roughly the same number of voters who encountered such problems in the 2000 election, according to an academic study to be presented to the Senate Rules Committee on Wednesday.

An additional two million to four million registered voters - or 1 percent to 2 percent of the eligible electorate - were "discouraged" from voting due to administrative hassles, like long lines and voter identification requirements, the study found.

The study, which draws from a survey of about 33,000 eligible voters, was conducted in October and November 2008 by the Cooperative Congressional Election Survey, a consortium of more than 150 university researchers, led by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who specialize in voting issues.

The study found that the most common registration problems involved clerical errors, like entering voter information incorrectly in statewide databases, or voters who changed their address but failed to inform election officials. At least 4 percent of eligible voters surveyed said they requested absentee ballots but failed to receive them.


 

Mark's new book, Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000-2008, a collection 14 essays on Bush/Cheney's election fraud since (and including) 2000, is just out, from Ig Publishing. He is also the author of Fooled Again: The Real Case for Electoral Reform, which is now out in paperback (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

This bill will kill small farms, and wreck our food supply

Scott Walker Goes To Chicago, Gets His Mic Checked! (Must-See)

Notorious Saudi prince is Fox News Corp's 4th-largest voting shareholder

Was Prop 8 Actually Defeated??

Peter B. Collins going off the air

Obama won by MILLIONS MORE than we've been told

Trending on the Web

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

There was also an article int he NY Times showing ... by Scott Baker on Thursday, Mar 12, 2009 at 9:35:03 AM