Discussion: Report: DOJ Launches Investigation Into Arizona's Election Disaster

will this story get as much play on Fox ‘News’ and the rest of the right wing nut blogosphere as Hill’s email faux pas?

3 Likes

The interesting thing to me is all the suspicious stuff was in Maricopa County, not the rest of the state. The rest of us had no voting problems. But if a county reduces the number of places to vote from 200 to 60 and then conveniently forgets what party folks belong to even if they’ve got a voter registration card saying which party they favor… Welp, somethin’s fishy I’d say.

12 Likes

Faux News headline: “Is Obama Using DOJ to Rig the Election?”

5 Likes

Why are they investigating this? Anyone can tell you that Hillary did it in order to steal the primary.

3 Likes

GOOD!

Maybe my vote will count in this presidential election! This state is notorious for voter suppression!

5 Likes

That’s how they roll.

The presidential election of 2012, there was a huge push on mail in voting. So my husband and I decided to do it that way.

When we received our ballots, on the outside of the return envelope was our names and party affiliation. In big bold letters! My husband said, this isn’t going to be good. (name ends in a vowel and we’re not re-pukes) So you know the 400K votes that didn’t get counted, ours was two of them. I called them to verify if our ballots were counted…of course not! They tried to blame in on the postal service, but I dropped off our ballots at the registrars office…whoops!

So, for each subsequent election, we show up and vote in person. And I would bet that most of the other 400K ballot owners are doing to same!

12 Likes

Sory, but do these Obama DoJ investigations actually accomplish anything other than a tepid “concern” for the issue at hand? I’d love to be proven wrong. But Torture Memo writers getting a letter from Holder merely expressing concern for their “poor judgment” set the template.

1 Like

Given the vote-suppression tactics being pursued by the G.O.P. it’s high time for a new Voting Rights Act that requires preclearance for any changes, in any jurisdiction. That would get rid of the excuse SCOTUS used to strike down the existing preclearance requirements.

8 Likes

Continuing on her math…each poling station would have to clear 2 voters a minute for 12 hours straight in order for the numbers Bartholomew cited to get the job done. That’s 2 per minute with her gross underestimation.

No polling place can do that. There is something else here and I hope DOJ finds it.

4 Likes

Well, they’ve been resurrected. I hope the new batch is smarter and has more foresight than the old.

I know some of them keep clinging to the notion that if it gets bad enough, we’ll have a revolution.

Jayzus. It’ll never get bad enough for enough people to make that happen.

3 Likes

They will never admit to it. Nader himself says he bears no responsibility for 2000. Nader gave us the Court as you point out…the war in Iraq ( and all those dead from it ) and a devastated economy. And he sleeps well. They all do.

8 Likes

Before the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, the county’s decision would have been vetted by federal officials, as Arizona was covered under the VRA’s “preclearance” section before the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision in it.

Justice Scalia’s gift that keeps on giving. I can’t wait for the ninth Justice so that we can hopefully “honor” Scalia’s legacy by repudiating it.

6 Likes

Since they are going to be looking into this, you should send in a complaint to the DOJ; include whatever documentation you have that your properly submitted ballot was not counted. Might as well pile on while the DOJ is looking into this.

3 Likes

This article is a poster child for innumeracy.

“She said that the county had 2 million active voters, but 750,000 were registered as independent or were unaffiliated with a party, and thus were ineligible to vote in the presidential primary. Out of the roughly 1.2 million voters left over…”

2 million - 750,000 = 1.25 million. Not “roughly 1.2 million”. That’s a 4% rounding error.

But it gets worse:

“…890,000 had been sent mail-in ballots, she said, either because they were on a permanent mail-in ballot list or because they requested one specifically for this election. Of the remaining 340,000…”

Whether you subtract those 890,000 mail in ballots from 1.2 million or from 1.25 million, you can’t possibly get 340,000. You get either 310,000 or 360,000 (respectively).

These aren’t differential equations; they’re simple subtraction.

With “dynamic scoring” and" trickle down", I don’t expect the GOP to grasp elitist concepts like “numbers”.

But shouldn’t reporters at least question Republican math?

8 Likes

Excellent idea!

But that’s why voters aren’t using the mail in ballot. Everyone wants their vote counted, without the re-puke clowns cheating!

It has been my custom of 35 years standing (when we moved into our present home) to show up at our polling place in person, sign the roll, vote, and then put that ballot into the box myownself. I consider that action “casting my ballot.” It used to be I had to hand it to a poll worker but i would not leave until I saw the ballot put into the box. I’ve seen what you describe with mail in ballots and I don’t trust that method quite yet. I’ve got friends in Oregon where all voting is by mail in ballot and it seems to work there…obviously not here in AZ yet.

3 Likes

Well if you look at it like that, all that nit picky mathematics and stuff it looks really bad for Phoenix’s educational system.

2 Likes

Always and six ways to Sunday.

1 Like

No, not when they printed the party affiliation on the outside of the envelope it won’t be. You know the dems ballots are the ones that were “lost”.

2 Likes