Dean's support of Michigan Internet Voting=Soft Racism

[DJcairo]

From the Detroit Free Press:
Eight of the 10 Democratic presidential hopefuls have signed a letter to the Democratic National Committee opposing Michigan's plan to expand voting to the Internet. Only former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean and retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark declined to sign the letter.

The candidates opposing the plan said the expansion would disenfranchise minority and poor voters who don't have access to computers.

http://www.freep.com/news/politics/vote4_20031004.htm


Why does Dean and his wannabe VP support internet voting in Michigan? Is it because they are afraid of black voters?

[NWHarkness]

1. George Bush says Thank You

Just keep smearing, you're making him proud.

[DJcairo]

2. Far be it from you to respond to my question

[mbali]

16. Answer me this -

Why is it that Dean and his supporters can go after any other Democrat - as they do repeatedly - and it's just further evidence that he's a straight shooting donkey smacker not afraid to speak truth to power, yet when anyone utters even a peep of criticism about Dean, it's a nasty smear that will only help George W.

Why are you people so afraid to have your candidate held accountable for anything he says or does or doesn't say or do?

[DJcairo]

29. Because with each revelation about Dean's character he moves

closer to the dust bin of political history.

[ModerateMiddle]

57. You know DJCairo

Dean is doing that all by himself. He really doesn't need you to do ANYTHING to push that effort along. I much prefer to simply watch the implosion, rather than be part of what is happening. Don't you notice that (some) folks are coming up with questions all by themselves? And many of them have been strong supporters of his. Let alone all of the folks who haven't paid attention yet, who are going to be turned off by his lack of meaningful answers to the natural questions they will have.

You really don't need to try to bury Dean. He's doing a fine job without you.

[NWHarkness]

65. My candidate?

Quote my endorsement of a particular candidate.

Anyone who accuses any of the democratic candidates of being a racist is doing the GOP's dirty work for them.

[Meshuga]

66. Dean does his own dirty work

By calling fellow Democrats Bushlite and accusing some of being Republicans.

[NWHarkness]

67. Relevance?

Please tell me that you can tell the difference between going after an opponent's positions and throwing out spurious charges of racism.

[Meshuga]

68. Calling a fellow democrat a "Republican" is an attack

I agree with you and I said in this thread that the accusation of racism is taking it a little too far because it's just not true. Now, unfairly portraying a fellow Democrat as a Republican or as Bush-lite is unfair and uncalled for.

Even Dean got angry when Gephardt made the Newt Gingrich comments at the NYC debate. Let's tell Dean to stop the double standard and I will have no problems supporting him. One standard will do just fine!

[Supply Side Jesus]

3. This has to be one of the dumbest posts ever

not to mention the writer of that article is out to smear dean/clark.
and you fell for it. bet you feel stupid.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

4. I'm Disappointed in BOTH Dean and Clark

Internet voting is racist and classist. The Democratic Party should not seek to disenfranchise its most loyal constituencies.

DTH

[mdvet]

5. internet voting

How can allowing people to vote over the internet be disenfranchising, the people without computers can still walk to teh polling station, did we have the same argument over mail in votes.

anything that increases the number of people voting gets my vote.

[mbali]

17. The problem is

that this only increases voting among certain groups of people. Yes, it's great to make it easier for those people who can afford computers and are internet savvy enough to use it for voting. But i does nothing for those who do not have access to computers and who must - as you note - walk to the polling station. If you've spent any time in low income, minority communities, you certainly know that this is more than a notion. Transportation is a serious problem. Getting time off of work is a problem. Their polling places are the worst staffed, worst equipped. Often they have to go to more than one place before being allowed to vote. Voting is NOT that easy for poorer people, regardless how diligent they are.

Your response represents a troubling attitude, one I often hear among Republicans. It sounds as if you're saying, "sure, it's hard for some people to exercise their constitutional rights. But they can still do it if they try hard enough." The question, of course, is why should some people have to bust their butts to exercise THEIR rights while others can just do it with nary an effort. It's bad enough to just ignore that problem; it's reprehensible to exacerbate it with this process.

Providing for internet voting to make it easier for more affluent people to vote while doing nothing to help poorer people cast their votes is wrong.

I can't help but wonder if Howard Dean would be more willing to speak up against this unfair process if HE weren't so likely to benefit from it.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

18. Just walk to the local library and cast your vote via the internet.

It's an additional polling station for everybody.


My concerns are more about security than disenfranchisement.

[mbali]

27. The library already IS a polling place

You just don't seem to understand the problem.

First of all, poor communities aren't overrun with libraries. And the libraries they do have are woefully underfunded and underresourced.

Second, the number of polling places in communities is not the problem. Polling places are in communities, but they are often difficult to get to for many reasons. Setting up an internet polling place in a library does nothing to solve this problem. For many people, it's not any easier to get to the local library than it is to get to the polling places in the local school or the local church or the local community center.

Sticking an additional polling place here and there does not solve the problem. We need much more comprehensive voting reform. And putting resources toward making it easier for more affluent people to vote should not be the priority.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

32. Easy, now.

I'm all for voting reform. I appreciate the concerns that you are raising. I'm not saying that it solves the problem, only that it doesn't necessarily exacerbate it. I completely agree with your assessment of the intrinsic unfairness of the present system.


:toast:

[tedoll78]

6. Brrrrring! Brrrrrring! Clue phone ringing! Pick-up pick-up pick-up!

Note the word "expand."

It wouldn't be internet-only voting. Voters would simple have one more means with which to vote. No one is being disenfranchised here.

Can you smell it?
"Desperation" - by Calvin Klein.

[mdvet]

7. lol

desperation by calvin klein, never heard that one b4.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DrFunkenstein]

11. What About Not Putting Voting Booths In Black Neighborhoods?

They could still walk to the white sections of town, so they wouldn't be technically disenfranchised. Do you see how this might grant favor to certain sectors of the community over others?

Another concern of mine with internet voting is that you have no means of documenting household coercion. How can you tell that a college kid won't be disinclined to vote for the Green Party while his long-time Democratic father is watching? How can you tell that Mom isn't voting for every voting age member of the family?

I think the internet voting is a dumb idea. Instead of relying on gizmos, why don't they just create a friggin' holiday? Throw in a couple of organized buses while you're at it.

[goldilox369]

12. Now i do agree with that

Why aren't most things shut down on election day? it really should be like Christmas i think.

[clar]

15. Good points

Dr. Funk. I'm increasingly dubious about internet voting. Maybe someday, but not yet.

[Mairead]

76. I think the call is for you

If some face-neutral policy has the predictable-in-advance effect of increasing the number of Republican votes, is that okay with you? Why or why not?

[sfecap]

10. Judging by Dean's internet support...

...I can see how Kerry would not want internet voting.

[DrFunkenstein]

13. Judging By Dean's Support In The Black Community

I could see why he would want to make it easier for white people to vote. Preferably middle-class ones that can afford personal computers.

PS - Anyone else notice the irony of a Dean supporter using a Kerry quote in his tag line?

"Kerry, Kerry, Kerry." Next thing you know, Joe Trippi will be teaching his dog anti-Kerry tricks...

[DJcairo]

28. It isn't just Kerry, it's 7 other candidates too

Kucinich is against it and he surely has a lot of support among the internet elite. Don't make this a Kerry bashing thread.

[no name no slogan]

79. Better tell that to our state's organizing committee

...and those of may other states, too. Many of them have computers, and can access email, but I would hardly call them "internet savvy" by any measurement. For our campaign listserv, we only have 1/10th of our supporters subscribed. You would think that if we had the support of the "internet elite", we'd have more people who'd use our technology, wouldn't we?

No, ours is still very much a grass-roots, shoe leather, door-knocking campaign like the ones Paul Wellstone used to run. And a lot of people are going to be suprised after Iowa, IMHO :).

[Zynx]

14. Does anyone here truly believe any of the candidates running are racist?

I don't believe that and I would be shocked if anyone else does.

[ModerateMiddle]

58. Soft racism

is encouraging things to be easier for non-minorities. It's not overt, but it is nonetheless racist.

[Mairead]

78. Being 'color-blind' where white privilege is at stake is a form of racism

Pretending something is neutral in its effects when it's obviously not is a form of racism.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. Snip....

Daren Berringer, spokesman for the Dean campaign in Michigan, said his camp wants to talk more with groups that oppose the Internet voting before deciding whether to sign the letter.


Sounds like he's still open on the subject.

[mmonk]

20. Actually it might need further deliberation

and study. Access to voting is a key to true democracy. The easier for citizens, the better. Its not time to discard it without study. If Clark is afraid of minority voters, why may I ask did he make the NAACP forum in Charlotte? Stop innuendo.

[KaraokeKarlton]

21. Internet voting could HELP the poor get to vote

Here's how...Democratic activists can set up internet voting stations in poor neighborhoods where they could make it EASIER for people to vote. Instead of taking the poor to the polls, bring the polls to the poor. It'd be BRILLIANT. Kudos to Dean and Clark for seeing the potential internet voting has! Shame on the rest for not recognizing a great opportunity when they see one.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

22. And, like I mentioned above...

The local library turns into a polling place.

[mbali]

26. The local library . . .

and local school and local church and local community center already ARE polling places.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

35. See #32.

I understand. However, not every library is a polling place. Virtually every library would be with internet voting in place. I also understand that there are many community libraries that do not have computer access. See post #32 for more.

[mbali]

25. Oh please . . .

While I'm impressed with the ability of Dean supporters to find unpreedented brilliance in everything Dean, neither Dean nor Clark has said or done anything to make internet voting easier for poor people. Although Clark just got involved in the controversy, Dean has been aware of it for some time an has one absolutely nothing but defend the biased plan, probably because he knows that the inequitable system offers him a significant advantage.

I have little doubt that if the internet voting process in any way diluted Dean votes, he'd be screaming from the rooftops about how unfair the system is.

Second, while setting up internet voting stations in poor neighborhoods might eventually be a good idea, it does nothing in the short term to address the problem at hand. The advantage of internet voting is the convenience it provides, not the technology itself. It is no more convenient for a person to seek out and get to an internet station than it is to seek out an get to the local polling place. Democratic activists have been working on this for years, putting substantial efforts and research into getting people out to vote on election day. It's not a new or brilliant concept.

[KaraokeKarlton]

34. Sure it would be easier

All the "projects" have offices on site and most have large community rooms adjacent to the offices. Get a few volunteers for each of these communities to talk to people, register them to vote and bring in computers to set up right on site for people to use to vote. I lived in a community like this in the past. It's much, much easier to get people to go to the complex community room and do something than it is to get them to leave the property to do something. Do a raffle for a prize and everyone who votes gets a raffle ticket. Bring in some donated clothing and household items to draw people in. These are the kinds of things you can do to get the attention of poor people who live in projects and don't normally vote. Find a couple of residents who are interested and will help organize things like this. These people are very difficult to reach and the only way to do it is to go to them and lure them out to talk to you by offering something. Once you have their attention, you can make some progress. One of my friends runs this great set of workshops for women, and I used to help her recruit low income women to participate. It's hard work to get people out of their homes and motivated, but it's not impossible. It's MUCH easier if you go to them and make it easier and less intimidating. Internet voting done as I've described would make a huge difference.

[mbali]

39. These are good ideas

But they don't address the immediate problem. It's great to get people out to the polling places, but once there, it doesn't matter whether they're voting on the internet or with a voting machine - it's just the mechanism. The problem with internet voting is that it provides a distinct advantage to those who have computers in their homes - they never have to leave the house, they can vote in their bathrobes at any time of day while less affluent people have to go through considerable trouble to get to a place to vote.

In my view, this would be the same as installing punch card voting booths in the homes of people who make more than a certain amount of money or sending someone to their houses to take down their vote while requiring everyone else to venture out to find a place to vote.

I'm not saying that internet voting is a completely bad thing - one day, it may be the way to go. But right now, it gives an unfair advantage to those who already have advantages. And I am very troubled by Dean's silence on the issue since his reluctance to say anything about it is likely based on the fact that it benefits him. For someone who is touted as such a courageous straight shooter, this is not a good thing.

[dsc]

41. Did you even read the article?

or for that matter my post which quoted it? You have a five week window to vote by mail. Or is it your contention they don't have mail service in poor areas either?

[KaraokeKarlton]

71. I hate to break it to you

But even poor people have internet access. In fact, you'd be surprised just how many either have it themselves or has a friend or relative who has it. If you set up a place to vote right there in their apartment complex it makes it MORE convenient for them, too. So what if internet voting makes it easier for some people? It makes it easier for ALL people because a lot of people wouldn't have to go to the polls at all and then those who do have to go don't have to wait in line and fight traffic for nearly as long. It's also great for the environment just from all the gas saved and exhaust fumes kept from going in the air. This is NOT a bad idea at all. It ALSO makes it all that much harder for idiots like Jeb Bush to keep people from voting. It's a win-win situation.

[ModerateMiddle]

59. Vermont has "projects"?

REALLY???

[Pez]

70. and they put them in quotations???

i like this the best:

Do a raffle for a prize and everyone who votes gets a raffle ticket. Bring in some donated clothing and household items to draw people in. These are the kinds of things you can do to get the attention of poor people who live in projects and don't normally vote.

<jokejokejoke>i thought the raffle was voting and the prize was your candidate ;-p </jokejokejoke>

i think the best strategy is to communicate with people, find out their problems and what they expect from a candidate, and give them information. and tell people how much their vote means. we shouldn't have to bribe people to get them to vote... the only reason people don't vote is because-- rich or poor-- they have accepted their situation and feel that nothing will change regardless of what they do.

[KaraokeKarlton]

73. Spoken by someone who means well, but...

doesn't understand the population of people living in poverty. Many of these people are depressed, have serious substance abuse problems and just don't give a shit. There are always a few good people living in those areas who do want to get involved. The others have the potential in most cases, but you do need to lure them out with a gimmick. That's the reality. I saw the same thing when I worked for the YWCA in the projects of Jacksonville, Fla. Just offering something good in and of itself doesn't do the trick. You have to really work to get most people in those communities to take an interest. Those are the facts, period.

[Pez]

74. i didn't "understand" you had to "lure them out with a gimmick," yeah.

maybe you could, like, leave a trail of breadcrumbs and sparkly beads from the "projects" to the voting booth?

i think if i tried that kind of gimmicky pandering on 125th and lenox i'd get punched in the face. and frankly, i would deserve it.

[KaraokeKarlton]

75. You probably would get punched because

if you just walk up to someone and try to pressure them to vote in some places you'd be liable to get a cap popped in your ass. Something like this takes organizing. That means, you meet with management of the buildings and have them put you in touch with a couple of residents who take an interest in the community. You work with those people to plan something that will appeal to the people there. This is going to vary from place to place. Single Moms living in the projects (these are the most common residents of these places) won't likely get 3 or 4 kids ready to go somewhere just to cast a vote. But they WILL get those kids ready and go somewhere that they can find free clothing for their families or used toys, canned food and the like. The dealers hanging out on the corners or gang bangers aren't going to vote anyhow, so it's pointless to even put any energy there, not to mention dangerous.

[Pez]

86. um, i wouldn't suggest you repeat any of that in east harlem

you missed my point entirely-- i did not in any way imply forcing people to vote; that is absurd. convincing people that each individual counts is a far cry from "pressuring" them to vote. i have yet to get "a cap popped in my ass" as a result of handing out material and answering questions about candidates. your overly-simplistic, patronizing view is kind of insulting. i don't know about all those rough "projects" in big bad vermont, but in nyc most people i've talked to say they don't vote because think their vote doesn't matter. it never even crossed my mind to use bribery or gimmicks, and yet i have succeeded in letting many people, including "Single Moms living in the projects (the most common residents of these places)" know that their voice can have an impact. the other problem is that the few places there are to vote are understaffed and not very well organized.

[KaraokeKarlton]

97. Why do you assume I've only lived in Vermont?

I've lived in several cities, including Atlanta and Jacksonville. I've actually lived and worked in poverty striken communities. Perhaps that's why I have a "simplistic" view. It's actually called realism. Poor people have more pressing concerns than voting as a rule. I was always worried about whether or not my kids had food, a home and the clothing they needed. In fact, when you are living like that, you usually don't even make the connection between politics and the social services you depend on for survival. You can't usually afford cable and you don't bother following the news because you usually have a front row seat for a lot the worst things that go on because it happens in your neighborhood. For future reference, you should never assume that just because someone lives in a rural area that they don't know anything about urban life.

[Pez]

99. ...

i wasn't assuming anything; i know, you've said several times that you lived in different places.

i just don't recognize any of the things you were talking about; i have been successful at getting people to vote by listening to their concerns, answering questions on candidates, providing information, etc... i don't pressure, pander or use gimmicks. everyone's vote is worth the same, and being unaware politically is not exclusive to any one demographic. i have the same approach for everyone, and it works, regardless of class.

[KaraokeKarlton]

72. Not a lot, but a few

The one I lived in was one 4 story brick building with 72 apartments all bunched up into one condensed area. It was low income housing and had a high incidence of drug use, fights and the same kinds of things you see in other areas, just to a less violent degree. No one was killed, but there were plenty of bad fights and drug dealing. One nutty drunk and high guy decided to do some spring cleaning and started heaving everything out of the fourth floor window into the street below. This included furniture, electronics, dishes, everything. There wasn't drive bys and such, but just about everything else except muggings. There wasn't any of that, either.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

23. Oh, yeah!

Deep Thoughts!

[Meshuga]

24. Internet voting is a terrible idea.

Hackers would have a field day!

[Meshuga]

31. BTW: Racism is a strong accusation... Sneaky is more like it!

I'm not a Dean or a Clark supporter but I don't see their support for internet voting as racist. That's taking it a bit too far! :-)

Sure Dean would have a HUGE advantage if internet voting is allowed because of his internet support base so I would like to say Dean is sneaky and not a racist.

Voting should never take place online because it can't be controlled and because of security reasons(hacking).

Offline computers taking human factors into consideration are used in other countries to make voting easy and fair. That's the kind of voting reform I would like to see Dean and Clark advocating or looking into to make our system fair.

Supporting an unfair method that is vulnerable to cheating is at the very least irresponsible. I'm disappointed at both Dean and Clark for not speaking against this Michigan internet voting.

[Duder]

30. Soft Racism? Nope.

'Michigan Democratic Party Executive Chair Mark Brewer said he expects participation to be up in 2004 because so many candidates are in the race and Internet voting will be available for the first time.'

<...>

'Brewer said he sees no problem with Internet voting, as long as voters also can participate in caucuses or mail in ballots. He points out that the DNC allowed Internet voting in Arizona's primary in 2000, and a legal challenge to Internet voting in that election failed.

"An Internet-only caucus at this point in our history would be discriminatory," Brewer said. "(But) we are not requiring anyone to vote over the Internet."

http://www.michigandaily.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/09/18/3f693ee65e205

[dsc]

33. From the article

Mark Brewer, cochairman of the Michigan Democratic Party, said those who want to vote will find it the easiest year yet.

We're going to have more than 400 caucus sites on Feb. 7 for people to vote," he said. "We will have a five-week window to vote by mail and we've got the Internet."


The party's state central committee voted unanimously in May to include Internet voting in the Feb. 7 caucus.

Daren Berringer, spokesman for the Dean campaign in Michigan, said his camp wants to talk more with groups that oppose the Internet voting before deciding whether to sign the letter. The Dean campaign has taken advantage of the Internet and has become the leader in fund-raising because of money generated online.

The Democratic party in Michigan had hoped that expanding the caucus voting to the Internet and the mail would help boost the dismal number of voters who have participated in closed caucuses in the past.




end of quote

As usual this poster left out numerous facts which he didn't like. Let's take a look shall we?

"We're going to have more than 400 caucus sites on Feb. 7 for people to vote," he said. "We will have a five-week window to vote by mail and we've got the Internet."

The poster left out the 5 week mail option. I suppose these poor neighborhoods don't have mail delivery either.

"The party's state central committee voted unanimously in May to include Internet voting in the Feb. 7 caucus."

Now does anyone care to bet that there might be an African American or two on Michigan's Democratic state central commitee. I'll tell you what if there isn't I'll give 20 bucks to Kerry here and now how's that?

I do agree that there are security issues here but it is nothing short of insane to claim one is disinfranchising voters by having mail in voting, more polling places, and internet.


One final word about poling places. Some churches, some schools, and some libraries are polling places but by no means all. I live in a 36 aquare mile township with one, count it one, polling place. And yes we do have two schools, a few churches, but no library.

[AP]

36. We shouldn't be voting for people in the primary in a way different from

how the general election is conducted. It's a sure-fire way to lose the general election.

If we said, OK, only people who drive Green SUVs can easily vote in the primary, we're going to get the favorite candidate of the people who drive Green SUVs. We need to get the candidate who's the favorite of the kinds of people who are willing to show up at the polls and vote, which includes a lot of people who aren't going to be proportionally represented if MI uses internet voting for the primary.

[dsc]

37. The fact that it is a caucus

makes that point moot. It already is different than the general election. Also do you favor open primaries? If not, why not as those would be most like a general election.

[AP]

44. I obviously don't like open primaries because the problem with that

is that Republicans spoil the vote by distorting the outcome, especially in districts which are majority Democratic which would suport more liberal candidates...like in parts of Michigan.

I didn't say that I liked the caucus either, but ASFAIK, Michigan doesn't have a caucus. Sadly, MI has open primaries, and you vote at the polls.

[dsc]

48. Read the article

they have a caucus. The reason they do is that the national party won't seat delegats from open primary states.

[mbali]

40. Excellent point

one I hadn't thought of before. Interesting.

[AP]

45. Why, thank you. Share that idea with your friends.

:)

[killbotfactory]

38. That's the dumbest accusation i've seen yet.

Kudos.

[Pez]

42. instead of making life easier for the yupsters...

...why don't they INSTEAD spend all that people-powered energy trying to make the system we already have more fair? internet voting is a total crock; there's no reason to deliberate on the subject at this point in time. not only is it going to be the preferred hacker playground of choice (or a puke farce) it's a diversion... why don't they spend money on increasing staff and reliability at existing voting locations or adding more instead of making life "easier" for suburbanites?

i'm for moving more staff and locations to poorer areas. make all those pseudo-humanitarian white hipsters drive their rolling entertainment centers a few more miles... take a look at what the voting block you're all trying desperately to attract actually needs/wants/thinks.

no matter which candidate it benefits in the dem primaries, the tides will turn in the general and pukes will walk away with another election. i don't think that's an unreasonable paranoid assumption.

[dsc]

43. Did you bother to read the article?

Polling places were increased, there is a 5 week mail window.

[AP]

46. But there's still a chance that you'll get a disproportionate represent-

ation of people with internet connections.

Like I said above, when you start using methods to count votes which aren't used in the general election, you might give more weight to voices which might not show up for the general election. It could end in tears.

[dsc]

47. they don't have a lot of choice up there

There turn out is abysmal (read the article) and they came up with several ways to fix that. They can't revert to primaries since the national party won't seat delegats in an open primary state. I think many of these people will show up (in Michigan union members get election day off it is in the contracts).

[AP]

60. Turnout was dismal in 2000. but it was great in '92 and they didn't use

the internet.

Perhaps the difference is that there was no reason to vote in MI in 2000 (was the race already decided) and in 92 there was a lot of competion?

I'm not saying the internet is neccessarily bad, but the key is that you have to get the people who are voting in the general election to vote in the primaries. If you get a set of people voting who, by virtue of the voting system, disproportionately represent a guy the rest of the party doesn't like, you're going to find that you had high turnout in the primary, and low turnout in the general election among democrats.

[dsc]

63. I don't consider

those figures to be great. Sorry but a state of close to 7 million had under 1/3 of a million vote. Even accounting for population increase since 92 we are talking around 1 out of 18 Michiganders voting. That isn't great.

[AP]

81. That's not bad for a primary which isn't on the ticket with any other race

Obviously, the problem is the open primary. That's what MI has to change. They should change it now that they have a Dem governor.

[dsc]

87. They have a Republican legislature

so no way it can be done.

[Pez]

52. different conclusion = i didn't "bother" to read the article?

where does it say polling places were increased? they have internet and mail voting... ok. it's obvious michigan has some problems getting people to vote-- 6.8 million registered voters and...

"In 2000, fewer than 20,000 people voted in Michigan when Al Gore became the eventual nominee over Bill Bradley."... "In the most competitive Democratic presidential caucus in the last 30 years, nearly 315,000 people voted in 1992"...

besides that, the point i was making is that internet/electronic voting is a crock for many reasons. and in the general election it won't help dems at all.

[dsc]

53. It is heavily implied

that the polling places were increased (why mention the number after claiming to make it easier) you, of course, still are leaving out vote by mail since it doesn't tell the story you like.

[Pez]

54. dude i didn't even trash your patron saint in my post so chill m'kay

i didn't leave out mail voting "since it doesn't tell the story" i "like". what is your problem man. i'm talking about internet voting so chill.

[indigo32]

49. While I understand the serious concerns about this

I don't think it's really necessary to call him a racist.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

51. I sincerely hope the people posting in this thread

aren't the same people who talk about ingorant sheeple. It is clear to me virtualy no one read this article. First, Michigan Democrats will let you mail in a ballot for a five week window period. Second, this proposal was unanimously agreed to by the state central committee which has African Americans on it. Third, their turnout has been dismal and they are trying to fix it. Again read the article.

[DrFunkenstein]

56. 5 Week Absentee Ballot? So what?

What About Not Putting Voting Booths In Black Neighborhoods?

They could still walk to the white sections of town, so they wouldn't be technically disenfranchised. Do you see how this might grant favor to certain sectors of the community over others?

Another concern of mine with internet voting is that you have no means of documenting household coercion. How can you tell that a college kid won't be disinclined to vote for the Green Party while his long-time Democratic father is watching? How can you tell that Mom isn't voting for every voting age member of the family?

I think the internet voting is a dumb idea. Instead of relying on gizmos, why don't they just create a friggin' holiday?

[dsc]

61. I also don't like internet voting

but to call it racist is insane especially given the mail option. The entire Michigan state central committee voted for this which means many African Americans voted for this. Are they racist too?

[DrFunkenstein]

83. I Wouldn't Say Racist

But the nature of racism today is more subtle ignorance than overt KKK stuff. I stand behind my criticisms of internet voting, and am dubious of people willing to look the other way, but I don't see it as stemming from hatred or trying to go out of their way to screw minorities.

[dsc]

88. Thank you

and that is largly my point. It is clear what the Michigan Democrats were trying to do here. They are in a bad situation due to the fact that Michigan has an open primary and the national party won't seat delegats chosen in that manner. Thus they have a caucus.

If the security issues can be dealt with, and being a computer novice I have no idea if that can be done, I would be willing to see this as long as it is combined with a similarly easy method for non computer users. The mail system appears to be similarly easy.

[poskonig]

55. BS!!

It is EVERYONE'S civic DUTY to vote. If you are not voting on your own free will, you are a pathetic excuse for a citizen. Period.

"White people voting absentee, I mean using the internet, is why I didn't vote."

:crazy:

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DrFunkenstein]

84. How Does This Message Not Get Deleted?

"Total bull shit from another loser Dean basher" seems pretty personal to me. I've noticed that Dean people tend to get away with alot more these days than any other supporters.

:wtf:

[Thomas Jefferson]

77. Dean's approach to criminal justic is also racist.

His complete contempt for victims of the criminal justice system and his desire to stramline convintions and his strong support for the death penalty is about as racist as one can get. The police often target minorities who would be quickly convicted and executed if Dean got his way. This is unacceptable. The Rutland Herald has done a number of stories on this. Also, on "Meet the Press" Dean said that executions of innocent people were an acceptable risk. I believe supporters of this man should check their consciences to see if they are closet racists.

[no name no slogan]

80. But I'm not racist, I've got two black friends!

;)

[Pez]

82. no no, he ~ordered~ two black friends. he really really wanted them!

:D

ok everyone calm the eff down. JEEBUS.

[DrFunkenstein]

85. Do They Deliver Now?

Seriously, the "roommate" story is as bad as Bush's "compassion" section of his re-election website.

<>

http://www.georgewbush.com/news/photoalbum.aspx?gallery=29

[killbotfactory]

90. Strong support of the death penalty?

And said innocent people being killed is an acceptable risk? Right. I guess that's why he supports the illinois death penalty moritorium.

[LoneStarLiberal]

89. How Does "EXPANSION" Disenfranchise?

Voting as a right is not a zero-sum thing.

If you expand voting methods from simply going to a designated polling place to include the option of some sort of encrypted trusted connection via the internet, you're not disenfranchising people. Now if you moved ONLY to voting via the internet and did away with polling places then that would be clear cut disenfranchisement.

Where do these candidates figure that expanding options equates to disenfranchisement? Luddites. Sheesh.

[DrFunkenstein]

91. One More Time

How would you feel if white neighborhoods got 4x more polling places than minority areas? The minority areas would not technically be disenfranchised, it would just be a little bit easier for the whiter shade of town.

[killbotfactory]

92. Expanding voting options = soft racism.

Got it.

[LoneStarLiberal]

93. Er?

Just focusing on residential ramifications doesn't do this justice.

I will concede that if this is interpreted in the narrowest residential terms that this would be a good example of soft racism.

But think about what this could mean for expanding the franchise for anyone or everyone who works in an environment with an internet connection. Think what it can mean to expand this from a test platform to something larger...perhaps a program to encourage businesses to give employees paid time off during the day on election day to vote at work or to go to a local polling place?

Look, I know that there is a decidedly stark color line when it comes to access to the internet. But the text of the original post speaks of disenfranchisement which, according to Webster's means "to deprive of the rights of a citizen."

This is not disenfranchisement.

You could make the arguement that it is soft racism, but it is not disenfranchisement.

This is a damn good idea that if encouraged and supported in the right direction could be a wonderful way to expand the franchise ACROSS racial and socioeconomic boundaries down the road.

[mbali]

95. Therein lies the problem . . .

The very fact that neither Dean nor many of his supporters understand why internet voting is perceived as an inequitable process that exacerbates the disenfranchisement of black voters is an example of why Dean is having trouble attracting strong support in the black community, despite his "I'm so down with the cause" claims.

It's one thing to talk about talking about race to white people. It's another to actually understand the race issue, its history and its impact on African Americans in this country.
Throughout our nation's history, government and other institutions have provided unequal access to the vote, an inequity that put up barriers to black voting, such as poll tax, citizenship tests and confusing election procedures. Like internet voting, many of these tactics appeared innocuous on their face, but had the very real result of disenfranchising black voters. When challenged, these measures were usually defended with many of the same arguments that are now being used to justify Michigan's internet voting procedure.

The Dean camp's failure to understand the negative disparate impact this will have on African Americans is really troubling. Moreover, their apparent unwillingness to even consider the views of those who have such serious concerns is puzzling. For someone who insists that he is so much further ahead of everyone else on the race issue, Dean and his supporters seem to be completely tone deaf on this one.

When you've got a whole bunch of black folk saying, "hey! This is wrong. We don't like it. It disadvantages us," it doesn't help Dean's cause when he and his supporters so arrogantly and dismissively ignore these complaints, telling the people who truly understand and are directly affected by the situation, "you don't know what you're talking about . . . this is good for you . . . we know what we're doing."

This failure to understand or empathize with how and why African American voters might feel that internet voting is unfair just feeds into the growing perception that the Dean campaign talks a good game but is really an elitist group of out of touch white people who just don't have a clue about the very complex and subtle issue of race in America.

Maybe the Dean crowd should be a little less sure of the infallibility of all things Dean, take a little time out from going around telling white people what's on black people's minds and make more of an effort to reach out and listen to the very people whom Dean seems to think he has such a strong connection to.

[Ellen Forradalom]

94. This post is a new nadir.

sfecap says it best here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=525178

[blkgrl]

96. The Digital Divide

I am a Dean supporter, and I'm glad you posted this article. This is a real issue that must be addressed. As a voter who stood in line for OVER 3 HOURS in the 2000 elections, I would say that the major problems in the current voting setup must be addressed before allowing a select few to vote over the internet. If I didn't have access to a computer and a plan like this was pushed through, I would most likely sit out the voting process.

[Vis Numar]

98. flawed logic

So, are you a racist because you are online now? Plus, internet voting is not replacing traditional voting, just supplamental.

[mbali]

100. Wrong semantics

Racist is a very loaded term, one with a very specific meaning that provokes visceral emotions. Everything that is discriminatory, either on its face or result is not necessarily racist.

The internet voting plan, as far as I can see, is not intended to target any particular group or to denigrate, diminish or deny rights to anyone based upon their race. Therefore, it is not appropriate to label it or those who promote or tolerate it as racist.

However, the plan is clearly de facto discrimination against minorities and low-income citizens. This complexity seems to be lost on some people, many of whom understandably resent the implication that they must be racist if they endorse the plan. However, those who support the plan should step back and consider why people feel so strongly about this issue. This cannot be viewed in a vaccuum - it must be viewed within the context not only of the actual effect the plan will have on minorities and the poor, but also of the historical framework of disenfranchisement in this country.

So, I urge everyone to take a breath and stop the rhetoric - those who oppose the plan should stop saying that it and its supporters are racist. And those who endorse the plan should open their eyes to the reality of the situation and try to understand why it unfairly favors the affluent while negatively impacting the poor and minorities.

In other words, let's stop talking AT each other and talk WITH each other. We might actually find some common ground.