2 Hours After SCOTUS Decision, Texas Moves to Suppress Minority Voters

Texas shows how fast it can execute a dick move.
Image from source, Think Progress.

Emboldened by the Supreme Court decision to remove part of the Voter Rights Act of 1965, the State of Texas is moving forward with distracting maps that would previously have violated the act. The maps were already blocked last year for being discriminatory to minority voters, so I'd imagine they remain discriminatory. They're just legal now.

So, it took two hours for Texas to prove SCOTUS wrong. The law was still necessary, obviously. And my theory that Republicans are just trying to out-mean each other stands.

[Excerpt]

Two Hours After The Supreme Court Gutted The Voting Rights Act, Texas AG Suppresses Minority Voters

Just two hours after the Supreme Court reasoned that discrimination is not rampant enough in Southern states to warrant restrictions under the Voting Rights Act, Texas is already advancing a voter ID law and a redistricting map blocked last year for discriminating against black and Latino residents. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott issued a statement declaring that both measures may go into effect immediately, now that there is no law stopping them from discriminating against minorities. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

Redmap: Republican Plan to Win 2016 (Even if They Don't Get More Votes)

I don't usually run two posts in a row from the same source, but frankly, this topic is important. And to be honest, a clip from The Rachel Maddow Show is probably the easiest-to-swallow way to take your medicine, if you haven't heard of this issue. Rachel has a way of distilling a lecture into something you want to learn. And this one is a doozy. [Story continues below]

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

If you didn't know, the Republican victory in the House of Representatives in the 2012 election was achieved by gerrymander. More people voted for Democratic candidates total, but because of the hinky way that Congressional districts are drawn up, more Republicans were elected. This rubs me the wrong way, but is semi-tolerable, because by district, the Republican actually did win. The quarrel is only with how the districts are drawn. But, given the GOP desire to turn several "blue" states into "red" states--by changing the way electoral votes are divided--gives me more pause. With that scheme, the district gets the spoils, and ends in a result where the statewide winner can lose huge chunks of electoral votes even though he/she carried the state.

The fact of the matter is, had this scheme been in place in 2012, Mitt Romney would be getting inaugurated this weekend, despite losing by millions of votes. This sort of scheming could only be done by a party that doesn't care what voters think. It can only be done by a party that puts winning and power ahead of the wants, needs and desires of the American people. My question is this: do American conservatives and Republicans care? Or are they also willing to "win" at any cost, even if they really lost? Any conservatives want to tell me (Dan?). 

Reince Priebus: Win 2016 by Rigging the System?

Swing that hammer, Reince!
Image from source, Think Progress

There's a plan afoot in "blue" states headed by Republican governance, to change the way Electoral votes are awarded. The plan would essentially gerrymander each of the targeted states so that a Republican candidate is almost assured to win the state even if the statewide vote totals go to the Democrat. Barring that, it would at least apportion close to half of the electoral votes to the Republican even if he still somehow manages to lose. It's one of those situations where it's legal, but it ain't right. And it's very telling of the Republican philosophy, so on display in the 2012 election: rig the system wherever possible.

Some key Republicans were busted actually admitting that Voter ID laws were more about disenfranchising Democratic voters than it was about "protecting" the vote. And that was just one of the schemes they had going. It dates as far back as 1980, when modern conservative forefather Paul Weyrich said it best:

They don't want everybody to vote. It is fairly well known that if everybody comes out to vote--and is allowed to vote--Democrats tend to win. What kind of party has to scheme and plot to try and squelch the other side's votes? And what kind of party is totally cool with winning at any cost, even if it means cheating?

[Excerpt]

RNC Chair: Rig The Next Presidential Election For Republicans

In an interview with the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus did not simply endorse this election-rigging scheme, he indicated that it should be targeted towards consistently Democratic states where it is most likely to skew the presidential election to the GOP’s benefit. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

It Begins Already: Vote Flipping in West Virginia

Well, ain't this just dandy. West Virginia is one of those pinkish-to strongly red states most of the time, but right now, it is tipping blue. That means, it is trending toward Barack Obama. Early voting has started, but a funny thing is happening there, something familiar. . .

[Excerpt]

Some early W.Va. voters angry over switched votes
Jackson County touch-screens switched votes, 3 residents say

At least three early voters in Jackson County had a hard time voting for candidates they want to win.

Virginia Matheney and Calvin Thomas said touch-screen machines in the county clerk's office in Ripley kept switching their votes from Democratic to Republican candidates.

"When I touched the screen for Barack Obama, the check mark moved from his box to the box indicating a vote for John McCain," said Matheney, who lives in Kenna. . .

Read more at: Gazette-Mail

Remind you of this?

Homer Simpson Tries to Vote for Barack Obama



EDITOR'S NOTE: This clip will likely not stay up for very long, especially considering that it is from a future episode of The Simpsons. Doubly so, since the show and the FOX network are owned by--insert scary music here--Rupert Murdoch!

Featured Site: Velvet Revolution's Anti-Rove Space

Image from source, Velvet Revolution

There isn't a good way to shorten the actual title of the site I want to highlight today. Velvet Revolution is the name of the site, and the section that jumped out at me is called, Protect Elections, Prosecute Rove.

I listened to Mark Crispin Miller on today's Thom Hartmann Show on Air America Radio. Miller alleges what many liberals (me included) have known in our bones; that the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen. More than that, according to Miller, many others have been stolen as well, even at the state level. And who is at the center of almost all of this political dirty work? Karl Freakin' Rove. Surprise, surprise.

Now, I can't absorb all of what is contained at this site, at least not yet. I intend to delve into it over the weekend though, that's for sure. While I think this site is important, I can't exactly vouch for its contents. So, check it out for yourself. Because according to Miller, plans are afoot to do it again in 2008.

[Excerpt]

The RoveCyberGate Campaign
Brought to you by VelvetRevolution.us

We are working with Ohio election attorneys, Cliff Arnebeck, Bob Fitrakis and Henry Eckhart to find out the truth about recent information indicating that Karl Rove architected and directed a strategy to manipulate elections through the use of computers. Rove’s Cyber Guru, Michael Connell, has worked for the Bush family for over 20 years and helped Bush Sr., Jeb and Bush Jr. “win” their elections using his computer skills. Whistleblowers, including Republicans, say that several of these and other national elections have been rigged through various invisible and illegal means, including vote tabulation manipulation, improper partisan use of the Justice Department to target Democrats and uncooperative US Attorneys, and the laundering of hundreds of millions of corporate dollars funneled into fake advocacy groups directed against Democrat candidates running for public office. Ex-Alabama Governor Don Siegelman has stated publicly that Rove was the person who directed Siegelman’s rigged election and criminal prosecution. . .

Read more at: Velvet Revolution

Republicans Still Trying to Rig California Vote

"Rig" might be a strong word, but it goes to intent. No, the GOP is not trying to do anything illegal. But it is sneaky, underhanded, and they'd be screeching to high heaven if the tables were turned. Would this effort have even been thought up, were the GOP not scared to death they were going to lose this election?

Let's hope California voters see this ploy for what it is. And let's also hope that pass or fail, the Democrats have enough wind in their sails to make the outcome irrelevant.

[Excerpt]

Californian vote switch may bolster Republicans

Republican candidates are trailing Hillary Clinton in the presidential polls but the revival of a campaign to change the way California allocates its 55 electoral college votes has raised the party's hopes for next year's election.

The California Counts campaign, which has several prominent Republican backers, wants to replace the "winner-takes-all" system for electoral vote allocation with one based on the number of congressional districts won by each candidate. . .

Read the rest at: MSNBC