[EL] Project Vote v. Project Vote

[Larry Levine]

While you can't let the other side dictate your agenda - a trap into which
the administration has stepped with regularity - you also don't need to buy
into futile controversy. But above all, you must remember there are people
out there who won't voter for you under any circumstances. The late Sen.
Alan Cranston once said: "If you are running against a rock the rock will
get 35% of the vote." In this instance the Obama campaign could have come up
with a name for the program that would have sidestepped even the possibility
of becoming an issue. On the other hand they opted for a name that describes
what they intend to do and will appeal to the targeted audiences. Tell me
what ACORN hater was going to vote for Obama anyway.

Larry

 

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Dan
Johnson-Weinberger
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 9:23 AM
To: Rick Hasen
Cc: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Project Vote v. Project Vote

 

Why Project Vote?

Perhaps because the Obama campaign refuses to play to the lowest common
denominator of those who lie about voter fraud conspiracies in order to
reduce.the number of citizens who vote. Instead, perhaps, the Obama campaign
is proud of the President's lifelong work at expanding the electorate and
will not allow the enemies of full participation to tarnish the name of a
successful registration campaign that the President helped to lead in 1992.

Perhaps it is less of a "stupid name" and more of a confident choice from
those who will not concede the truth to their enemies. The meme is a lie. I
suspect their choice of name reflects that bedrock understanding.

I should say I am neither an employee nor vendor to the Obama campaign so my
thoughts are mine alone.

Dan



On Thursday, August 25, 2011, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
> Project Vote v. Project Vote: Dept. of Dumb Names
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=22241>
>
> Posted on August 25, 2011 8:47 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=22241> by
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Mike Allen today reports
<http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62049.html>for Politico that
"President Barack Obama's reelection campaign on Thursday announced 'Project
Vote,' a campaign-within-a-campaign that is aimed at increasing registration
and participation among Democratic base constituencies - including young
voters, seniors, African Americans and Hispanics, plus Native Americans and
gay and lesbian voters."
>
> While the move to increase participation among the Democratic base may be
a smart one, I cannot think of a more stupid name for the initiative-it is
going to feed into the right-wing Democratic voter fraud meme.  "Project
Vote" is also the name of this organization <http://projectvote.org/>, an
organization aimed at getting out the vote as well.  Although non-partisan
in the sense that it is not affiliated with any political party, the group
works toward enfranchisement of groups that have been disenfranchised,
especially pushing the provisions of the National Voter Registration Act
(NVRA) which require states to take steps to register voters at welfare
offices and other government agencies.
>
> Project Vote has long been affiliated with ACORN (and there has been some
dispute about the entangling of the two organizations).  ACORN is now
defunct, but the cries of voter fraud against ACORN are now being directed
to Project Vote.  Just today, for example, the Washington Times has run a
story
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/24/watchdog-suspicious-of-fede
ral-ties-to-project-vot/> on a FOIA request by Judicial Watch to seek
information about ties between Project Vote and the Justice Department.
>
> In conducting research for my book, The Voting Wars, I came across a
nauseating amount of unsubstantiated claims against President Obama as
promoting voter fraud to help him win his election.  Much of this writing
stems from work Obama had done as a community organizer in Chicago and
briefly as a lawyer for the Project Vote organization.
>
> Why on earth would the Obama campaign seek to stoke these conspiracy
theories, and cause confusion, by naming its efforts Project Vote?
>
> </mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=13201a4eddf94059&attid=0.0.1&disp=emb&zw>
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D22241
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D22241&title=Project%20Vote%20v.%20Project%20Vote%3A%20Dept.%20of%20Dum
b%20Names&description=>
&title=Project%20Vote%20v.%20Project%20Vote%3A%20Dept.%20of%20Dumb%20Names&d
escription=>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
fraudulent fraud squad <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8> | Comments Off
> --
> Rick Hasen
> Professor of Law and Political Science
> UC Irvine School of Law
> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
> 949.824.3072 <tel:949.824.3072> - office
> 949.824.0495 <tel:949.824.0495> - fax
> rhasen at law.uci.edu
> http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
> http://electionlawblog.org
>

-- 
Dan Johnson-Weinberger

Attorney at Law
111 West Washington, Suite 1920
Chicago, Illinois 60602

312.867.5377 (office)
312.933.4890 (mobile)
312.794.7064 (fax)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110825/4232fb00/attachment.html>