[EL] Vote fraud -- evidence vs. belief

[Ben Adler]

"No conservative that I know has any difficulty believing that a majority
of voters in New York, for example, vote for candidates who support liberal
policies, or that President Obama received more votes than Sen. McCain."

I am so sick of conservative intellectuals pretending that the vast
majority of actual conservatives, with their shockingly ignorant and
conspiratorial beliefs, don't exist, so as to dispense with any need to
defend actual conservatism as opposed to your idealized version of it. If
no conservative you know has any difficulty believing Obama received more
votes McCain, then either you don't know many conservatives, or the ones
you know are an extraordinarily unrepresentative sample. Here's some actual
data, as opposed to your anecdotal assertion:

According to a 2009 Public Policy Polling survey, a majority (52%) of
Republicans believe that ACORN stole the 2008 election on behalf of Obama.
See here:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/poll-gop-base-thinks-obama-didnt-actually-win-2008-election----acorn-stole-it.php

If you've watched Fox News or listened to right wing talk radio over the
last few years, you'll know why this is. But I suppose you would say you
don't know any conservatives who watch Fox News or listen to Rush Limbaugh
either.

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Scarberry, Mark <
Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu> wrote:

> In response to Jim: Conservatives generally have no problem believing that
> people may act foolishly for various reasons. Conservatives tend to have a
> more realistic view of human nature than do some liberals. Conservatives
>  may believe it is foolish for people to support liberal policies, but
> conservatives generally are quite willing to believe that people do so in
> large numbers. No conservative that I know has any difficulty believing
> that a majority of voters in New York, for example, vote for candidates who
> support liberal policies, or that President Obama received more votes than
> Sen. McCain. Conservatives also think that there are a lot of people who
> benefit from a large government who are likely to vote in favor of govt
> expansion. Conservatives are not at all surprised, for example, that a lot
> of government workers would do so. Whether or not that is a foolish
> decision depends on the factors that it may be reasonable for people to
> take into account in voting.****
>
> ** **
>
> With regard to real reasons why at least some people who support voter ID
> laws do so: There is a concern that fraud may occur in the future. Perhaps
> it is analogous to the fear that electronic voting systems may be hacked so
> as to change voting results. Even if there is no evidence that it has
> occurred, there is a system vulnerability that can reasonably be considered
> in deciding what action may be appropriate, in part to prevent the
> vulnerability from being exploited and in part to help assure voters that
> the system has integrity.****
>
> ** **
>
> Discussions on this list have persuaded me that there is little current
> voting fraud that would be prevented by voter ID laws, and that there
> should be more concern about absentee voting, voting by mail, and new
> Internet voting systems. I also have an innate distrust of non-transparent
> systems like electronic voting and would prefer that we use paper ballots
> that can be recounted manually. That does not mean that it is unreasonable
> to take into account other  vulnerabilities of the system that could be
> exploited in the future. Explanations about why voter ID laws are not
> needed or helpful to address a potential vulnerability will be more
> persuasive than data showing a lack of current fraud that would be
> prevented by voter ID laws. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Mark S. Scarberry****
>
> Professor of Law****
>
> Pepperdine Univ. School of Law****
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jim Gardner
> *Sent:* Friday, July 20, 2012 12:08 PM
> *To:* Election law list
> *Subject:* [EL] Vote fraud -- evidence vs. belief****
>
> ** **
>
> The lack of evidence to support charges of vote fraud raises a more
> interesting and profound question: Why do people continue to believe in
> it?  The answer, it seems to me, has nothing to do with evidence – so
> arguing about the evidence is probably a waste of time – and a lot to do
> with culture, specifically the culture of contemporary politics.  ****
>
>  ****
>
> I think the problem here is that many on the right have managed to
> convince themselves that it is impossible – literally impossible – for
> people in any kind of numbers to support liberal policies.  Since people
> can’t possibly support such policies, they can’t possibly vote for liberal
> candidates.  Consequently, if liberal candidates win, it can only be the
> result of fraud because nobody could actually vote for such people.  ****
>
>  ****
>
> This problem is cultural.  It reveals a very sad fact about our current
> politics, namely that the views, beliefs, and experiences of other human
> beings are so completely dismissed and devalued in some quarters that many
> find it impossible to take seriously the possibility that their fellow
> citizens could actually hold certain views (much less actually take those
> views seriously or engage with them on the merits).****
>
>  ****
>
> I hasten to add that the political valence does not always run in the same
> direction.  For example, the “What’s the Matter with Kansas” analysis holds
> that working class voters couldn’t possibly support candidates who support
> policies that disadvantage them economically, although proponents of this
> view explain it by brainwashing rather than vote fraud.  But this
> explanation doesn’t take seriously the possibility that social and
> symbolically resonant issues could actually be more important than economic
> ones to some segments of the population.****
>
>  ****
>
> Until we start taking each other seriously as political agents, we’re not
> going to extract ourselves from the current impasse.****
>
>  ****
>
> Jim****
>
>  ****
>
> ________________________________
> James A. Gardner
> Joseph W. Belluck and Laura L. Aswad
>   SUNY Distinguished Professor of Civil Justice
> SUNY Buffalo Law School
> The State University of New York
> Room 316, O'Brian Hall
> Buffalo, NY 14260-1100
> voice: 716-645-3607
> fax: 716-645-5968
> e-mail: jgard at buffalo.edu
> www.law.buffalo.edu
> Papers at http://ssrn.com/author=40126****
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>



-- 
Ben Adler
Contributing Writer, The Nation
Federal Policy Correspondent, Next American City
347-463-0429
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120720/1d7e177e/attachment.html>