On 4/7/11, Larry Levine <larrylevine@earthlink.net> wrote:
Fraud is in the eyes of the loser.
Larry
C'mon Larry, winners of course don't look gift horses in the mouth and
in any event will never contest their own win, and you say fraud is
only in the eyes of the loser? Under this "sore loser" view, there's
nobody left to contest an election and that leaves democracy itself
defenseless. Is this good?
Only "sore losers" with a cognizable injury have standing and
motivation to litigate. If they are to be deterred or ridiculed into
silence then both fraud and error have a free hand to go forward
undetected.
Paul Lehto, J.D.
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Hasen
To: Election Law
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 4:51 PM
Subject: [EL] Wisconsin update
April 07, 2011
As the WI Supreme Court Election Moves Beyond the Margin of Litigation
Toward Prosser, What Will Become of Republican Fraud Claims?
With news reports indicating that human error was responsible for a
failure to include 7,582 votes in favor of Justice Prosser in the vote
totals, I breathe a sigh of relief from the point of view of election
administration. Though it is possible that there will be other,
countervailing errors, it seems doubtful that they could make up this huge
gain.
Over the last day and a half, I have been collecting and blogging links
showing Republican concerns about voter fraud. Here's Ann Althouse, before
the new numbers were revealed, responding to my Politico piece:
So... because past claims of fraud have been "methodically debunked" --
have they? -- we should stop even looking for fraud? We'll only suffer if we
keep checking for cheaters? This sounds way too preemptive to me. I've spent
the last 2 months in a vortex of political ugliness and saw it grafted onto
the judicial election. I saw frantically impassioned protesters grasping at
the symbolism of this election and building an intense shared feeling of
entitlement to shift the politics of this state. I heard the phrase "by any
means necessary" more than once.
In this context, Prosser proponents have every right to drag us through
the search for fraud one more time. I hope they don't find it, and Professor
Hasen can add this new example to his next there-is-no-fraud column. But
there's a 204 vote margin in this crazy election. We need to feel confident
that the outcome is correct.
There's John Fund too before this calling out the fraud.
Here's what I expect: With Prosser in the lead, the claims of fraud on the
Republican side will stop. The Democrats will not raise claims of fraud even
if they contest the election.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 04:49 PM
"Predictable: Right-Wing Media Respond To WI Supreme Court Election With
Baseless Voter Fraud Allegations"
Media Matters for America has put up this post, which further validates my
prediction.
Posted by Rick Hasen at 09:54 AM
--
Rick Hasen
Visiting Professor
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen@law.uci.edu
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola Law School
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law