Ohio early voting and White House meddling

posted at 11:01 am on August 5, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

Nothing is ever easy in Ohio, it seems, at least when it comes to politics and elections. The latest significant dust-up involves a pair of 2011 changes to the Buckeye State’s voting laws concerning early voting. Early voting previously was allowed right up until the day before the election, but has now been terminated on the Friday before. (Presumably to allow election officials more time over the weekend to wrap up the early vote process and get ready for the heavy traffic on Tuesday.) An exception was made for military members and their families.

That’s where the Obama administration comes in, filing suit in Ohio to toss out the law on the grounds that it is somehow unconstitutional. Mitt Romney wasn’t about to let a softball like that sail over the plate.

“President Obama’s lawsuit claiming it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges during the state’s early voting period is an outrage. The brave men and women of our military make tremendous sacrifices to protect and defend our freedoms, and we should do everything we can to protect their fundamental right to vote. I stand with the fifteen military groups that are defending the rights of military voters, and if I’m entrusted to be the commander-in-chief, I’ll work to protect the voting rights of our military, not undermine them.”

To me this sounded pretty much like a no-brainer. We make exceptions in our legal codes for military members and their families in all manner of activities. Commissary and military exchange prices get very favorable tax treatment unavailable to civilians. Returning veterans qualify for all manner of government funded or subsidized benefits which can not be had by civilians. And rightly so! What kind of a wet blanket would come along and try to defend Obama’s law suit? Enter my friend, Doug Mataconis.

On the surface, there doesn’t seem to be any justification for this kind of disparate treatment. What is it that distinguishes a member of the military, or their family members, from regular voters to the extent that it should be acceptable to give them three extra days to vote early? It’s hard to see any plausible answer to that question that would withstand legal scrutiny, and the argument made by the Ohio Attorney General in his responsive pleading doesn’t strike me as persuasive:

Doug provides a lengthy legal analysis of it – not terribly surprising, since he’s a lawyer – which you are invited to read. One of his chief complaints comes from the state’s argument that we already make exceptions for military members overseas (and civilians as well) under the Uniform Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.

The state argues that this is justified by the provisions of the UCOAVA and the general accommodations that have been given to military voters in the past, including extending the time for military ballots to be received beyond those of ordinary absentee ballots. As Court have noted, though, those accommodations are acceptable precisely because of the unique situation that deployed members of the military find themselves in being thousands of miles from home and unable to return home to vote.

This argument only really makes sense, it seems, if we’re talking about members of the military who are on the verge of being deployed, something they’re likely to know about well before the three days before Election Day unless we’re talking about a deployment made necessary by a foreign crisis of some kind.

I disagree with this on two major counts. First of all, as Doug concedes, the constitution gives the states broad discretion in how they structure their elections and when they are held. In Oregon, for example, you only vote by mail. And – again – we regularly make exceptions for the military. The argument that there will only be impediments to voting if the service member is overseas is invalid in my opinion. The options for civilian employees are far different from servicemen. As any service member or veteran knows, if your duty section is on call, you can’t simply wander away from your post to go vote. Civilian employers are unlikely to bar anyone’s chance to vote, if only for the public outcry which would follow. And duty rotation cycles can vary wildly in the military. There are plenty of combinations which would make it virtually impossible for soldiers, sailors and airmen to get to the polls in any given 48 hours.

What’s the real reason Obama’s team is trying to shoot down this law? Doug actually answers this question himself, though perhaps unintentionally.

It’s not hard to see a partisan reason behind the discrepancy, of course. As a general rule members of the military and their family members are more likely to vote Republican than Democrat so anything that encourages this particular voting group to vote when it’s convenient would potentially be of advantage to the GOP.

While I personally disagree that the military vote is as homogeneously Republican as is implied here, it’s certainly a common perception. But rather than blaming Ohio for trying to structure a law expanding military voting options to benefit the GOP, the court challenge from Obama is just as clearly an effort to limit military voting options – even to a tiny degree – to nullify that advantage. The whole thing stinks from beginning to end, as I see it, and Romney is right to call national attention to this lawsuit.

ADDITIONAL READING: Dr. James Joyner decides to focus on the question of whether the Obama lawsuit is trying to “take away voting days from the military” vs. “giving the extra voting days back to everyone else. Of course, “giving the days back” wouldn’t be the end result if the suit is successful, as it would simply strip the three extra days from everyone.

UPDATE: (Jazz) It is already being noted that one potential remedy through the courts could be to extend the three days of voting back to everyone rather than taking it away from the exempted groups. And yes, that’s possible, but the first linked article certainly implies that it’s the least likely scenario. We shall see when a judge gets hold of it.

UPDATE 2: (Jazz) Thanks to a lot of help in the comments, one of the first bits of analysis I read on this situation doesn’t seem to pan out. It originally looked as if this was an “either or” situation, where the final result could either be going back to everyone voting up until Monday, nobody voting after Friday, or leaving things as they are. But, as Ed already noted, it seems that going to a situation where nobody votes after Friday isn’t even an option. My bad. So the choices are to leave things as they are or wipe out the idea of curtailing any voting on Friday at all. So I suppose the next question is, how badly did the state need to cut off voting on Friday for logistical reasons? And would it make more sense to simply have every day be a voting day right through Tuesday?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

0bama is really scared of Ohio…

OmahaConservative on August 5, 2012 at 11:05 AM

(SHOCKER!) BREAKING NEWS: obama is anti-U.S. military (and U.S. military service members are anti-obama).

Pork-Chop on August 5, 2012 at 11:05 AM

But let’s make sure illegals can have an interpreter paid for by taxpayer money to0 help them vote.

bgibbs1000 on August 5, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Serves the Army well. They swore an oath to fight enemies, domestic and foreign. Obama is both.

Archivarix on August 5, 2012 at 11:07 AM

why does he hate the military so much?

2012chuck on August 5, 2012 at 11:08 AM

While I personally disagree that the military vote is as homogeneously Republican as is implied here, it’s certainly a common perception.

Well, it is true that military officers are overwhelmingly Republican; last time I checked the ratio was 7 to 1.

But among the enlisted ranks the gap is much narrower, a trend that has only taken place in the past decade or so. It’s now something like 55% R and 45% D.

Del Dolemonte on August 5, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Early voting is a recipe for voter fraud. Voters should have to show up at their local polling place, prove that they are eligible to cast a ballot and then do so. If one feels strongly about their right none of these things should bother them.

Rio Linda Refugee on August 5, 2012 at 11:14 AM

I was stationed in Italy a couple of decades ago when ‘Overturn the Death Penalty’ Rose Elizabeth Bird was on the California ballot for re-election as judge.
I did everything as early as possible in order to cast my vote to not re-elect her for another term.
All my effort was not enough. I received notice from the secretary of State that my ballot was received too late and would not be counted.
Fortunately, voters agreed with me as she was not re-elected to another term.
But, I, for one, could have used that extra time.

What about that Democratic mantra “A Fair And Accurate Counting Of All The Votes”?

TimBuk3 on August 5, 2012 at 11:15 AM

If the people around Romney could figure out how to replace his computer chip with a brain and implant some titanium where he should have some spine, they could take this theme and turn it into a major, driving narrative. Why not challenge Obama to the cleanest election in modern history? Why not challenge Obama to call off his legal dogs over states trying to clean up voter rolls? Why not promise Americans to remove voter fraud as an issues and enjoin the Attorney General to ensure updated and legitimate voter franchisement? Something like 75% of Americans, including minorities, believe in cleaning up the voter rolls. It’s a no-lose for Romney, and no-win for Obama (who can’t possibly call off Holder, since he needs every illegal and dead-man vote he can find).

A narrative, Mitt. You know what this is?

rrpjr on August 5, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Silly misinformation Hotair. From the lawsuit….”Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit to restore in-person early voting for all Ohioans during the three days prior to Election Day”. The lawsuit gives all Ohioans the extra days, it does not take away days from the military. Nice try at trying to dupe the kool-aid drinkers.

ZippyZ on August 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM

About 17% of the military are black. Why does Obama want to prevent black people from voting?

aunursa on August 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM

why does he hate the military so much?

2012chuck on August 5, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Like most liberal DIMocrat politicians, Obama prefers to use them as props and photo backdrops while wanting to minimize their vote…

Most officers are OVERWHELMING Republican, but the gap narrows at the Enlisted ranks and really varies by service…

Khun Joe on August 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Of course, “giving the days back” wouldn’t be the end result if the suit is successful, as it would simply strip the three extra days from everyone.

Sorry, Jazz, but this is incorrect. It was covered by Ed yesterday at Hot Air. If the suit is successful, everyone gets the three extra early days to vote, not just military voters. See Ed’s update at the bottom:

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/03/obama-democrats-suing-to-block-military-voting-in-ohio/

AngusMc on August 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM

O dislikes the military because they know better than anyone what a miserable failure his foreign policies have been. He has zero compunctions about suing to block extended timeframes for overseas military voting, just as he’s worked feverishly to promote illegal alien voting and adding dead dogs to the rolls. His flagrant attempts to steal this election by whatever means necessary may be the only transparent thing about his administration.

Slainte on August 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Rasmussen Poll: Military Veterans Pick Romney Over Obama 59% To 35%

there it is on August 5, 2012 at 11:20 AM

This entire column — and Romney’s statement — is a lie. The Obama suit does not seek to restrict the right of service members to vote. It seeks to allow all Ohioans the same right (arguably — but today — in the face of partisan efforts to repress early voting. This was argued here yesterday, I’m surprised it’s reappeared. I’m also surprised Romney made a strong statement he’s going to have to back away from. That’s bad staff work:

The opening paragraph of the complaint:

Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit to restore in-person early voting for all Ohioans during the three days prior to Election Day – a right exercised by an estimated 93,000 Ohioans in the last presidential election. Ohio election law, as currently enacted by the State of Ohio and administered by Defendant Ohio Secretary of State, arbitrarily eliminates early voting during the three days prior to Election Day for most Ohio voters, a right previously available to all Ohio voters. This disparate treatment violates 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth

urban elitist on August 5, 2012 at 11:20 AM

the court challenge from Obama is just as clearly an effort to limit military voting options – even to a tiny degree – to nullify that advantage. The whole thing stinks from beginning to end, as I see it, and Romney is right to call national attention to this lawsuit.

I don’t want to hear another g-dda-n thing about the “effects” of voter ID.

JeffWeimer on August 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Why is everything bolded?

wargamer6 on August 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Silly misinformation Hotair. From the lawsuit….”Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit to restore in-person early voting for all Ohioans during the three days prior to Election Day”. The lawsuit gives all Ohioans the extra days, it does not take away days from the military. Nice try at trying to dupe the kool-aid drinkers.

ZippyZ on August 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM

.
Huh? . . . Sorry, I missed what you said; I was drinking Koolaid.

listens2glenn on August 5, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I’m glad you mentioned Duty…even when my husband was on Shore Duty when he was a new officer, here in the states, he was on a watch bill, and he would be on watch for 12 hours, NO exceptions. Rotating schedule, three days on, two days off, followed by two nights on, three off, etc. My husband also spent plenty of time deployed, but what really galls me is that many civilians obviously think that if you’re not on the battlefield or on a ship, your military job is just peaches and cream all day long.

ellifint on August 5, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Why is everything bolded?

wargamer6
on August 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM

.
I noticed this, as well. Site being hacked?

listens2glenn on August 5, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Why is everything bolded?

wargamer6 on August 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Was just going to ask the same thing…

OmahaConservative on August 5, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Serves the Army well. They swore an oath to fight enemies, domestic and foreign. Obama is both.

Archivarix on August 5, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Please tell me you’re being tongue in cheek here.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Why is everything bolded?

wargamer6 on August 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I’m guessing Ace of Spades is running the blog now

gwelf on August 5, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Why is everything bolded?

wargamer6 on August 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Maybe Jazz used the html tags incorrectly in the “Edit” of his post.

bluegill on August 5, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Get rid of early voting in person. You either vote in person or vote by absentee ballot if you are going to be outside of the area. There is no reason for “early voting”. It just allows labor unions to bus people in from out of state so they can vote in both Ohio and their home state.

crosspatch on August 5, 2012 at 11:29 AM

And after breaking the page with that update, it seems to be fixed again. Must. Have. More. Coffee.

Jazz Shaw on August 5, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Nice try at trying to dupe the kool-aid drinkers.

ZippyZ on August 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Nice try at trying to dupe your kool-aid drinkers. This is an obvious legal bearding in effort to eliminate the extra days for the military.

Of course, “giving the days back” wouldn’t be the end result if the suit is successful, as it would simply strip the three extra days from everyone.

rrpjr on August 5, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Oh man! I just thought my eyes were getting better! I could see all of the words clearly….but it’s just everything was in bold….bummer. ;)

sicoit on August 5, 2012 at 11:32 AM

It wouldn’t shock me if Obama decided to set up TSA “VIPR” checkpoints on or before election day to effectively halt interstate and other travel to suppress the vote of Republicans.

After all, they can bus around their inner city “rent a vote” mobs at will.

wildcat72 on August 5, 2012 at 11:34 AM

What a terrible post.

From getting the name of the Act wrong, thru the moronic slap at a lawyer for providing lengthy legal reasoning on a subject of intimate legal importance, to propounding arguments which confuse the structures of state sovereignty, and the limits thereof, with intrastate disparate treatment of a state’s own citizens, your argument is so full of holes one doesn’t know where to start.

It’s about circumstances, not groups of people. That’s the crux of the issue on whether or not there is disparate treatment. One can’t just treat military members differently and civilians differently just because they in one or another group for voting purposes.

Dusty on August 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM

While I personally disagree that the military vote is as homogeneously Republican as is implied here, it’s certainly a common perception.

While I understand that things change, when I was in, military folks I was stationed with just weren’t all that political. Most didn’t vote at all and the ones that did certainly weren’t all Republicans. The voter demographics tended, as far as I could tell, to be pretty much the same as they were in civilian life (military people are ex-civilians, by the way). The black and latino soldiers tended to talk favorably of Democratic candidates, white soldiers tended to favor Republicans in discussions. This was particularly true in the 1976 election. In 1980, even Democrats were leaning toward Regan. By Reagan’s re-election campaign, I didn’t hear anyone speaking ill of Reagan that I remember but I got out of the military during Reagan’s second term.

Also, there were rarely any discussions of local politics since we all voted in our home states, most discussion was about national politics when there was any, which was fairly rare.

crosspatch on August 5, 2012 at 11:40 AM

They make an exception to voluntarily serve and protect us often leaving their families, certainly we can reciprocate. Unless you are the Commandless-In-Chief.

hillsoftx on August 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Hard to believe ANY MEMBER of the US Military could support a Democrat.

But then again Bush jacked around for 7 years plus and didn’t want to win against the 7th century goat headers in Afghanistan so that explains it well.

NOT THE COMMIE 2012!!

PappyD61 on August 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM

I’d just like to know how many other states – particularly ones less likely to influence the outcome of the election – have similar voting laws but are not being challenged.

As Doug Mataconis said earlier on Twitter, it’s not legally relevant, but if there are other such states, the Romney campaign could get some mileage out of it.

flipflop on August 5, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Sorry, Jazz, but this is incorrect. It was covered by Ed yesterday at Hot Air. If the suit is successful, everyone gets the three extra early days to vote, not just military voters. See Ed’s update at the bottom:

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/03/obama-democrats-suing-to-block-military-voting-in-ohio/

[AngusMc on August 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM]

I’d agree, but haven’t pushed that because I don’t know legal procedure. It may be a proposed remedy, but that doesn’t mean it could be put into effect by the court. The Court may only be able strike the provision giving military members the three day period, thus requiring the Legislature to act to reinstate it via the remedy.

As I said, I just don’t know, so don’t quote me in arguments about this, anyone. It’s only a supposition.

Dusty on August 5, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Thanks for the quick feedback. (See Update 2.) It appears that the first CBS analysis I looked at was just speculation. There doesn’t seem to be a path to cutting off all voting at Friday with the current structure of the suit.

Jazz Shaw on August 5, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Why the hell should we have a problem with doing something that makes our military men and women feel special? I think it’s significant that the Obama adminstration finds it necessary to meddle in state affairs EVERYWHERE.

COgirl on August 5, 2012 at 11:50 AM

What a SNAFU! At least Mr. Romney has found a subject that’s safe to speak out on. Keep up the good work!

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on August 5, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Challenging a law that makes it easier for mililtary to vote while at the same time challenging laws that make it harder for illegal immigrants to vote.

We know whose “voting rights” are important to President Obama.

29Victor on August 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Serves the Army well. They swore an oath to fight enemies, domestic and foreign. Obama is both.

Archivarix on August 5, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Please tell me you’re being tongue in cheek here.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 11:26 AM

The last two sentences are God’ own truth, aren’t they? The army should have deposed the creep. And don’t tell me about the Congress being the one to call the shots – it’d open a wide gate to tyranny if the Congress and the White House are in the same party’s hands.

Archivarix on August 5, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Hahaha
Ohio is the most f-ed up state in the union, next to Kalifornia. Believe my I’ve spent my entire life here……….Ohio sucks…….. Just like our pResident in chief……………;-(

angrymike on August 5, 2012 at 11:56 AM

”Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit to restore in-person early voting for all Ohioans during the three days prior to Election Day”.
ZippyZ on August 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Why does this fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government/DOJ? Should all states have to do this now?

Buy Danish on August 5, 2012 at 12:04 PM

The stupidity here remains making a big deal of the military accommodation and attacking it with a lawsuit.

Of course the military should have special accommodations for voting. Is any specific accommodation 100% necessary? Maybe not, but that’s the kind of thing that should be adjusted through quiet negotiation in the state legislature.

The lawsuit is stupid on its face. It’s very hard to believe that the courts will hold accommodations for military voting to be unconstitutional. Even serving stateside, military members often have reasons why it’s harder for them to get to the polls.

If the suit is stupid, then the whole approach is foolish. It’s not even like civilian voters don’t have early voting opportunities. They do. There is no injustice here.

I don’t even care if civilian voters have the same number of early-voting days as military voters — that’s fine, if we’re going to go the early-voting route.

But attacking the military accommodation with a lawsuit shows a flawed posture on responsible use of the law. Our leaders should have better judgment than this. If you thing it’s a good idea to run around filing lawsuits about everything you don’t like, as if that’s the way government should work, then you’re as much of a problem as the Democratic Party and the Obama campaign.

J.E. Dyer on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Are the republicans going to disenfranchise current military men,women and veterans who have expired drivers licenses as well?

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

The last two sentences are God’ own truth, aren’t they? The army should have deposed the creep. And don’t tell me about the Congress being the one to call the shots – it’d open a wide gate to tyranny if the Congress and the White House are in the same party’s hands.

Archivarix on August 5, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Whereas a military coup would not open a wide gate to tyranny??

AngusMc on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

I live in Ohio, and the Ohio GOP could screw up a free lunch.

Kasich could have enacted a Scott-Walker-type bill that excluded cops and firefighters, but they included everyone, and the legislation got overturned by referendum. After enacting stupid legislation, Kasich and the Ohio GOP got steamrolled when Dems and the unions convinced old ladies that firefighters wouldn’t be showing up to put out their fires.

Now, again, Ohio tries to prune back the early voting nonsense–recipes for fraud–and they have to toss in a useless exception for military that probably can’t past constitutional muster.

I think there’s something in the water that the Ohio GOP drinks.

Hot Airians dump on Portman, but this latest problem makes me hope that Romney picks someone else for VP. For this state’s GOP, Portman is pretty good. He’s smart and respected. He may not be Jim Demint, but he ain’t Scott Brown.

Fair warning: my local paper (The Cincinnati Enquirer) has been playing up Ohio’s problems with provisional ballots. Look for a huge dispute on Election Day and thereafter regarding provisional ballots.

BuckeyeSam on August 5, 2012 at 12:09 PM

What about that Democratic mantra “A Fair And Accurate Counting Of All The Votes”?

TimBuk3 on August 5, 2012 at 11:15 AM

..you don’t actually take those clowns seriously, do you?

The War Planner on August 5, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Are the republicans going to disenfranchise current military men,women and veterans who have expired drivers licenses as well?

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

You’re am idiot but I let this stuff pass because liberals know nothing next to nothing about the military. A military ID or Military CAC card gives access to anything a driver’s license does. Well, except driving. Well, except if you’re driving an M1.

HTHs.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:11 PM

you “are” an idiot

And I can’t type.

Sue me.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Ohio is the most f-ed up state in the union, next to Kalifornia.

angrymike on August 5, 2012 at 11:56 AM

..Ohio is not next to California, Mike. Oregon, Nevada, and Arizona are.

Oh, wait, I see what you mean.

:-D

The War Planner on August 5, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Are the republicans going to disenfranchise current military men,women and veterans who have expired drivers licenses as well?

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

You’re a idiot but I let this stuff pass because liberals know nothing next to nothing about the military. A military ID or Military CAC card gives access to anything a driver’s license does. Well, except driving. Well, except if you’re driving an M1.

HTHs.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:11 PM

LOL…dang you are dumb….upperassside.

HumpBot Salvation on August 5, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Rio Linda Refugee on August 5, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Early voting in my county occurs at the registar of voters office. You must show ID to vote.

chemman on August 5, 2012 at 12:18 PM

The dirtbags are trying to supress the military vote . . . purely and simply.

rplat on August 5, 2012 at 12:19 PM

I don’t know how things are now, but I suspect that they are not far different than when I served in Vietnam. Then, it was probable that one might not receive mail for a week to ten days.

So the ballot might arrive late, you fill it out and wait another week or so for the thing to be picked up by helicopter. I can easily see the same delay for ships at sea.

Giving the deployed military extra time to vote is not unreasonable.

Special Forces Grunt on August 5, 2012 at 12:19 PM

you “are” an idiot

And I can’t type.

Sue me.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:13 PM

It probably made more sense to it the first time.

Rio Linda Refugee on August 5, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Are the republicans going to disenfranchise current military men,women and veterans who have expired drivers licenses as well?
Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

“Math is hard, science is harder and research is hardest of all”

Lowerbackside you make an anal orifice look smart. You know all those poor people you think republicans want to disenfranchise they have picture ID because the government requires it to sign up for all those wonderful benefits they receive. As for the military you feign concern for you would have been one of those who spit on the returning Vietnam Vets.

chemman on August 5, 2012 at 12:23 PM

liberals know nothing next to nothing about the military.

Talk about a gross generalization. Please try thinking before you say stupid things. As far as this issue goes, it isn’t an issue. Military members are just like everyone else so everyone should vote the same. It’s not like they were going to come out in droves to vote democratic anyway…not with all the brainwashing by commanders and the Fox News viewing in every office.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM

brainwashing by commanders and the Fox News viewing in every office.

Oh boy…

tom daschle concerned on August 5, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Are the republicans going to disenfranchise current military men,women and veterans who have expired drivers licenses as well?
 
Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

 
Wait, so you support voter ID laws now?

rogerb on August 5, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Are the republicans going to disenfranchise current military men,women and veterans who have expired drivers licenses as well?

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

I’m guessing they can use their military ID, idiot.

chewmeister on August 5, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Talk about a gross generalization. Please try thinking before you say stupid things.

Did you intend that comment for uppereastside?

As far as this issue goes, it isn’t an issue. Military members are just like everyone else so everyone should vote the same.

Hard to get to a ballot box in Afghanistan. And further, very few military members are stationed in their home state. It’s very much different for military memebers. I was assigned duties as Voting Assistance Officer one year and it is tough sorting through the details state to state to get folks registered.

It’s not like they were going to come out in droves to vote democratic anyway…not with all the brainwashing by commanders and the Fox News viewing in every office.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM

I refer to you’re first comment to me.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:30 PM

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM

HA! It’s not a “stupid thing” to claim our military commanders are being “brainwashed” by Fox? Indeed, I’d go so far as to say your comment was not only “stupid” it was “reprehensible”.

Buy Danish on August 5, 2012 at 12:30 PM

“your” sue me again

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:31 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/govt-probes-las-vegas-sands-corp-money-laundering-035448662–finance.html

This, along with the DNCC’s allegation that Adelson’s Casino business engaged prostitutes will backfire big time when he strikes back.

bayview on August 5, 2012 at 12:31 PM

HA! It’s not a “stupid thing” to claim our military commanders are being “brainwashed” by Fox? Indeed, I’d go so far as to say your comment was not only “stupid” it was “reprehensible”.

Buy Danish on August 5, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Please learn to read before you come at me.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:36 PM

The comments about the Ohio gop remind me of what Rush says on his show. He’s been getting calls for over 20 years from people wanting to know (essentially) what is WRONG WITH THE gop?

That would be about the same time that Reagan left office and the RINO Ruling class took complete control of the party. There hasn’t been a true limited government Reagan type nominee ever since.

And Reagan was just an asterik in their ongoing control of the party machinery. Romney………….is just the RINO next in line.

And funny how the Dems try to get the Military disenfranchised and then the gop tries to do the same thing with dead people and illegals.

NOT THE COMMIE 2012

PappyD61 on August 5, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Are the republicans going to disenfranchise current military men,women and veterans who have expired drivers licenses as well?

Lowereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Can you give us any credible examples of Republicans disenfranchising military voters in the past? Multi-sourced, please.

Your problem is that it’s your Party that has in the past tried to suppress the military vote. See “Florida 2000″.

As the Democrat NY Times bitterly whined at the time:

For many Democrats immersed in Florida’s disputed presidential election, there was no worse moment than the one on Sunday, Nov. 19, when Senator Joseph I. Lieberman appeared on national television and said that election officials should give the ”benefit of the doubt” to military voters.

Until then, the Democrats had conducted a full-scale effort to persuade counties to disqualify any overseas ballots that lacked postmarks or witness signatures. But on that morning, with Republicans attacking the Gore-Lieberman campaign for eliminating the votes of hundreds of men and women in the armed forces, Mr. Lieberman effectively disavowed the strategy.

”There was some gasping,” recalled David Ginsberg, the research director for the Gore campaign, who watched it with other aides at Democratic headquarters in Washington.

-snip-

As Mr. Herron’s memorandum made clear, the Gore campaign sought to disqualify as many overseas ballots as possible, knowing that the state’s complement of military voters overseas had regularly voted Republican in other elections. They pushed county election officials to apply the strictest interpretation of the rules.

They were equally calculating in their strategy with recounts, calling for them only in counties with large Democratic populations.

Why do you Democrats Hate the military?

Del Dolemonte on August 5, 2012 at 12:39 PM

It’s infuriating to watch Holder and this administration slink its tentacles into every local voter issue that could potentially help or harm the re-election strategy.

Allowing illegal aliens to vote -> helps the PØTUS
Keeping deceased on the rolls -> helps the PØTUS
Disenfrancising the military -> helps the PØTUS
Enabling ineligible voters -> helps the PØTUS

Red Creek on August 5, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Buy Danish on August 5, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Please learn to read before you come at me.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Is that your MO. Insult the intelligence of someone who makes a great point with you that you can’t defend?

Save your breath, everyone reading your comments knows you’re an idiot.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Here is sample conversation most vets should expect in November.

WW2 Vet- Hey i voted for Obama last election however i can no longer find my military id or drivers license. Can i still vote?

Republican Hack Poll Watcher – Are you going to vote for Obama again?

WW2 Vet- I think i am.

Republican Hack Poll Watcher- Unfortunately you wont be able to vote until you show a valid government id.

WW2 Vet- I changed my mind, i think i will vote for R0mney

Republican Hack Poll Watcher- Come on down sir. Thank you for your service.

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:47 PM

A window into the mind of an invalid.

Thank you for the demonstration. You are a good democrat.

tom daschle concerned on August 5, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Wait, so you support voter ID laws now?

rogerb on August 5, 2012 at 12:27 PM

What i support is letting all American citizens vote instead of picking the ones that only benefit one party.

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Is that your MO. Insult the intelligence of someone who makes a great point with you that you can’t defend?

Save your breath, everyone reading your comments knows you’re an idiot.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Seriously? The guy completely misquotes me and you have the nerve…you know what, never mind. You must also be lacking in the reading comprehension skills dept if you can’t identify what’s wrong with his usage of my quote.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:54 PM

You know all those poor people you think republicans want to disenfranchise they have picture ID because the government requires it to sign up for all those wonderful benefits they receive.
chemman on August 5, 2012 at 12:23 PM

So how come your party is only purging minority voters then? How come your party didnt require the tea partiers to show id in the presidential primary? Phucking hypocrites.

Then again ID or no ID, you all will be here next year whining about how R0mney lost because he wasn’t conservative enough.

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Wait, so you support voter ID laws now?

rogerb on August 5, 2012 at 12:27 PM

What i support is letting all American citizens vote instead of picking the ones that only benefit one party.

Lowereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:49 PM

The military now is almost exactly 50-50 in the enlisted ranks as far as Party ID. Shouldn’t the 55% of Republican enlisted people have just as much of a right to vote as the 45% who are Democrats? As I conclusively confirmed in my 12:39 post, it was your Party that tried to selectively disenfranchise military members in 2000. Not the Republicans.

Del Dolemonte on August 5, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Please! This old dodge kills me. I have to have a valid ID for almost any official thing I do. The most important thing we’re called to do is elect public officials. What is the problem other than you guys need anonymity at the ballot box.

I’ll tell you this much, if it were Republicans that were notorious for ballot box stuffing, you’d be screaming for picture ID.

PS, you have to have picture ID to get into an Obama rally.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:59 PM

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Finally! A conservative who understands that ALL Americans regardless of political stripes should be allowed to vote.

Imagine what will happen when Obama wins and we hear that thousands of swing state republicans were turned away because they had expired government ids.

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Finally! A conservative who understands that ALL Americans regardless of political stripes should be allowed to vote.

Imagine what will happen when Obama wins and we hear that thousands of swing state republicans were turned away because they had expired government ids.

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 1:00 PM

SK is a braindead libtard like youself.

HTH

tom daschle concerned on August 5, 2012 at 1:01 PM

So how come your party is only purging minority voters then?

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Your Party is also purging minority voters. Blacks make up a larger percentage of the US military than they do the general population.

You’re also purging those military voters who are Native Americans (which includes Alaska) as those two minorities are also a larger percent of the military than they are in the general population.

Del Dolemonte on August 5, 2012 at 1:02 PM

PS, you have to have picture ID to get into an Obama rally.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Another idiotic conservative. Getting into an Obama rally is not a right. Voting is a right for all non felon Americans!!!!

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Finally! A conservative who understands that ALL Americans regardless of political stripes should be allowed to vote.

Um…yeah…..I’m gonna need you to never refer to me as a conservative again…that would be great. XD

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:05 PM

why does he hate the military so much?
2012chuck on August 5, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Because our armed forces are inherently conservative institutions.

Akzed on August 5, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Seriously? The guy completely misquotes me and you have the nerve…you know what, never mind. You must also be lacking in the reading comprehension skills dept if you can’t identify what’s wrong with his usage of my quote.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:54 PM

First, Danish is a she and you’re not a match for her intellectually. So forget trying to trade comments with her.

Second, are you really that stupid? You asserted that my original comment you read was a “gross generalization”. Then you claim the military leaders coerce subordinates in voting and Fox news is playing in every office?

I think most “rational” people would agree Danish’s point was not only valid, but one that (if you had a shred of dignity) would make you too embarrassed to offer even one more comment here.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Del Dolemonte on August 5, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Liar!! The democratic party is fighting for ALL Americans to vote and not just military personnel.

Maybe if the republicans fought for all Americans instead of just the upper 1%, the middle class might consider voting for them.

50% of eligible Americans don’t vote. You want to bet whether those Americans are part of the upper 1% or just struggling workers who have given up on the whole system.

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Tdc. Do me a favor and STFU.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Giving the deployed military extra time to vote is not unreasonable.

Special Forces Grunt on August 5, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Exaclty. Or just have them vote one month in advance and accept that vote based on when they recorded it rather than when the mail delivered it.

liberty0 on August 5, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Another idiotic conservative. Getting into an Obama rally is not a right. Voting is a right for all non felon Americans!!!! Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM

And to ensure that legitimate votes are not diluted by fraudulent ones, we should take reasonable measures to protect the process from fraud.

The side shrieking hysterically against those measures is the one most likely to benefit from it.

Akzed on August 5, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Tdc. Do me a favor and STFU.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:08 PM

I thought you big bad brave military types fight everyday to protect the rights of ordinary citizens like myself. You protected my first amendment rights so bravely and honorably. And now this?

:(

tom daschle concerned on August 5, 2012 at 1:12 PM

PS, you have to have picture ID to get into an Obama rally.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Another idiotic conservative. Getting into an Obama rally is not a right. Voting is a right for all non felon Americans!!!!

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Why doesn’t Obama want disenfranchized minorities at his rallies?

PS

You know many on your side push for felons to vote, right?

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 1:12 PM

It’s not like they were going to come out in droves to vote democratic anyway…

Which is why the Dems have tried to discount their votes, and put roadblocks before them when it comes to voting.

not with all the brainwashing by commanders and the Fox News viewing in every office. StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM

How are commanders brainwashing service members?

Akzed on August 5, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Liar!! The democratic party is fighting for ALL Americans to vote and not just military personnel.

Uppereastside on August 5, 2012 at 1:08 PM

You might want to check and see if you need to blow that fire bottle on your pants too.

From the WTs.

The political attack on our troops reopens a wound from the 2000 presidential race. During the controversial Florida recount process, Democrats issued a detailed eight-page guide to local operatives for challenging military overseas ballots. The instructions included erroneous guidance that resulted in over 1,500 ballots being wrongly rejected, which were later reinstated after legal action. Facing a public-relations disaster, the Gore campaign relented, but the damage was done. This year, Democrats are up to similar dirty tricks.

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Military commanders are pushing conservative ideals upon their troops and Fox News is on in every military office I’ve ever seen. To say that this is a gross generalization just means that either you are intellectually dishonest or you don’t know much about the modern military.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Conservative ideals like:
Preserving the constitution.
Rule of law.
Individual responsibility.
Limited gov.
Free markets.

All horrible, horrible things. Especially in the military.

tom daschle concerned on August 5, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Tdc. Cut the BS. You bully people on this site that don’t agree with and call them names…well normally I let it slide, but I’m going to start giving the hate right back. So if you want to continue being a douche, that’s your right and I have the right to tell you to STFU.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Military commanders are pushing conservative ideals upon their troops and Fox News is on in every military office I’ve ever seen. To say that this is a gross generalization just means that either you are intellectually dishonest or you don’t know much about the modern military.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I just retired after 34 years troop. Next meme?

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Military commanders are pushing conservative ideals upon their troops and Fox News is on in every military office I’ve ever seen. To say that this is a gross generalization just means that either you are intellectually dishonest or you don’t know much about the modern military. StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I need, this Fox News conspiracy is dangerous to our troops. They might be tempted to take seriously the remarks of Fox News’s left-wing contributors Bob Beckel, Juan Williams, Tamara Holder, Alan Colmes, Greta Van Sustren, Kirsten Powers, Mora Liasson, Bernie Sanders, Pat Cadell, Shepard Smith, Geraldo Rivera, Susan Estrich, and others.

Akzed on August 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Military commanders are pushing conservative ideals upon their troops and Fox News is on in every military office I’ve ever seen. To say that this is a gross generalization just means that either you are intellectually dishonest or you don’t know much about the modern military.

StoneKrab on August 5, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I just retired after 34 years troop. Next meme?

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Nice you conceded Danish’s point was right on though, right?

hawkdriver on August 5, 2012 at 1:24 PM

I need,

Indeed,

Akzed on August 5, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2