Comments on: Whoops.

Whoops.

backseatpilot — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:41:14 -0800

A "mystery man" was caught at a polling site for the New Hampshire primary attempting to use a dead man's name to vote. That man turned out to be James O'Keefe, who may have also broken federal law (and potentially violated his probation for previous wiretapping shenanigans) by crossing state lines to tamper with another state's election by filming poll workers and attempting to commit election fraud.

By: nushustu

nushustu — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:43:49 -0800

Man, it would be so sweet if this guy ended up doing time because of this.

By: weinbot

weinbot — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:44:00 -0800

He will not do time because of this.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:44:45 -0800

If he gets a felony conviction he will end up being qualified to work in a republican administration. So this is resume padding.

By: the man of twists and turns

the man of twists and turns — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:44:47 -0800

While I think using wiretapping laws to prevent people from filming or making audio recordings of public officials is bullshit, I really won't mind if he is convicted of committing voter fraud.

By: Artw

Artw — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:44:51 -0800

No way in hell. Also this will be reported as James O'Keefe entirely successfully using a dead man's name to vote.

By: Curious Artificer

Curious Artificer — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:44:56 -0800

Christ, what an ...

By: gauche

gauche — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:44:57 -0800

He will not do time because of this. Won't that just prove his point, though?

By: 2bucksplus

2bucksplus — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:45:00 -0800

Sigh, can he be arrested for treason yet?

By: the man of twists and turns

the man of twists and turns — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:46:24 -0800

2bucksplus, what?

By: Ruthless Bunny

Ruthless Bunny — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:47:11 -0800

Oh THIS yutz. Yeah. I'd like to see him do some time over this.

By: Artw

Artw — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:47:14 -0800

The polling booth was actually a tent full of dildos.

By: weinbot

weinbot — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:47:32 -0800

Won't that just prove his point, though? Literally any outcome of this can and will be spun to prove his point. (I am, however, stretching the definitions of "prove" and "point.")

By: Faint of Butt

Faint of Butt — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:47:53 -0800

The system works!

By: Hoopo

Hoopo — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:48:30 -0800

Oh man, O'Keefe really burned those liberals this time! O'Keefe 3, liberals zero!

By: PenDevil

PenDevil — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:48:53 -0800

I love how every time he goes out to prove that the left wing are committing massive electoral fraud the only person who actually gets caught committing an actual crime is himself.

By: [citation needed]

[citation needed] — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:49:48 -0800

What a brilliant move! He's bravely defending GOP voter suppression tactics by proving voter fraud exists...by committing voter fraud. Q.E.D. For his next trick, he should prove Democrats eat human flesh by registering as a Democrat before unhinging his jaw and swallowing Andrew Breitbart whole.

By: BobbyVan

BobbyVan — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:49:57 -0800

FWIW, here's O'Keefe's side of the story:

He said no laws were broken during the investigation and that his team members never claimed to be the dead people whose ballots they were trying to obtain. Instead, they carefully worded the way they asked for ballots, phrasing it like: "Do you have Earnest Chavanelle?" and "Do you have Paul Soucy?" "We decided to go in there without using any false pretenses," he said. "There's no misrepresentation in these videos if you watch them — we didn't lie about who we were." The investigators never actually voted when they were given ballots. Sting artists who received ballots would leave the voting precincts after saying they left their identification in the car.

By: anaximander

anaximander — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:50:29 -0800

This guy is like the joke that keeps on giving.

By: Benny Andajetz

Benny Andajetz — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:50:35 -0800

This guy is an insufferable prick. To anyone who really pays any attention to his antics, he always proves the opposite of what he sets out to prove. He certainly has a worldview; it's just that the real world doesn't comport with it. This is the second time, I believe, he's broken federal law. He'll use a "freedom of the press" defense, no doubt.

By: Tomorrowful

Tomorrowful — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:51:41 -0800

He said no laws were broken during the investigation and that his team members never claimed to be the dead people whose ballots they were trying to obtain. Instead, they carefully worded the way they asked for ballots, phrasing it like: "Do you have Earnest Chavanelle?" and "Do you have Paul Soucy?" "No, officer, I wasn't soliciting her for sex. I just asked 'How much would you charge for a blowjob?' - it was clearly a hypothetical question."

By: jwells

jwells — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:52:44 -0800

Here's the video. Everytime he got a ballet he asked if he had to display ID and was told no, so he handed it back and said he'd go it from his car anyway.

By: ninjew

ninjew — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:53:48 -0800

trolling is like the new American pastime, right?

By: theodolite

theodolite — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:54:21 -0800

He said no laws were broken during the investigation and that his team members never claimed to be the dead people whose ballots they were trying to obtain. Instead, they carefully worded the way they asked for ballots, phrasing it like: "Do you have Earnest Chavanelle?" and "Do you have Paul Soucy?" This sort of fifth-grade "Tee hee I didn't actually say it!!" shit doesn't actually fly in court, right?

By: Hoopo

Hoopo — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:54:25 -0800

There's no misrepresentation in these videos if you watch them — we didn't lie about who we were. Um, yes there was misrepresentation. What a fucking moron.

By: The 10th Regiment of Foot

The 10th Regiment of Foot — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:54:39 -0800

To anyone who really pays any attention to his antics, he always proves the opposite of what he sets out to prove. And yet he managed to ruin Acorn, go figure!

By: Artw

Artw — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:56:54 -0800

Trust me, there is no way in hell we are going to get anything out of this other than a news cycle worth of VOTER FRAUD IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. The game is rigged...

By: rough ashlar

rough ashlar — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:57:09 -0800

Sigh, can he be arrested for treason yet? No from the FPP post about Obama signing the NDAA - I'm guessing he could be branded an enemy of the state and be locked up without due process.

By: no regrets, coyote

no regrets, coyote — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:57:29 -0800

When the pretend voter noted he almost got away with fraud, Pilotte told him: "That would be on your conscience, not mine." That poll worker was badass.

By: Benny Andajetz

Benny Andajetz — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:58:06 -0800

And yet he managed to ruin Acorn, go figure! That's why I said "to anyone who really pays attention". Even at the time, the information that the Acorn video was a lie and a hatchet job was available to anyone who cared.

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:58:47 -0800

He jumped the shark in New Orleans.

By: shakespeherian

shakespeherian — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:58:48 -0800

...it eventually turns out he was trying to lure the dead voters onto a boat to have sex with them.

By: Philosopher Dirtbike

Philosopher Dirtbike — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:58:56 -0800

Doing something that you know will cause someone else to believe something, for the sake of getting them to believe it, is the definition of misrepresentation. Geez, what an idiot. I'm cautiously optimistic that the courts (or the DA) don't buy that crap.

By: rough ashlar

rough ashlar — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:59:34 -0800

"Tee hee I didn't actually say it!!" shit doesn't actually fly in court, right? Like the F-5 and barn doors - if you strap enough horsepower to it, it'll fly.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:59:49 -0800

My "favorite" O'Keefe thing is when he was planning an operation wherein he would seduce a female CNN anchor, with the goal of (somehow) getting CNN to then report a false story impugning the Tea Party or Sarah Palin or something, after which O'Keefe would burn CNN by revealing the story to be a hoax. CNN wound up actually obtaining the written plan from O'Keefe's organization, which you can see here. It's unintentionally absolutely hilarious - parts of it read like how a 13 year old boy would imagine seducing a woman.

By: elizardbits

elizardbits — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:01:30 -0800

So... in order to prove that liberal voter fraud exists, a conservative troll decided to go out and CREATE an incident of voter fraud that would not have otherwise existed had he not gone out and created it to prove that it exists and then the goose and the fox and the corn on the boat and idefk halp

By: griphus

griphus — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:01:43 -0800

Okay, I don't understand why everyone thinks what he's doing is so bad, necessarily. Voter fraud via recently deceased registered voters is a genuinely serious problem and I can name at least one elected official who managed to get into office based by using this exact tactic.

By: elizardbits

elizardbits — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:03:01 -0800

Also I would like to propose a resolution that Salon changes their official title from "James O'Keefe, Notorious Hidden Camera Clown" to "James O'Keefe, Notorious Scammy Asshole". Motion to approve?

By: Faint of Butt

Faint of Butt — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:03:58 -0800

Motion seconded. It's offensive to clowns.

By: crayz

crayz — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:04:39 -0800

Maybe next he could strap explosives to himself and do an honest citizens investigation of the TSA

By: rebent

rebent — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:04:58 -0800

Is this the James O'Keefe you are all talking about?

By: octobersurprise

octobersurprise — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:05:48 -0800

Surely this is a violation of the terms of his probation, at least.

By: jbickers

jbickers — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:06:17 -0800

My god, Flunkie's CNN link is golden. The dude bad-assedly quotes Don Henley!

By: a_girl_irl

a_girl_irl — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:06:59 -0800

I killed a guy to show anyone can commit a murder if you don't have enough anti-murdering procedures in place. I'm a hero and the Republican Party is not a fucked up joke being played on humanity by a sadistic alien race of Dracs

By: sotonohito

sotonohito — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:07:51 -0800

It'd be excellent if he got nailed for the felonies he committed. But he won't.

By: no regrets, coyote

no regrets, coyote — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:08:33 -0800

That sad part about James O'Keefe isn't that he exists, but that his idiotic schemes are actually successful in pushing the media's narrative in the direction he wants it to go. If only there where some news outlets that could call him on his bullshit.

By: ultraviolet catastrophe

ultraviolet catastrophe — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:09:21 -0800

Surely this is a violation of the terms of his probation, at least. The third link also says it's a crime to film an election official in New Hampshire without permission.

By: Hoopo

Hoopo — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:09:40 -0800

Guys, even if he did break laws, the courts have no authority because people can totally commit perjury.

By: notsnot

notsnot — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:10:29 -0800

elizardbits: "Also I would like to propose a resolution that Salon changes their official title from "James O'Keefe, Notorious Hidden Camera Clown" to "James O'Keefe, Notorious Scammy Asshole". Motion to approve" Objection! New nomenclature is offensive to assholes.

By: Artw

Artw — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:10:34 -0800

All low level public officials should be issued with "IF YOU SEE THIS MAN, REPORT HIM" posters.

By: Bulgaroktonos

Bulgaroktonos — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:11:13 -0800

CNN wound up actually obtaining the written plan from O'Keefe's organization, which you can see here. It's unintentionally absolutely hilarious - parts of it read like how a 13 year old boy would imagine seducing a woman. What woman would fall instantly for an asshole on a boat full of porn mags and lube? I also love that he calls it a "caper."

By: Bulgaroktonos

Bulgaroktonos — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:11:55 -0800

Wouldn't not would. Way to kill the sarcasm, typo.

By: localroger

localroger — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:12:35 -0800

because people can totally commit perjury. Except that O'Keefe has filmed himself and his friends breaking the law here. What a maroon.

By: backseatpilot

backseatpilot — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:12:37 -0800

What woman would fall instantly for an asshole on a boat full of porn mags and lube? What if he also has a Segway? Would that help?

By: obscurator

obscurator — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:12:42 -0800

That's a paddlin'..little else probably.

By: Napierzaza

Napierzaza — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:13:42 -0800

Please put him in prison...

By: Hoopo

Hoopo — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:17:40 -0800

Except that O'Keefe has filmed himself and his friends breaking the law here. What a maroon. I know! Did this guy not consult with anyone about what constitutes a misrepresentation, or did he just read the definition in the dictionary and come to the conclusion that he could deliberately mislead people into thinking he's someone he's not and get away scott-free because he never said the magic words?

By: darkstar

darkstar — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:22:46 -0800

1. Misrepresentation in order to illegally obtain a fraudulent ballot. 2. Filming election officials without their permission. 3. Conspiracy to commit same and to encourage others to do so. Somebody please tell me that someone already on probation for illegally entering a Senate office using fraudulent identification with criminal intent is held accountable for continuing with this shit.

By: Rock Steady

Rock Steady — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:24:00 -0800

I know! Did this guy not consult with anyone about what constitutes a misrepresentation, or did he just read the definition in the dictionary and come to the conclusion that he could deliberately mislead people into thinking he's someone he's not and get away scott-free because he never said the magic words? I believe he also had his fingers crossed when he asked for the ballot, so...

By: clockzero

clockzero — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:24:28 -0800

Proving that a crime is commitable isn't really a terribly clever or revealing undertaking. And "I was doing it to prove it could be done" is a hell of an affirmative defense.

By: shakespeherian

shakespeherian — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:24:33 -0800

What if he also has a Segway? Would that help? Illusion, Michael.

By: localroger

localroger — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:26:34 -0800

O'Keefe probably thinks the mojo that kept him out of jail after the Landrieu affair protects him still. However, while I strongly suspect there was some political pressure in that case I also suspect it had something to do with O'Keefe being caught before he had gotten to the point of putting his greasy fingers on the phone lines. This time he actually got to the point of breaking the law and filmed himself doing it. I don't expect the plea deal he is offered to be nearly as attractive this time. Sure, Republicans generally might want to suck his dick for busting ACORN, but DA's Republican and Democratic alike like convictions too. Especially against well-known people who attract publicity.

By: Miko

Miko — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:27:09 -0800

When the pretend voter noted he almost got away with fraud, Pilotte told him: "That would be on your conscience, not mine."

By: Napierzaza

Napierzaza — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:28:53 -0800

A lot of what o'Keefe does reads like the Hardy Boys (or the Adventure Team). Pretending to work for the phone company? I don't understand how anyone grabbed on to his capers (save the people arresting him).

By: fuq

fuq — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:30:59 -0800

O'Keefe is one of those people I always hope will come by my office...

By: Hoopo

Hoopo — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:31:35 -0800

Maybe it's a freedom of the press thing. Like how journalists are excused from breaking any laws they feel like for gotcha stories. Press credentials = license to kill. It's in the Constitution!

By: East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94

East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:35:48 -0800

O'Keefe is presumably going to argue that he shouldn't go to jail because vote fraud isn't a serious issue. I lol'd.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:39:28 -0800

If only Leopold and Loeb had O'keefe's media savvy.

By: OnTheLastCastle

OnTheLastCastle — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:39:30 -0800

Oh my god, everyone stop what you're doing and read document CNN obtained of his boat plan. It. Is. Amazing. I relinked it below. Just skip to page 3 for the joy. 3) music alicia keys 80s love songs avoid marvin gay is is too cliche

By: hattifattener

hattifattener — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:39:54 -0800

Proving that a crime is commitable isn't really a terribly clever or revealing undertaking I shot a man in Reno, just to ~~watch him die~~ reveal the flaws in the system

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:40:36 -0800

I'm happy to see that the Manchester voting system still works as it did when I lived there; you tell the poll workers your name and home address, you don't need to show ID, and they give you a ballot. It's generally a very successful system -- possibly because New Hampshire is full of honest New Hampshirites and not snivelling young ne'er-do-wells from the fucking south? I wouldn't know; I'm not a political scientist.

By: elizardbits

elizardbits — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:41:12 -0800

omg. That hilarrible sexboat script just made me scream so loudly and so wildly with appalled laughter that 2 of my coworkers rushed in ready to rescue me from a presumed intruder.

By: ericb

ericb — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:42:08 -0800

N.H. widow shocked by ploy at polls

A grieving New Hampshire widow said she was stunned to learn her beloved husband's identity was used for a political gotcha — just 10 days after his death. "That's awful," Rachel Groux said. "Why should they use his name? They shouldn't use anybody's name — alive or deceased." Activist filmmaker James O'Keefe secretly recorded video showing his operative using Roger Groux's name and address to obtain a Republican ballot at Manchester polls Tuesday. The U.S. Navy veteran died Dec. 31 at an assisted living home. His family held funeral services Monday, his widow said. "Oh my God, I know what he would say, 'Call the cops, call the police,' " Rachel Groux said. City officials may have not received notification in time to remove Groux from voter lists, said Manchester City Clerk Matthew Normand. "Obviously it's disturbing that anyone would be going out to any polling place anywhere using a dead person's name," said Normand, who became aware of O'Keefe's voter-fraud expose after he received calls Tuesday about a Herald online report detailing one of O'Keefe's thwarted attempts in Manchester. Dailycaller.com later posted a report and a video by O'Keefe's Project Veritas. The AG's office confirmed it is investigating the incidents.

By: Artw

Artw — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:46:00 -0800

Has his boss said anything yet?

By: djeo

djeo — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:46:05 -0800

Greg Nog, don't tar the South with that brush. He's from New Jersey.

By: jedicus

jedicus — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:47:14 -0800

said Normand, who became aware of O'Keefe's voter-fraud expose Blech. The media has already accepted O'Keefe's framing despite the fact that no voter fraud was exposed other than that which he perpetrated himself.

By: jontyjago

jontyjago — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:47:21 -0800

I love the instruction from the sexboat script on page 5: James should have a more sleazy persona than normal

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:47:56 -0800

The third link also says it's a crime to film an election official in New Hampshire without permission. Hmm... Not that I wouldn't mind seeing O'Keefe hoisted on his on petard over this, that seems like a bullshit law. Like "no filming the cops". You should probably be able to record in a polling place, to ensure that no voter suppression is going. Anyway, this guy is completely full of shit, for sure. Also, you know some of the most damning video they got on Acorn, the one one where the woman was telling the 'prostitute' to hide money underground or something, they spun it like she was asking about hiding money from the government, but actually the question was about hiding money from her 'pimp'. John Stewart actually ran that clip before the full tape came out, I don't know why he was so eager to run with video from such an untrustworthy source. Oh well. There was also a clip of him walking around in OWS dressed like what he thought a "banker" would look like. Someone recognized him, and followed him around. He probably figured he would get harassed for wearing a suit. In the end he just got followed around for being James O'Keefe. --- Here's the thing though. Imagine you're a NH prosecutor. You have to decide whether or not to prosecute this guy, or his friends. He says he didn't use 'deception', but come on. I don't think you're legally in the clear just because you use carefully worded statements. Just look what happened to the Enron guys -- they never broke any **formal** disclosure laws, all the data was in their voluminous reports, they just buried it. But here's the thing: you let this guy go, it sets the precedent that anyone can do the same thing. If it doesn't work out, just say you were trying to do an 'audit' or something. On the other hand the precedent wouldn't actually be legally binding.

possibly because New Hampshire is full of honest New Hampshirites and not snivelling young ne'er-do-wells from the fucking south? I wouldn't know; I'm not a political scientist.

What? It has to do with people in the south wanting to make it harder for people to vote, but throwing up extra barriers. Poor people don't always do a great job of keeping IDs current, and you have to pay for them. So if someone's ID is out of date, maybe they don't drive anymore, maybe they're disabled -- maybe they have a million other things to worry about and just don't get to renewing their license, then they *can't vote*. In terms of actual voter fraud, where people show up to the polls claiming to be people they're not and scamming votes, it just doesn't happen. There are no 'ne'er-do-wells' causing problems. You're making the classic mistake of assuming that because a law exists, there must be a rational public-interest reason for that law to exist, as if laws are written by rational people looking out for the public good. In fact, laws are written by the same idiot politicians you see being fucking idiots all the time.

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:48:53 -0800

Greg Nog, don't tar the South with that brush. He's from New Jersey. I'm sure I'm not alone in considering everything lower than Lowell, Mass "The South"

By: elizardbits

elizardbits — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:49:33 -0800

a more sleazy persona than normal brb weeping loltears forever

By: Wulfhere

Wulfhere — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:49:37 -0800

I assume that item (11) - Blindfold is so that the unfortunate seductee won't have to look at O'Keefe being "more sleazy than normal, with slicked back hair and exposing his chest." Good planning, James.

By: OnTheLastCastle

OnTheLastCastle — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:52:05 -0800

AB: You can't be serious, I'm married. JO: Abbie, there's never going to be a right time for you and I. There's only right now. We have to make the most of the time we're given, and we're being given right now. I'm so glad no one is in my office but me today. I sound like an evil hyena from the Lion King.

By: Doublewhiskeycokenoice

Doublewhiskeycokenoice — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:54:43 -0800

My favorite part of the Sex Boat List is the "obvious sex tape machine." You mean a video camera? Actually, every part is my favorite part.

By: benito.strauss

benito.strauss — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:56:30 -0800

not snivelling young ne'er-do-wells from the fucking south? Yeah, don't worry, djeo. I live in Boston, and I knew GregNog was referring to us.

By: elizardbits

elizardbits — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:56:51 -0800

It's beyond the borders of terrible scriptville and galloping headlong into GLORIOUS FANFICTION territory.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:56:57 -0800

Here's the other thing about this. The republicans have been cranking up the moral panic over hallucinated "voter fraud" (brought to you by Acorn, of course) for years. One of the results has been that the Secretary of State in Indiana (in charge of elections) got charged with multiple counts of voter fraud. His crime: voting in the same district he always has, despite the fact that his wife kicked him out of the house, and he was living in a different district. He could actually go to jail for it. Ironically, he was a republican. So he's actually being done in by his parties voter fraud hysteria. Which is why I think this could be such a huge problem for O'Keefe. 10 years ago, maybe this wouldn't have been as big of an issue. Karl Rove was pushing the issue from the whitehouse starting in the lead-up to the 2004 election I think. So now with various government officials so amped over voter fraud, it seems like prosecutions are much more likely. The current DA in NH is a democrat. O'Keefe was probably assuming that if he did get into any trouble, his political connections would help him out. We'll have to see if that's the case.

By: midmarch snowman

midmarch snowman — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:59:00 -0800

Y'know, I'm sure voter fraud exist. Not because I believe anything I read on the internet, but because ours is a freaking huge country, full of all sorts of people, many of whom happen to be assholes who will do asshole things for asshole reasons. But given that years of moving between Red and Blue states has shown me assholes tend to come in all political stripes, I have no idea why people would think one party is more likely to condone or depend on vote fraud. Funnily enough through, given I'm relatively young, I happen to know a lot of democrats, and a lot of people with questionable respect for the law, but I've heard not a peep about scamming the voting laws from my politically active friends. The only time I've actually heard of voter fraud was some Facilities Manager at a hospital bragging about how he requested absentee ballots for his four adult sons to be delivered to his house since they still used that as their permanent address. He asked if they were voting, and when they said no, he filled them all out and sent them in forging their signatures. Incidentally he voted straight ticket Republican because he "knew for a fact" that Obama intended to use the lame duck session of 2010 to ram through legislation charging a 1% tax on all bank transactions. Yep, he get's his facts from forwarded e-mails and his vote counted for five times mine!

By: ericb

ericb — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:16:18 -0800

Like "no filming the cops". In related news (from yesterday): Boston PD Admits Arrest For Cell Phone Recording Was A Mistake.

By: ericb

ericb — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:21:19 -0800

Book 'em, Dano!

"Election law experts say James O'Keefe's affiliates who got the ballots under false names could face criminal charges, as federal law bans not only the casting of such ballots, but their procurement as well, according to TPM. Title 42 states that criminal penalties will apply to any person who procures, casts or tabulates ballots 'that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held.' ... Election law expert Rick Hasen, of the Election Law Blog, said in an e-mail to TPM that O'Keefe's group should 'next show how easy it is to rob a bank with a plastic gun.'"*

By: ericb

ericb — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:26:20 -0800

James O'Keefe Says $50K Donation Funded Voter Fraud Stunt

An "extremely generous donor" gave $50,000 to James O'Keefe's Project Veritas to fund their voter fraud stunt in New Hampshire on Tuesday, the conservative activist said in a email to supporters. "Our Voter Fraud investigation is being funded with a gift of $50,000 from an extremely generous donor — but that covers the cost of just ONE national project," O'Keefe wrote in a fundraising email. Project Veritas received non-profit status from the IRS and said in an application that it wanted to raise $1.65 million over a three year period. A $50,000 donation will likely show up on the organization's yearly 990 forms, but that information wouldn't be available until this spring or the spring of 2013, depending upon if the donation was made in 2011 or 2012.

By: Thorzdad

Thorzdad — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:29:16 -0800

Election law experts say James O'Keefe's affiliates who got the ballots under false names could face criminal charges, as federal law bans not only the casting of such ballots, but their procurement as well... I have a shiny new dime that says nothing will come of this. Arresting O'Keefe only serves to give him a soapbox and provide endless "Obama lib'ruls jailing their enemies" fodder for FOX, Rush, Hannity, etc. It'll be a mess of a circus. Which is why I think no prosecutor will want to go down that stinkhole.

By: Tsuga

Tsuga — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:31:29 -0800

The only time I've actually heard of voter fraud was some Facilities Manager at a hospital bragging about how he requested absentee ballots for his four adult sons to be delivered to his house since they still used that as their permanent address. He asked if they were voting, and when they said no, he filled them all out and sent them in forging their signatures. Umm... you did report this man to the appropriate authorities, right?

By: Faint of Butt

Faint of Butt — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:32:30 -0800

Wouldn't it be hilarious if the $50,000 came from a wealthy liberal who encouraged O'Keefe to do something stupid like this with it, and it was all a scheme to land his dumb ass in jail?

By: argonauta

argonauta — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:36:01 -0800

You know what's funny (except really not)? The woman James O'Keefe teamed up with to "infiltrate" Planned Parenthood clinics (before the ACORN stunt) was Lila Rose. Last year, Lila Rose interviewed Tess and Sydney Volanski, two girls who "launched" the website SpeakNowGirlScouts.com to gain support for their boycott of the Girl Scouts "for exposing girls to Planned Parenthood... because Planned Parenthood teaches promiscuity to children, grooming future birth control and abortion clients." Tess and Sydney's mother, Christy Volanski, is coincidentally featured alongside Susan Riedley, the editor of HonestGirlScouts.com (previously, yesterday) just about anywhere you look when it comes to the Girl Scout Cookie boycott saga, as Miko pointed out. Both James and Lila have received training, mentorship and funding from groups like Americans for Prosperity and The Leadership Institute. I'm not sayin', but I'm just sayin'... There's a LOT of Koch Brothers money around those parts.

By: ericb

ericb — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:37:11 -0800

Interesting details on O'Keefe and the status of his organization:

Politico: O'Keefe "Derailed By Infighting, Lack Of Funding". Allies Accuse James O'Keefe of 'Hit Job' in Undercover NPR Sting.

By: jedicus

jedicus — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:39:41 -0800

An "extremely generous donor" gave $50,000 to James O'Keefe's Project Veritas to fund their voter fraud stunt in New Hampshire on Tuesday, the conservative activist said in a email to supporters. I wonder how much that donor knew about the details of O'Keefe's plan to commit election fraud. It's entirely possible that he or she could be charged as a conspirator.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:41:20 -0800

It's entirely possible that he or she could be charged as a conspirator.

Heh, that would be pretty awesome.

By: Uther Bentrazor

Uther Bentrazor — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:45:11 -0800

By: kiltedtaco

kiltedtaco — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:46:20 -0800

"Our Voter Fraud ~~investigation~~ is being funded with a gift of $50,000 from an extremely generous donor — but that covers the cost of just ONE national project," O'Keefe wrote in a fundraising email.

By: newdaddy

newdaddy — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:17:49 -0800

So wait, did the CNN seduction thing work? Because I can't see how it couldn't, he's thought is through so carefully.

By: maryr

maryr — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:21:23 -0800

Greg, when I go home to my parents in northern New England (forget bros over hos - think trees over seas) and complain about the cold, my mother makes fun of my "thin southern blood". I live in Boston.

By: tivalasvegas

tivalasvegas — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:24:59 -0800

I dunno if I'd consider Boston the South. But anything below South Bend, Indiana, sure. IT'S RIGHT IN THE NAME.

By: Doublewhiskeycokenoice

Doublewhiskeycokenoice — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:25:22 -0800

So wait, did the CNN seduction thing work? Because I can't see how it couldn't, he's thought is through so carefully. No. No it did not. It inspired bewildered amusement as much as anything.

By: tivalasvegas

tivalasvegas — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:28:28 -0800

Huh. On further research, South Bend is at approximately the same latitude as Rhode Island. My brain hurts.

By: Bulgaroktonos

Bulgaroktonos — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:30:31 -0800

I'm sure I'm not alone in considering everything lower than Lowell, Mass "The South" The flipside of this is my father who called me a Yankee recently for living in DC and being able to tolerate temperatures below 40 degrees.

By: MCMikeNamara

MCMikeNamara — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:38:29 -0800

I understand people think nothing will happen to O'Keefe based on past experience. But then I remember how seriously the folks in New Hampshire take their primary and am pretty sure that even most Republicans' Granite State loyalty would win out over any supposed ideological 'loyalty.' Exhibit A: Republican Mayor Wants James O'Keefe Allies Arrested

By: one more dead town's last parade

one more dead town's last parade — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:41:33 -0800

Sounds like the "extremely generous donor" is part of a conspiracy to commit electoral fraud.

By: COBRA!

COBRA! — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:46:19 -0800

I dunno if I'd consider Boston the South. But anything below South Bend, Indiana, sure. IT'S RIGHT IN THE NAME. posted by tivalasvegas I'd say anything below the North Dakota/South Dakota border is by definition in the South.

By: los pantalones del muerte

los pantalones del muerte — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:46:59 -0800

"I'm sure I'm not alone in considering everything lower than Lowell, Mass "The South" Yup, and as far I've always been concerned, anything north of DC is New England.

By: hydropsyche

hydropsyche — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:48:29 -0800

I just want to point out that every time I ever voted in North Carolina,including most recently in March, all I had to do to get my ballot was state my name and address, as in New Hampshire. Although some folks feel that no self respecting southern state would have the word 'north' in its name, most folks who live there do indeed consider North Carolina to be in the South and grow weary of people stereotyping all of the South as having the exact same issues including the voting ID issue, which appears to be a hobby horse the rightwing is riding all over the country.

By: Sticherbeast

Sticherbeast — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:52:01 -0800

As far as I'm concerned, we're all in Nunavut.

By: koeselitz

koeselitz — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:53:10 -0800

By: Bulgaroktonos

Bulgaroktonos — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:57:00 -0800

Although some folks feel that no self respecting southern state would have the word 'north' in its name, most folks who live there do indeed consider North Carolina to be in the South Oh, obviously. My father who called me a Yankee is a North Carolinian(as am I, no matter where I might live and what he might say). I sometimes have to correct people on this point, but North Carolina is absolutely the South, a fact that becomes quickly apparent if you drive an hour outside of any of the major cities.

By: Theta States

Theta States — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:11:18 -0800

so. much. stupid.

By: butchseaman

butchseaman — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:25:35 -0800

looks to me like he made his point .... ID should be required!

By: Mental Wimp

Mental Wimp — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:25:37 -0800

"I believe he also had his fingers crossed when he asked for the ballot, so..." He needs one of those playground attorneys to represent him. "Your honor, my client pleads 'I am rubber, you are glue; what bounces off me sticks on you."

By: zzazazz

zzazazz — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:26:32 -0800

This transcript of his interview on the NPR show, On the Media, is high comedy. I loved listening to him twist in the wind while being asked legitimate questions by a real journalist.

By: Mental Wimp

Mental Wimp — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:26:59 -0800

looks to me like he made his point .... ID should be required! Oh, okay. So if we film one person asking to vote who doesn't have picture ID and is refused, that proves the opposite?

By: RedEmma

RedEmma — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:28:49 -0800

Oh widespread voter fraud happens. It's just Republicans who do it.

By: RedEmma

RedEmma — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:32:18 -0800

The Fuckers.

By: griphus

griphus — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:33:11 -0800

looks to me like he made his point .... ID should be required! Unless ID is handed out for free, we call that a "poll tax" and it's explicitly unconstitutional.

By: XMLicious

XMLicious — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:39:58 -0800

I don't know if this has been pointed out already, but he actually proved that no one else was doing this. They didn't come across any of these names of deceased people where someone else had already fraudulently voted using that name. (Because I'm sure if they had they'd be crowing their heads off about it.)

By: telstar

telstar — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:48:07 -0800

Trust me, there is no way in hell we are going to get anything out of this other than a news cycle worth of VOTER FRAUD IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. The game is rigged... I know this sounds crazy, but humor me here. What if you didn't watch "the news"?

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:06:06 -0800

If James O'Keefe were a boil on my ass, I wouldn't give him the dignity of a lancing.

By: Talez

Talez — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:17:59 -0800

There is an easy way to stop photo ID voting laws. Head to the DMV or wherever and request a new copy of the ID for the purposes of voting. Every day. As a large group. They can't stop you from getting it and they can't charge you for it. It'll cost the states doing it millions if a large enough group was persistent enough.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:22:47 -0800

Title 42 states that criminal penalties will apply to any person who procures, casts or tabulates ballots 'that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held.' Is a primary an election for federal office (which is what Title 42 covers)? I thought it was just an internal thing for the party.

By: no regrets, coyote

no regrets, coyote — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:32:29 -0800

Is a primary an election for federal office (which is what Title 42 covers)? I thought it was just an internal thing for the party. I've been trying to look this up. This explains that "After 1890, mandatory regulations transformed the primary into an election that is conducted by public officers at public expense." It also cites instances of some types of primaries being declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. I'm no expert, but I'm assuming this means that primaries fall under federal election laws.

By: localroger

localroger — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:38:20 -0800

Yep, primaries fall under election laws. One reason for the remarkable number of negative ads in this primary is that past Republican primaries didn't have unfettered anonymous spending via Citizens United.

By: shushufindi

shushufindi — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:47:58 -0800

He makes me think of a superhero whose superpower is to get caught doing stupid shit.

By: marble

marble — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:50:46 -0800

Head to the DMV or wherever and request a new copy of the ID for the purposes of voting. Every day. As a large group. They can't stop you from getting it and they can't charge you for it. It'll cost the states doing it millions if a large enough group was persistent enough. Yeah but what if the DMV has rules that state you can't get the free voter card unless you DON'T already have an ID or driver's license? You can maybe give up your ID or DL to get it, but who wants to do that? A person needs something to open a bank account, buy liquor, drive, etc, and election ID says "NOT USABLE FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN VOTING" or something like that. Plus you still have to show up with all your documents - birth certificate, SS card, etc. A lot of hassle, really, unless of course you do need one. A lot of people who find themselves without ID have difficulty getting their documents together to obtain the ID, and difficulty getting to the DMV office - not just time off work, but transportation. But of course interested parties and organizations who believe strongly in a person's right to vote could assist people facing barriers with such endeavors.

By: Sticherbeast

Sticherbeast — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:56:57 -0800

Yeah but what if the DMV has rules that state you can't get the free voter card unless you DON'T already have an ID or driver's license? Who's to say that protestors wouldn't constantly accidentally lose or destroy their IDs?

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:08:26 -0800

I understand people think nothing will happen to O'Keefe based on past experience. But then I remember how seriously the folks in New Hampshire take their primary and am pretty sure that even most Republicans' Granite State loyalty would win out over any supposed ideological 'loyalty.' Exhibit A: Republican Mayor Wants James O'Keefe Allies Arrested

The more I think about it, the more I think you're probably right. The law doesn't even say you have to cast the balot, just take posession of it. So that aspect seems pretty open and shut. The other thing - The major thing that prevents election fraud is the deterant effect. There are huge fines and jail time if you actually get caught doing it. The problem is, in a lot of places, places they don't really do a lot to prevent it. Democrats, in general, are opposed to putting up barriers that might stop someone from voting. So, in states like Iowa (where I'm from) or apparently new hampshire, there's no ID check. It's basically the honor system. And beyond that, they actually got noticed by a lot of poll workers - but there aren't cops at polling places. They couldn't have just arrested him there. But he was noticed, and apparently reported. So had he not been O'Keefe, he might still have been caught, and the system would have worked (save a few fraudlent votes, unfortunately) -- But like I said, it's largely the honor system, plus enforcement after the fact that prevents voter fraud. So, James O'Keefe has violated one component: the honor system. And he's setup something of a paradox for the people in charge of enforcement. His goal was to prove the system doesn't work. If he's not prosecuted, he will succeed. But the defenders of the system: Mainly the NH state government, which actually has a much higher stake in the integrity of their primary then most other states, then they must prosecute him to prove their election system is sound. O'Keefe may have powerful friends but he's not that important. And people in NH probably won't go for his antics the way republicans in Louisana might. So I think he's fucked. I'm not going to make a prediction, though, because you never know.

looks to me like he made his point .... ID should be required!

But, not if he's prosecuted. Which, as I said, is the only way that NH can prove the security and seriousness of their primary. ---

Okay, I hate O'Keefe as much as anybody, but how exactly does the Republican primary count as an official federal election? This seems silly to me, but I guess the two parties are so entrenched now that they're basically assumed to be a part of government automatically even before they've been elected. Primaries are run by the states, legally they are like any other type of election. The states tally the votes, and tell the parties who's won. In fact, when both parties have candidates, the states will print two balots, one for each. So the dem, republican, and any other party candidates are all actually chosen by the same 'primary election'. It's also possible that it may differ in other states. This is different from a Caucus, which is definitely controlled by the parties, and much less formal. The other thing about a caucus: you have to actually show up, and they're all held at the same time, so it's impossible to vote more then once. The only fraud possible is if people come in from out of state, or aren't eligable to vote.
Who's to say that protestors wouldn't constantly accidentally lose or destroy their IDs?
Well, first of all it's probably not that much of a hassle for them to just print up another voter ID. They snap a picture, print out the card. You'd need huge numbers of people, and without critical mass the people you'd be hurting most are people who actually need to go to the DMV, and may be taking off work to do so.

By: koeselitz

koeselitz — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:14:57 -0800

localroger: "Yep, primaries fall under election laws." Well, they sure as hell shouldn't. In an era when the Tea Party is trying to defund any and all government functions, it's silly that we're still footing the bill for Democrats and Republicans to hold their obnoxious little popularity contests. But I suppose the Republican Party couldn't really afford to hold a primary if taxpayers didn't fork over to make it happen.

By: furiousxgeorge

furiousxgeorge — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:33:30 -0800

Yeah, let the Super PACs pay for the primaries.

By: Riki tiki

Riki tiki — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:40:14 -0800

Gonna roll this out again, because it's no less true. Yes it is possible to, as delmoi puts it, violate the "honor system". O'Keefe has made a living out of "documenting" evil things that can be done on the margins of the rules. I add the scare quotes because the only thing reliably documented is how thoroughly fraudulent his methods and presentation are. But particularly in this case, the risks are so innately limited by the logistics of this type of fraud, and it bugs the shit out of me that people don't think through it for ten seconds to realize it. How much damage can you really do with dead people's votes? You'd be lucky to swing a close election for the District Comptroller's Janitorial Assistant, and the operation to do so would involve so many people that you'd most likely be caught JUST LIKE WHAT HAPPENED HERE IN THIS THING THAT HAPPENED. Compare that to the damage you can do by contracting voting machines out to a private company run by people sympathetic to your cause. Who then make machines with goddamn USB ports that can be used to change the vote totals. Like I said in the other comment... that should be fucking treason to allow that to happen. Not death-penalty treason, but it should have the same effect on your future as a sex offense does now, where the stigma is what drags your life into the toilet. Or more to the point, compare it to the damage you can do by making it 10% harder for people to vote. Rich people don't have any trouble voting, so 110% times zero is still zero. But for people who can barely make it out as it is, that 10% is the killer that removes them from our democracy. Every one of these laws that has supposedly been passed to fight this small-time, meaningless voter fraud should really be called an "excommunication" law, because that's what it boils down to. People abusing their ill-gotten power to expel those who challenge their ill-gotten power. Makes me sick to my goddamn stomach.

By: Dodecadermaldenticles

Dodecadermaldenticles — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:41:55 -0800

Would this with parole violation be three strikes? If so, get tough on crime!

By: Miko

Miko — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:44:32 -0800

t there aren't cops at polling places. Actually, at least in NH and ME, there are, usually right outside the front door. , it's silly that we're still footing the bill for Democrats and Republicans to hold their obnoxious little popularity contests The NH primary is a single primary event for both parties, not an intraparty function. Independents can vote in the primary for this reason. It's not quite open in that if you're registered with a party you're bound to vote in that party, but everyone has access.

By: marble

marble — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:15:14 -0800

Who's to say that protestors wouldn't constantly accidentally lose or destroy their IDs? Well, it's still in the DMV's database even if you don't have the card in your pocket. Unless you tell them that you want them to cancel it. Then you can get your voter card. If your "lost" ID or DL turns up, it's invalid since it's marked cancelled or revoked in the DMV database. You could use it to buy liquor and stuff still I suppose, even though it's invalid, but if we're talking about a driver's license and you get pulled over and the cop runs your license and it says revoked / cancelled / invalid or something, that's probably not a good situation for you. And of course, if you want to have your ID / DL be valid again, you have to surrender your voter card. You can't have both. Seriously, all of this hassle just to cost the state a few dollars...?

By: localroger

localroger — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 19:07:33 -0800

Well, they sure as hell shouldn't. Oh sure, nothing says "two parties of similar stripe system" like what we got going. But when the stakes are so high, making sure the election laws apply to primaries is actually a good thing. One of these two people is going to win, so it's in our interest to make sure that the process by which the two people are selected is fair. Caucuses are just an abomination and should not be allowed given the dominance of the two parties. Such things are fine for fringe parties that might actually be relevant in a parliamentary system where a 5% party can form strategic coalitions, but in our winner take all system anything short of a real election is just fraud.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 21:15:24 -0800

Well, they sure as hell shouldn't. In an era when the Tea Party is trying to defund any and all government functions, it's silly that we're still footing the bill for Democrats and Republicans to hold their obnoxious little popularity contests.

Because it would be better if they just got together in a back room and let the party bosses decide amongst themselves? That's what used to happen, before primary campaigns became common. The whole point of a primary election is to make the process more democratic, because if you can vote in a primary, you have a lot more choice then if all you get to do is pick between two candidates on election day. Because of the primary system, people got to choose Obama instead of Hillary, for example. And not only that, in may primaries people in any political party can vote in any primary. That means independents and even democrats can vote in the republican primary. That means independent voters actually get a say in who the president is before the general election. Also, it's different in every state. South Carolina tired to charge the parties for the primary, and since the republicans couldn't pay Steven Colbert was going to sponsor it through his SuperPAC. Apparently a judge ruled that the counties would have to pay, which prevented that from happening.

Caucuses are just an abomination and should not be allowed given the dominance of the two parties.

They're a lot of fun, though.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:26:23 -0800

"The other thing - The major thing that prevents election fraud is the deterant effect. There are huge fines and jail time if you actually get caught doing it. The problem is, in a lot of places, places they don't really do a lot to prevent it. Democrats, in general, are opposed to putting up barriers that might stop someone from voting. So, in states like Iowa (where I'm from) or apparently new hampshire, there's no ID check. It's basically the honor system. " Yeah, from a public policy point of view, the best case is to place very low barriers between the polity and voting and place very high penalties — and prosecute them aggressively — for interfering with the integrity of the election. Again, from a public good point of view, O'Keefe should be hauled off to prison for this. The implication O'Keefe wants, that if he's prosecuted it proves that it's easy to commit crime, is easily countered by pointing out that by convicting him, the system works.

By: BrotherCaine

BrotherCaine — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 02:29:39 -0800

Okay, I hate O'Keefe as much as anybody, but how exactly does the Republican primary count as an official federal election? This seems silly to me, but I guess the two parties are so entrenched now that they're basically assumed to be a part of government automatically even before they've been elected. I can't imagine how bad our political system would become if we abandoned any kind of protections or regulation of the party candidate selection process.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 06:39:09 -0800

Here is our current party candidate selection process: 1) Several candidates are liked enough by the rich donors that they can think about running. A few more are just multi-millionaires that can decide to run on their own. 2) These candidates run until they run out of donor money, or a "important" scandal comes out that the press can destroy them with. 3) Those who are left run in a series of single-state primary elections that cause more candidates to drop out, even though only a few percent of the country is voting in each. At the end of it, we have a candidate who the vast majority of the country had no say at all in choosing. So... you think it would be worse than that?

By: octobersurprise

octobersurprise — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 07:06:32 -0800

So... you think it would be worse than that? Undoubtedly! And if you think the methods by which candidates are selected couldn't be worse, then you just haven't given much thought to the topic.

By: Thorzdad

Thorzdad — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 07:24:34 -0800

Well, they sure as hell shouldn't. In an era when the Tea Party is trying to defund any and all government functions, it's silly that we're still footing the bill for Democrats and Republicans to hold their obnoxious little popularity contests. I agree, in principle. But, as others note, there's a definite problem with them going back to privately-funded primaries (the whole "smoke-filled room" thing). I think a better solution would be to require the parties involved to reimburse the state for the costs of staging the primaries. The state maintains control, but the bill is handed to the parties.

By: Miko

Miko — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:16:39 -0800

Caucuses are just an abomination and should not be allowed given the dominance of the two parties. They're a lot of fun, though. So true! I lived in Maine in 2008 and got to caucus then. What a wacky event - combination pep rally, runoff election, and primary. They settled it with a physical head count - super lo-fi and grassroots-feeling. And very, very festive! Cupcakes and punch!

By: The 10th Regiment of Foot

The 10th Regiment of Foot — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:47:05 -0800

2) These candidates run until they run out of donor money, or a "important" scandal comes out that the press can destroy them with. So I guess that's how Steve Forbes ended up as the GOP nominee? At the end of it, we have a candidate who the vast majority of the country had no say at all in choosing. Yes, and then we usually have an election in which a small plurality of a minority of voters will select their states' electors who will select the "leader of the free world" from the two nominees of the major parties. Sounds like a call to get more people involved with the process to me?

By: smackfu

smackfu — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:07:14 -0800

So I guess that's how Steve Forbes ended up as the GOP nominee? If he hadn't been self-funded, he probably would have dropped out after the first couple of primaries.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:08:21 -0800

I mean, sure, the system might allow 2 or 3 choices for the populace to vote on, but the idea that those choices are any better than what a shadowy backroom would provide doesn't seem realistic to me.

By: Miko

Miko — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:18:10 -0800

I agree, 10th regiment - every election cycle, the same complaints. But where's the action? I only know a handful of people who've actually done anything at all about election or campaign finance reform, other than yabber about it.

By: ericb

ericb — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:13:00 -0800

Andrew Breitbart's Big Government blog: Media Smears O'Keefe – Using Obama Election Lawyer.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:53:03 -0800

South Carolina tired to charge the parties for the primary, and since the republicans couldn't pay

Am I reading this correctly? The Republican Party was incapable of paying for their primary in South Carolina? How much did South Carolina want to charge them? How soon before the primary's scheduled date were the Republicans told about it?

By: homunculus

homunculus — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:35:21 -0800

James O'Keefe Asked Me to Help Him Sue Liberal Media Outlets

By: Artw

Artw — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 13:45:03 -0800

You know, he'd fit right in with the Gawker guys.