(It's not just the M$M, we here in the blogosphere have gotten a pretty distorted view of the electorate this cycle as well. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
Project Vote’s new poll, which reveals the “rising electorate” from 2008 has starkly different views about the role of government than Tea Partiers, has inspired some discussion on the mood of voters before the election in November. “What Happened to Hope and Change,” we ask, and several bloggers, columnists, and reporters (sometimes with a combination of relief and frustration) attempt to answer.
"Lorraine C. Minnite, the author of the study, argues that the poll shows that the media is paying too much attention to the concerns of the mostly white and better-off Tea Party," reported Linda Scott at PBS News Hour.
The poll's finding that Tea Partiers only make up 29 percent of 2008 voters, compared to the 32 percent of black, young, and low-income voters, who turned out in droves in 2008 was a "refreshing corrective," wrote The Nation's Chris Hayes.
"We've all spent so much time dwelling on the slights and accusations of the Fox News crowd, there's been shockingly little attention paid to the views, frustrations and convictions of what we might call the forgotten electorate, otherwise known as Obama's base," he wrote.
Some progressives overlook that voting by mail does not always help their longtime constituents.
As state and county officials look for ways to streamline elections during tough budgetary times, many jurisdictions are increasingly relying on mail-based voting-and winning praises from progressives for doing so. But the true litmus test for any election reform should be whether it helps expand the franchise to those whose voices are missing in our democracy. What some groups may overlook in their enthusiasm about voting by mail is that it does not always serve underrepresented or vulnerable populations as well as traditional polls.
(We certainly shouldn't only pay attention to voting rights issues in election years. This one was a blow out, but conservatives know there will be future close calls where disenfranchising a few hundred thousand more voters will turn the tide. What Obama can do is get some good people nominated to the bench quickly so more of these court cases have a chance of being decided in favour of letting people vote. - promoted by Daniel De Groot)
Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog Weekly Voting Rights News Update
by Erin Ferns
As we predicted last December, legislation designed to prevent so-called voter fraud has dominated election law debates in several states this year. Last week alone, Georgia's controversial voter ID law was upheld by a federal appeals panel, the Texas Senate "sparked deep partisan tensions" by eliminating the majority rule in order to aid the passage of a voter ID law, and nine more states introduced numerous voter ID bills.
Even if they aren't fully aware of it consciously.
A new study to be published in Science this week has found it can predict the decision of "undecided" people with 70% accuracy:
The team tested the "automatic mental associations" of 129 residents of Vicenza, Italy, about a controversial expansion of an American military base in their community.
In a computer test, participants were asked to rapidly rate a series of words, interspersed with pictures of the base, as either positive or negative. One week later, when participants made a conscious choice to support or oppose the base expansion, researchers found that those choices invariably reflected the initial automatic associations.
Comments inside.
Update - The sample only included 33 undecided voters (the article I read did not convey that, but the original from Science does. My scepticism goes up a bit (though I think a bigger study would find a similar result). Science is highly respected, but that doesn't preclude them from running with an unconvincing study. Hopefully someone else repeats this research.
STATE BLOGS
