It's been a few days now since we began a conversation that addresses the issue of how frustrated some number of LBGT voters are with the Democratic Party this cycle; this because they find themselves either frustrated at the lack of progress on the civil rights issues that matter to them, or because they see both the Democratic and Republican Parties as unreliable partners in the struggle to assure equal rights for all.
In an effort to practice some actual journalism, I assembled a version of an online "focus group" at The Bilerico Project ("daily adventures in LBGTQ"), with the goal of gathering some opinions on this subject in the actual words of those frustrated voters.
Part One of this story focused on "stating the problem", and today we'll take on Part Two: in this environment, with Election Day staring us in the face, what is an LBGT voter to do?
As before, there are a variety of opinions, including a very informative comment I was able to obtain from a genuine Member of Congress, Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania's 8th District, and that means until the very end you won't hear much from me, except to help "set the stage" for the comments that follow.
It is about a week before early voting begins for a bunch of us around the country, and that means this may be one of the last times I have to convince you that, frustrated progressive or not, you better get your butt to a ballot box or a mail-in envelope this November, because it really does matter.
Now I could give you a bunch of "what ifs" to make my point, or I could remind you how we spent all summer watching oil gush into the Gulf, and how that came to be...but, instead, it's "Even More Current Event Day", and we're going to visit Hungary for a extremely real-world reminder of what can go wrong when the environmental cops are considered just too much of a burden by the environmental robbers-and if today's story doesn't scare you to death, I don't know what will.
It ain't Texas, but we will surely visit a Red River Valley...and you surely won't like what you're gonna see.
It's long past time for the left to publicly acknowledge that tying its meager fortunes to the Democrats is a lost cause. You cannot fight a beast from within its belly. You can only be digested and shat out.
You may not like the suggestion I'm about to make.
But I'll make it anyway: Vote third party, a LEFT-wing third party. MAKE the Democrats' self-inflicted losses in November be because they were too right-wing and the public, having been lied to for too long, chose to leave for a party that represents its interests over those of Big Business.
You must do this not only to send the right message, but because it is the ONLY way any Democrat will be made to realize just why he or she lost and what the party needs to do to win and keep power. That's not going to happen by sitting out elections, which is what the powerful want us to do anyway and only allows the far right to keep shaping the narrative that Democrats lose because they're perceived as being too liberal.
American culture loves head-to-head battles. Just look at sports. While the English Premiere League has a double round-robin which only has a playoff if the top teams are tied in total points, goal differential, and goals scored, American sports loves having play-offs.
In a similar light, I think Americans would like elections that result in a head-to-head ballot battle at the end, which is why I propose what I am dubbing "IRV minus one", using the mechanics of instant runoff voting, but skipping the last stage so you narrow the field to two rather than declare a winner.
For some perspective on the wisdom of the Democrats who are opposing health care reform, let's go the elections last Tuesday. New polling analysis from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and Women's Voices Women's Vote is pretty powerful, and I recommend it to all the Democrats who voted no on the health care bill and every single one of their political consultants: the bottom line, friends, is that everything you do to depress Democratic voter turnout in your district is another nail in your coffin.
During the run up to the Stupak amendment, it appeared that the measure could be defeated by turning a few Democrats against it. In the end, 64 Democrats voted for it, 23 more than the 41 minimum needed to pass it (assuming all Republicans voted for it). During the vote, some observers described Democrats "piling on" once they saw the measure would pass anyway. This sort of thing happens all the time, but I have never seen a critical word written about the practice.
Why should it be that when asked to vote on a bill, members of Congress can watch how others are voting, and even change their vote before the result is finalized? Whose interest is that in? Who benefits? What societal value exists in allowing politicians to so obviously shift in the breeze?
Outcomes in legislative bodies must be a matter of public record, but there's no inherent reason that during the vote members should see how others are voting, know the count, and even be able to change their already cast vote, is there? Ordinary citizens do not get this luxury when voting; generally no results are published until the polls close (at least for their state). Should they vote for the wrong person, how many jurisdictions would allow a second ballot, to try again?
Tomorrow I go to the local fire house to vote in the special election in New York's 20th Congressional district.
The main bit of my preparations is my talking points, just in case a TV newsie shows up to interview me. Not that this is likely -- I have a real face for radio, but it's in the same spirit of planning what I might buy if I win a lottery. And since I look like what they probably imagine a Republican to look like -- fat, white, middle-aged and suburban -- it might be useful to have something to say that would jolt 'em a bit.
We're about to finish the 2008 election cycle with the conclusion of two elections for the United States Senate, a recount in Minnesota and a runoff in Georgia. It's hard to imagine a better illustration of America's oddball and potentially disastrous election process.
The Senate election in Minnesota is being recounted in what most consider, ballot challenges aside, an admirably scrupulous process. In Minnesota, every voter votes on a paper ballot read by optical scanners, and ballot-marking devices are available in every polling place to serve voters who cannot use a pen to mark a ballot due to vision, dexterity or other disabilities. Recounts are done by hand. If there is doubt about the intent of the voter, the ballots can be examined, and standards for evaluating intent applied. Part of the reason there are so many unresolved ballot challenges in Minnesota is simply because there is independent evidence of voter intent to evaluate.
I voted at about 8:15 this morning. Took twenty minutes or so. Given reports from my friends, the lines were huge everywhere in Philadelphia early in the morning, but tapered off after 9 a.m. Lots of hard-core voters out early. Lots.
The best part about my voting experience was when the judge of elections claimed a young woman in line ahead of me wasn't on the rolls, and was about to send her to another division. I quickly pulled out my street list, confirmed she was a registered voter in the division, and told the judge to look again (as a certified poll watcher, I can do this). The judge looked again and found her. Turns out the page the voter was on was just stuck. So, I helped someone else--a registered Democrat--vote, too. Cool.
Obama people are all over the neighborhood, pulling people out to vote. I don't remember any Election Day canvassing in the area ever before.
This is an open thread. How was your voting and / or activist experience?
While ACORN's record-breaking voter registration campaign - and the partisan attacks which followed - have been much in the news lately, ACORN members and organizers are hard at work conducting extensive Get Out the Vote programs to make sure that ACORN members, new registrants, immigrant citizens, young people, and infrequent voters in low-income and minority communities participate in this historic election. Below the flip are some highlights of our work.
Crossposted from Daily Kos These times are like none I have experienced in my 72+ years! I think that we have a unique oportunity to take stock of ourselves and our relationships to each other that may never come again. Old definitions can be trashed and new ones born. It is time for the people of this and every other nation to redefine what we as people want to be our guiding values from this pont on. There are many reasons foy saying this, not the least of which is the disintegration of the language we once held dear in our declaration of independence. A partial list might include "freedom", "liberty", "rights", "government", "people" ... You get the picture. These words had meaning then in a very specific context, yet they have been thoiught to transcend that context. Just how far can that transcendence be carried? Look beneath the fold and explore this notion with me. Maybe we can help ourselves understand what "change" really means.
Most American voters could do with putting a little more thought into how they vote, in my opinion :) Of course, most American voters are not having the time, energy or informational resources, let alone the level of obsessiveness, required to actually get to the point of having a fully thought through voting strategy to meet their personal aims and values. Probably with good reason. However, since I have done it, I will tell you how to go about it.
First, the values that I am interested in, the order of which I'm not clear on:
Having the best of the two options presented in office;
Increasing the capacity for a diversity of opinions to proliferate;
Shifting national discourse towards the values above
The objectives for 2008:
A Republican loss;
The first Black President;
Promoting nuanced class politics that intersects with other kinds of hierarchy;
Planting seeds for radical democracy;
Send a message to the Democratic establishment that they're still part of the problem and likely will be as long as there is hegemony. If they weren't, they'd be pursuing strategies like this.
The method:
1. Just before you vote, go to Pollster.com, Five Thirty Eight, or some other site you trust.
2A. If you live in a "tipping-point" state, vote for Obama.
2B. If you live in a non "tipping-point" state, research third party candidates and vote for a third party candidate (strategy memo on how to pick one coming :).
For nearly two weeks now, I've been suffering from a newly-minted malady called Palin-paralysis--a nasty tv-transmitted virus I caught after watching Sarah Palin's divisive and derisive acceptance speech. You know, that salute to "small town values" that lionized plucky, scrappy hockey moms and demonized yucky, crappy community organizers.
The primary symptoms are nausea, a perpetually clenched jaw, and a half-baked Alaska-induced brain freeze; can't get out of bed, can't blog, can't even blog in bed. The surreal spectacle of the Palin pick, the depth of cynicism and carelessness that it demonstrated, and the embrace of this ludicrous choice for veep by so many folks is truly appalling. As Matt Damon told the AP:
For quite some time we have been noting that the Republicans ran a hugely obstructionist strategy in the Senate, running up a record total of cloture motions. McCain, in his effort to cast himself as some kind of trans-partisan agent of change was of course fully on board with this agenda.
Further, McCain by far, leads the pack of senators for votes skipped during the 110th Congress. McCain skipped 63.8% of votes. He beats out stroke sufferer Tim Johnson, and both Obama and Clinton in the midst of their epic struggle who all still managed to attend a majority of votes.
Let's take a peek at that record, after all McCain says:
The constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving these problems isn't a cause, it's a symptom. It's what happens when people go to Washington to work for themselves and not you.
Again and again, I've worked with members of both parties to fix problems that need to be fixed. That's how I will govern as President. I will reach out my hand to anyone to help me get this country moving again. I have that record and the scars to prove it. Senator Obama does not.
I heard last week that Google, Pew, The JEHT Foundation, and some Secretaries of State were collaborating on the Voter Information Project, a project to help voters understand if they are registered to vote, find out where to vote, and figure out what is on the ballot.
There's a good amount of handwringing about how stupid voters really are, how they don't even know that there are 100 Senators. I have on my bookshelf the 'Myth of the Rational Voter', a book by a George Mason professor of economics with a picture of a flock of sheep on the cover.
Maybe. But it's important to realize that apathy is a completely reasonable choice considering how complicated voting systems are and how much misinformation is out there about our political system. Why should you participate?
The internet is rapidly shifting the calculus here, changing us from a consumer oriented political culture to a producer oriented one. It's not just that the number of political donors has tripled, from 2% to 6% of the country; in the last five years, 44% of the country has contacted a member of Congress. That is remarkable.
The Voter Information Project, if it can standardize data and locations, will undercut the complexity of our political system and let voters, if they want to, to vote with relative ease. That is what political machines do not want, and it is why we should embrace simplicity.
STATE BLOGS
