John Q. Jacobs writes: The 2004 Ohio Presidential voting results do not accurately reflect voter intentions. In Cuyahoga County, the election was flawed and the design appears to have been manipulated. At locations with several ballot orders in use, many votes were cast by voters crossing precincts, hence counted other than as intended. At precincts with the highest Kerry support, the percentage of uncounted votes is inexplicably high. The obvious inference—intentional manipulation produced concentrated undercounting, cross-voting, and vote-switching in areas of highest Kerry support—cannot be ignored in the face of the evidence and statistics. The possibility that ballots were switched to different precincts, post-voting to effect vote-switching, must be considered in a complete chain of custody context.

Many individual ballots resulted in a vote-switch, a two-vote margin difference from the intended result. Switched-votes cast for Kerry and counted for Bush had twice the impact as their actual occurrence, by each subtracting one from Kerry and adding one to Bush. Bush and Kerry votes also went uncounted as non-votes or were miscounted as minor candidate votes. A high percentage of all Cuyahoga County votes were cast at locations with multiple ballot orders. The manner in which precincts and ballot orders were combined increased the probability of a Kerry cross-vote being recorded as a Bush vote. Quantitative analyses of candidate votes and of non-vote percentages evidence the cross-voting and the patterns of cross-voting and vote-switching. -- How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes.

Posted by Ed at 8:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: Sen. Barack Obama's top fundraisers have asked his campaign donors to refrain from contributing to liberal independent political organizations in hopes of controlling the tone and message of the general-election campaign.

At a meeting in Indianapolis on May 2, members of the Democratic front-runner's finance committee made it clear Obama (Ill.) is worried that overtly negative advertising from outside organizations could undermine his themes of unity and hope. ...

The meeting was only the most overt effort by Obama or Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the presumptive Republican nominee, to freeze out "527" groups -- named after a provision in the tax code -- which are not allowed to openly support a candidate but have helped define recent elections through negative advertising.

The McCain campaign has been less organized than Obama's in its efforts to counter the groups, but the senator from Arizona has made clear his antipathy toward them -- without much effect. -- Obama, McCain Aim to Curb '527s' - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 7:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Peter Overby on NPR reports on ways to pay the debt: Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was some $10 million in debt at the end of March. Then she loaned her campaign $11 million. The campaign won't say what her total debt is. How might Clinton go about paying off some of the bills? -- How Will Clinton Resolve Campaign Debt? : NPR

Posted by Ed at 6:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Detroit Free Press reports: A paralegal testified today that the FBI agent in charge of the criminal probe against Southfield lawyer Geoffrey Fieger tried to bully her when he questioned her about contributions she made at Fieger’s behest to John Edwards’ 2004 presidential campaign.

Under cross-examination by Fieger defense lawyer Gerry Spence, SueEllen Sandner said she was so disgusted with the way FBI agent Jeffrey Rees treated her, she refused Monday to meet with a federal prosecutor in advance of today's testimony if Rees would be there.

“He was fairly aggressive with me when I didn’t say the words he wanted me to say,” Sandner said of her first conversation with Rees in December 2005. He called her shortly after agents raided Fieger’s law firm looking for evidence that Fieger and law partner Vernon (Ven) Johnson recruited 64 people to contribute to Edwards’ 2004 presidential campaign and reimbursed them with law firm funds.

Defense lawyers have conceded that Fieger and Johnson reimbursed employees for contributing, but that the pair didn’t think they were breaking the law. Their lawyers have focused on federal investigative tactics. -- Paralegal: FBI agent tried to bully me in Fieger case

Posted by Ed at 7:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: Ever wonder how much companies really spend to influence government through trade associations? Well, a few corporations are coming clean, or at least cleaner.

The Center for Political Accountability, a nonpartisan group that promotes corporate political disclosure, has been gradually persuading companies to disclose more about their political activities. As a result, a few mysteries have been solved.

In 2006, for example, Chevron, the oil company, paid the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Industry PAC BIPAC $250,000 each to educate voters. Such spending has traditionally been kept secret because laws do not require disclosure, even though it is an important element in the assault on Washington. Now, shareholder pressure has changed a few minds in corporate boardrooms.

Aetna, the insurance company, has disclosed that it paid trade associations $3.4 million in 2006, the latest year for which information is available. That included $950,000 to America s Health Insurance Plans, $925,000 to the Coalition for Affordable Quality Healthcare, $226,500 to the Business Roundtable and $100,000 to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In other words, a ton of dough. -- Jeffrey H. Birnbaum - Companies Start to Lift Veil on Political Spending - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: In the threadbare border towns of South Texas, one of the country’s poorest regions, enterprising locals like Candelaria Espinoza have long been paid to round up votes for candidates on Election Day. There is even a name for these electoral soldiers of fortune: politiqueras. ...

The payments, known in the political vernacular as “street money,” are a legal but controversial tool that Mrs. Clinton employed at a time when she was desperately seeking a victory after losing 10 consecutive contests to Mr. Obama.

As a practical matter, the payments are now little more than a footnote to a hotly contested race that seems closer to a conclusion after Mrs. Clinton’s poor showing in North Carolina and narrow victory in Indiana last Tuesday. But they underscore how her strategists, caught unprepared for a drawn-out battle, turned to an old-style method of retail politicking to ensure much-needed victories in the suddenly critical Texas and Ohio primaries.

Not equipped with the volunteer-driven grass-roots movement that has propelled Mr. Obama’s get-out-the-vote efforts, the Clinton campaign hired more than three times as many local operatives as he to fill that role in those two states. While mostly forgoing the use of street money in Ohio and other places, the Obama campaign paid about 150 people in Texas, most of them college students, for campaign work. The payments were widely dispersed, with only a handful in South Texas and fewer than 20 in Houston. -- Legal but Controversial, It Helped Get Out the Vote

Posted by Ed at 7:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

AP reports: The Texas Democratic Party was sued Friday by Latino advocacy groups that contend the complicated primary and caucus system used in the March 4 presidential primary unfairly diluted Latino votes.

The League of United Latin American Citizens of Texas and the Mexican American Bar Association of Houston sued in federal court, arguing the party failed to seek clearance required by the U.S. Justice Department for the so-called Texas Two Step. The groups also argue the system effectively discriminates against Latino voters by giving them fewer delegates.

Texas Democrats distribute the state s 193 delegates using both a primary election and a caucus, but the distribution favors state Senate districts that had high voter turnout in the last presidential and gubernatorial elections.

In the March 4 election, that meant predominantly Hispanic districts, where turnout was low in 2004 and 2006, got fewer delegates than others, particularly urban, predominantly black districts. Latino districts favored Hillary Clinton; black districts favored Barack Obama. -- LULAC sued Texas Democratic Party over primary delegates - El Paso Times

Note: If anyone has a copy of the complaint, email it to me. The complaint may be downloaded here. Thanks to Jose Garza for responding to my request.

Posted by Ed at 3:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: The buzz these days is that American politics may be entering a “postpartisan” era, as a new generation finds the old ideological quarrels among baby boomers to be increasingly irrelevant. In reality, matters are not so simple. Far from being postpartisan, today’s young adults are significantly more likely to identify as Democrats than were their predecessors. Along with colleagues at the Brookings and Hoover institutions, we recently completed a comprehensive study of the nation’s polarization. Our research concludes not only that the ideological differences between the political parties are growing but also that they have become embedded in American society itself. ...

But polarization has proceeded even further than these shifts made necessary. The great majority of voters now fuse their party identification, ideology and decisions in the voting booth. The share of Democrats who could be called conservative has shrunk, and so has the share of liberal Republicans. The American National Election Studies asks voters a series of issues-based questions and then arrays respondents along a 15-point scale from -7 (the most liberal) to +7 (the most conservative). These data indicate that 41 percent of the voters in 1984 were located at or near the midpoint of the ideological spectrum, compared with only 28 percent in 2004. Meanwhile, the percentage of voters clustering toward the left and right tails of the spectrum rose from 10 to 23 percent. ...

Our study shows that this geographical sorting worsens polarization in several ways. When counties become more homogeneous, it becomes harder to use redistricting to create more competitive Congressional districts. (Recent research indicates that gerrymandering accounts for, at the very most, one-third of noncompetitive districts in the House of Representatives.) When states become more homogeneous, presidential campaigns begin by conceding a large number of contests to the opposition, disheartening their supporters in those states and increasing the majority’s electoral advantage. Polarization feeds on itself. -- Vote Like Thy Neighbor

Posted by Ed at 7:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: The battle over voting rights will expand this week as lawmakers in Missouri are expected to support a proposed constitutional amendment to enable election officials to require proof of citizenship from anyone registering to vote.

The measure would allow far more rigorous demands than the voter ID requirement recently upheld by the Supreme Court, in which voters had to prove their identity with a government-issued card.

Sponsors of the amendment — which requires the approval of voters to go into effect, possibly in an August referendum — say it is part of an effort to prevent illegal immigrants from affecting the political process. Critics say the measure could lead to the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of legal residents who would find it difficult to prove their citizenship.

Voting experts say the Missouri amendment represents the next logical step for those who have supported stronger voter ID requirements and the next battleground in how elections are conducted. Similar measures requiring proof of citizenship are being considered in at least 19 state legislatures. Bills in Florida, Kansas, Oklahoma and South Carolina have strong support. But only in Missouri does the requirement have a chance of taking effect before the presidential election. -- Voter ID Battle Shifts to Proof of Citizenship - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 7:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: The public relations executive whom Senator John McCain’s campaign had chosen to run the Republican National Convention this summer resigned his post on Saturday after a magazine reported that his firm had lobbied for the military junta that runs Myanmar.

The executive, Doug Goodyear, said in a statement that he was stepping down as the coordinator of the convention, which will be held Sept. 1-4 in Minneapolis-St. Paul, “so as not to become a distraction in this campaign.”

“I continue to strongly support John McCain for president and wish him the best of luck in this campaign,” the two-sentence statement concluded.

Mr. Goodyear is the chief executive and a founding partner of the DCI Group, which has offices in Washington and Phoenix. He offered his resignation after Newsweek reported that his firm had been paid $348,000 in 2002 to represent the junta.

The rulers of Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, have been widely condemned for stymieing relief efforts after a cyclone ravaged the country’s coastal areas on May 3, killing thousands. The United States has denounced the Burmese government as one of the world’s most repressive, and Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, has long been critical of the government as well. During the campaign, he has called for Myanmar’s leaders to halt human rights abuses. -- Official Chosen by McCain to Run Convention Resigns

Posted by Ed at 10:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Trailhead blog at Slate.com reports: Ever since the Clinton campaign went on life support earlier this week, there’s been speculation that Barack Obama could persuade Hillary to drop out by promising to pay off her campaign debt. The Huffington Post’s Tom Edsall wrote that “it is not uncommon for winning presidential campaigns to pick up some or all of a competitor's debts and obligations, although the size of Clinton's debt and her personal loans to her campaign are unprecedented - somewhere over and above $20 million.” Meanwhile, diarists at DailyKos started hyperventilating that their Obama donations would be given to subsidize Clinton’s ailing campaign. Is their fear justified?

No it’s not. Obama can’t just “pay back” Clinton’s debt. FEC rules limit contributions from one candidate committee to another at $2000, according to FEC spokesman Bob Biersack. So even if Obama wanted to cut Hillary a $10 million check, he couldn’t. Nor could he route his money through the DNC, since national party committees can only give $5000 to a candidate committee.

What Obama can do is fundraise for her. Over the past year, Obama has established a formidable online fundraising apparatus that has raked in more than $240 million since the campaign began. If he called for supporters to chip in for Clinton, or set up a joint fundraising committee, he could probably drum up some cash. How much is unclear. -- Trailhead : Debt Relief

Posted by Ed at 4:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Birmingham News reports: An effort to ban shuffling money between political action committees is coming down to the final day of the legislative session.

A conference committee on Thursday debated a watered-down version of the ban originally proposed by Rep. Jeff McLaughlin, D-Guntersville.

The proposed compromise bans PAC-to-PAC transfers, but would carve out one-way street exemptions for political parties and legislative caucuses and require new filings to shed light on who s getting and giving money in Alabama politics.

PACs could give money to political parties and legislative caucuses, but the parties and caucuses could not give money to another PAC, under the compromise. PACs, political parties, legislative caucuses and "get out the vote" groups would have to file new quarterly reports listing their contributions and donations in addition to the reports they file before elections. -- Alabama Legislature s proposed PAC compromise would require new disclosure- al.com

Posted by Ed at 7:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Wall Street Journal reports: A conservative legal-advocacy group is enlisting ministers to use their pulpits to preach about election candidates this September, defying a tax law that bars churches from engaging in politics.

Alliance Defense Fund, a Scottsdale, Ariz., nonprofit, is hoping at least one sermon will prompt the Internal Revenue Service to investigate, sparking a court battle that could get the tax provision declared unconstitutional. Alliance lawyers represent churches in disputes with the IRS over alleged partisan activity.

The action marks the latest attempt by a conservative organization to help clergy harness their congregations to sway elections. The protest is scheduled for Sunday, Sept. 28, a little more than a month before the general election, in a year when religious concerns and preachers have been a regular part of the political debate. ...

The section of the tax code barring nonprofits from intervening in political campaigns has long frustrated clergy. Many ministers consider the provision an inappropriate government intrusion, blocking the duty of clergy to advise congregants.

Alliance fund staff hopes 40 or 50 houses of worship will take part in the action, including clerics from liberal-leaning congregations. About 80 ministers have expressed interest, including one Catholic priest, says Erik Stanley, the Alliance's senior legal counsel. -- Pastors May Defy IRS Gag Rule - WSJ.com

Posted by Ed at 7:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: For months, the White House and Senate Republicans have been content to let a political impasse over vacancies at the Federal Election Commission persist, sidelining the regulatory agency in the throes of a heated presidential campaign.

But on Tuesday, President Bush suddenly announced three new nominees to the commission. He also backed away from Republicans’ insistence that the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department official who faces vigorous opposition from Democrats, be voted upon with other nominees to the commission.

The reason for the about-face?

Several Democratic officials familiar with the negotiations and watchdog groups said they believed that Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, had been pressing the White House and Senator Mitch McConnell, the minority leader, to resolve the issue.

Although Mr. McCain has been a longtime champion of campaign finance reform, he also has an urgent pecuniary interest in the matter.

The agency, which monitors compliance of federal election laws, has had only two commissioners out of a normal complement of six for months, leaving it without a quorum and powerless to act. Without a functioning commission, campaign finance experts said, Mr. McCain’s ability to collect $85 million in federal money for the general election through the country’s public financing system would be severely complicated. -- In F.E.C. Moves, Some See Effort to Aid McCain - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 8:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Carlton Larson, writing on Prawfsblawg, suggests "Suppose Obama announced that he would name Hillary Clinton to the first Supreme Court vacancy of his term." -- PrawfsBlawg: Hillary Clinton for the Supreme Court?

There is a small problem with that idea. 18 USC § 599 provides:

Whoever, being a candidate, directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment, or the use of his influence or support for the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Posted by Ed at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Project On Government Oversight POGO Blog: Internal Draft Document Reveals Bloch-Headedness
The Project on Government Oversight Blog reports: POGO has gained access to an extraordinary internal DOCUMENT from the Office of Special Counsel, an independent federal agency charged with protecting whistleblowers from reprisal. Clearly marked DRAFT, it is a memo dated January 18, 2008, to Special Counsel Scott Bloch from the members of a special task force. The task force was created, according to the memo, in May 2007, to pursue certain complex and high profile investigations, such as the firing of the U.S. Attorneys and the political presentations given by the White House Office of Political Affairs OPA . The stated subject of the memo is Summary of Task Force Activities and Recommendations, but it reads at times like an anguished cry from investigators charged with an important mission but virtually every recommendation they make is countermanded by their boss. If they recommend going forward with an inquiry, Bloch says no. If they say they lack evidence or jurisdiction, he orders them to go forward.

The inescapable conclusion reached from poring through the contents of this 13-page memo is that Bloch was deliberately creating the impression of a huge ongoing multi-faceted investigation of the White House--at the same time that he himself was being investigated by another arm of the White House for various forms of misconduct. ...

Voter Registration Fraud Case:
Indictments were filed against four individuals associated with a liberal organization, ACORN, for engaging in election fraud. ACORN had reported the fraud itself and had fired the individuals, but a senior Justice official in Washington rushed to file the indictments a few days before the 2006 election, despite clear DOJ policy against bringing such actions right before an election because of the possibility of influencing the outcome.

The task force wrote a memo "outlining the reasons that the Hatch Act case investigating this matter should be opened.” The Hatch Act expressly forbids any Executive Branch official from taking actions that might influence an election. The task force was told they were "not authorized to open up this file." The task force protested strongly:

Because the facts raise the strong possibility of violations of two Hatch Act provisions, the TF requests that a case file be opened into these allegations. OSC is the only agency charged with enforcement of the Hatch Act…it could be perceived that the Office of Special Counsel was abdicating its responsibility to enforce the Hatch Act if we were to take no action in this matter. More importantly, [if the actions were]…an attempt to affect the results of an election, this would constitute one of the most egregious violations of the Hatch Act.

The draft document is here.

Hat-tip to Left in Alabama for the link to this extraordinary document.

Posted by Ed at 9:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Why Clinton Stands to Lose Millions - US News and World Report
US News and World Report reports: Experts disagree on whether or not Clinton will actually stick in the fight until the Democratic National Convention in August. But the date looms large for another reason—at least, if she hopes to recoup any of the millions she has sunk into the campaign. Thanks to a little-known provision in 2002's McCain-Feingold campaign-finance reform bill, a campaign must repay the loan to a candidate before Election Day. In this case, that's the nominating convention. After the election has passed, a bankrupt campaign is limited to gathering just $250,000 from contributors, which means that modest sum is all it can give back to a candidate. In short, Clinton stands to lose $11,150,000. "If she wants to be repaid, she'd have to move on that between now and the national convention," says former Federal Election Commission chairman Michael Toner. "Otherwise, it just becomes another contribution." The campaign, meanwhile, has other debts to consider as well. According to her latest FEC filing, the Hillary Clinton for President campaign committee owes millions to vendors, including more than $4.5 million to Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, the consulting firm of her former chief strategist Mark Penn.

That adds another wrinkle to her decision to stay in the race. Time is running out to pay off friends, allies, and vendors. Plus, by all accounts, Clinton's most ardent supporters are tapped out, either unwilling or unable by law to donate any more. If she's going to continue competing, she has to ask herself how many more millions she's willing to spend in a quest many describe as increasingly quixotic. In short, how much does she care about the money? Politics guru Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia figures not much; after all, the Clintons earned $109 million since leaving the White House. "It's like Michael Bloomberg spending a billion. Would he miss it? Is she going to miss $10 million? There's only so much you can spend yourself anyway." -- Why Clinton Stands to Lose Millions

Hat-tip to Taegan Goddard's Political Wire for the link.

Posted by Ed at 9:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The DNC released a memo this afternoon showing

The memo contains state-by-state tables and more supporting data.

Posted by Ed at 4:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Detroit Free Press reports: An attorney from Geoffrey Fieger’s law office, called as a prosecution witness to testify in the high profile lawyer’s federal trial for alleged illegal political fund-raising, told jurors today that he’d followed the same practices throughout his 24-year career.

“I’ve done exactly what I’ve done at the Fieger firm that’s the subject of this litigation on numerous occasions through my legal career at another firm,” Jeffrey Danzig testified on direct examination.

Fieger and partner Vernon (Ven) Johnson are charged with breaking campaign finance laws. Money was collected from employees, friends, relatives and other for the 2004 John Edwards presidential bid and the donations were then reimbursed by law firm checks.

The times he’d done the same thing while at the Lopatin-Miller law office were “too many to count,” Danzing said in later cross-examination. -- Attorney working for Fieger: I've followed the same practices for 24 years

Posted by Ed at 7:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Kansas City Star reports: Lawmakers have passed a bill requiring Kansans to provide photo identification when they vote — starting in 2010 — but some Democrats expect a veto from Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

The governor’s office was noncommittal about House Bill 2019, but Rep. Tom Sawyer of Wichita said he expected Sebelius to veto voter ID as she has in the past.

The bill sailed through the Senate 27-3, but the House vote was 67-56, far short of a veto-proof majority. The legislation exempts people with disabilities, voters 65 and older and active-duty military personnel and their families. -- www.kansascity.com | 05/07/2008 | Voter ID bill sent to Kansas governor

Posted by Ed at 7:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports: Voters could decide whether to enact a photo ID requirement for voting under a proposed constitutional amendment given first-round approval Wednesday by the Missouri House.

Legislators approved a photo ID law in 2006, but it was struck down by the state Supreme Court as a violation of the state constitution. The proposal approved Wednesday would present the idea to voters as a constitutional amendment either in November or in a special election.

House members gave the resolution first-round approval on a party-line vote, 89-67.

Republicans brought up the proposal after the U.S. Supreme Court said an Indiana photo ID law was constitutional. -- STLtoday - Mo. voters may decide on photo ID requirement

Posted by Ed at 7:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Star Press reports: A first-time voter said he was not permitted to vote in Tuesday s Democratic Primary because a poll inspector believed he was a Republican.

The reason the poll inspector believed Ball State University student Kyle Ellis, 21, was a Republican was because Ellis told the inspector he registered to vote as a Republican.

"I realize now that is incorrect," Ellis said Wednesday.
It's a common misconception that Indiana voters declare political affiliation when they register to vote. Instead, voters decide party affiliation in primary elections when they choose whether to vote in the Democratic or Republican primary.

The concept is known as an "open primary."

Having never voted before, Ellis would have never officially declared an affiliation with either party before Tuesday's election. -- Voter says he was banned from casting Democratic ballot | The Star Press - www.thestarpress.com - Muncie, IN

Posted by Ed at 7:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Tom Edsall writes on the Huffington Post: Hillary Clinton s campaign has a secret weapon to build its delegate count, but her top strategists say privately that any attempt to deploy it would require a sharp and by no means inevitable shift in the political climate within Democratic circles by the end of this month.

With at least 50 percent of the Democratic Party s 30-member Rules and Bylaws Committee committed to Clinton, her backers could -- when the committee meets at the end of this month -- try to ram through a decision to seat the disputed 210-member Florida and 156-member Michigan delegations. Such a decision would give Clinton an estimated 55 or more delegates than Obama, according to Clinton campaign operatives. The Obama campaign has declined to give an estimate. -- Clinton Camp Considering Nuclear Option To Overtake Delegate Lead - Politics on The Huffington Post

Comment: The only reason to float this scenario now is to send a Nixonian message to Obama's would-be supporters that HRC is willing to destroy the Party in order to get her way. By projecting this power now, she hopes to sway waverers away from Obama.

Posted by Ed at 5:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Washington Post reports: Women's Voices, Women Vote is one of those little advocacy organizations with a lot of big names attached: Former White House chief of staff John Podesta is a board member, Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams has consulted, and founder Page Gardner worked for the 1992 Bill Clinton campaign, to name a few.

But for all the paid and unpaid talent associated with the group, which focuses on registering unmarried women to vote, it's landed in legal hot water in North Carolina for robo-calling voters after the primary registration date and for not identifying the group in the call.

Voters and watchdog groups complained about the calls, and North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper ordered them to stop on Wednesday. Some saw a turnout-suppression conspiracy because the group's allies include so many Clinton supporters, especially Podesta and Williams.

On Friday, Barack Obama's campaign weighed in by circulating the transcript of a National Public Radio report on the calls. It noted that the North Carolina calls seemed to heavily skew to African Americans, including many women who had already registered, causing them to question whether they were eligible to vote in the primary on Tuesday.

In a statement released on its Web site, the group explains that the calls were part of a general-election outreach effort in 24 states and coincided with mailings that conveyed a similar "hurry up and register" message. But in other states as well, the mailings and calls were placed after primary registration deadlines had passed, sowing confusion and leading to other legal complaints against the group. -- Women's Voices, Women Vote: Did the Outreach Overreach? - washingtonpost.com

Posted by Ed at 10:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

BBC reports: Boris Johnson has won the race to become the next mayor of London - ending Ken Livingstone s eight-year reign at City Hall.

The Conservative candidate won with 1,168,738 first and second preference votes, compared with Mr Livingstone s 1,028,966 on a record turnout of 45%. ...

First preference votes:
Boris Johnson (Tory): 1,043,761
Ken Livingstone (Lab): 893,877
Brian Paddick (Lib Dem): 236,685
Sian Berry (Green): 77,374
Richard Barnbrook (BNP): 69,710
Alan Craig (Christian Choice): 39,249
Gerard Batten (UKIP): 22,422
Lindsey German (Left List): 16,796
Matt O'Connor (Eng Democrats): 10,695
Winston McKenzie (Ind): 5,389 -- BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | Johnson wins London mayoral race

Note: Since the bottom eight candidates together had fewer votes than Livingstone, all of their ballots were re-examined and the second preferences counted.

Posted by Ed at 8:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Pacific News Center reports: The Democrat Party Nominating Committee said officials will look over the large amount of spoiled ballots in the coming days.

At issue is the small margin of victory of Senator Barack Obama. He beat his rival, Senator Hillary Clinton by 7 votes, but well over 500 ballots were deemed invalid during the tabulation process.

Herbie Perez, chairman of the nominating committee, said she will not certify the results because the Committee needs to ensure that all the uncounted ballots were properly identified as spoiled. -- Pacific News Center

Hat-tip to TalkLeft for the link.

Posted by Ed at 8:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: Groups planning parades or protests at the Democratic National Convention filed a lawsuit here on Friday charging that the Secret Service and the City of Denver are threatening free speech — not because of tight security rules, but by the very lack of them.

The suit, filed in Federal District Court, says that delays in establishing legal parade routes, and unanswered questions about security arrangements around the convention center, are undermining efforts to plan for events when Democrats gather here from Aug. 25 to 28.

Mark Silverstein, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, which is representing 12 groups in the lawsuit, said they had no choice but to turn to the court. With just four months until the convention, the groups want a judge to speed the scheduling and the issuing of rules governing activities outside the Pepsi Center.

At the Democratic convention in Boston in 2004, First Amendment challenges could not be addressed by judges, Mr. Silverstein said, because security measures were announced too late. -- Convention Preparations Prompt Suit by A.C.L.U. - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 2:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: Even some states without open primaries seem to have experienced crossover voting. In the Pennsylvania vote on April 22, voter surveys indicated that about 5 percent of those voting in the Democratic primary were Republicans who switched their party registration; they split their vote almost evenly between the two candidates.

Here in Indiana, both Democratic candidates are sending surrogates to campaign in traditionally Republican areas they might have ignored in years past, including in Hamilton County, Indiana’s fastest-growing and most affluent county.

“We’re getting a lot of inquiries from Republicans asking how do you do it, how do you cross over,” Dan Parker, the Democratic Party state chairman, said in an interview here. “It’s been our No. 1 request for the past two months.”

Clouding the picture, however, is a campaign by Rush Limbaugh, the radio talk show host, urging his listeners to cast their ballots for Mrs. Clinton “if they can stomach it,” in order to prolong the Democratic race and weaken the eventual winner. -- Republicans Crossing Over to Vote in Democratic Contests - New York Times

Posted by Ed at 2:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The New York Times reports: The Senate on Wednesday delivered its judgment on a constitutional question involving one of its own and formally declared that Senator John McCain is eligible to be president — at least from a citizenship perspective.

Weighing in on an arcane question that has arisen because of Mr. McCain’s birth in the Panama Canal Zone, the Senate without opposition approved a nonbinding resolution recognizing that Mr. McCain is a natural-born citizen.

Among the basic qualifications the Constitution lays out for president is that the person be a natural-born citizen, a phrase not defined and one that has been subjected to various interpretations.

At the request of Mr. McCain’s campaign, two constitutional lawyers studied the issue and found in favor of Mr. McCain, whose father was stationed in the zone with the Navy when the future candidate was born. Colleagues of both parties in the Senate, including his two potential Democratic rivals, concur. -- Senate Says McCain Is Qualified

Posted by Ed at 7:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)