Republicans In Big Trouble With Technology
	found on AP via Guardian written by BetsyDevine, edited by Humberto (Plastic) [ read unedited ] posted Sat 8 Feb 8:35pm
		"When is the GOP going to get the message that even big-buck technology can backfire?," asks BetsyDevine. "The AP reports that the US Justice Department is looking into their latest high-tech and high-ticket fiasco. At least one NH Republican Party official has resigned after news broke that his party paid a Virginia group called GOPMarketplace to hire an Idaho telemarketing firm to jam NH phones on election day. And the plan was to jam all the phones of folks who gave people rides to the polls--not just the Democrats but also the Firefighters Union. According to the usually-pro-Republican Manchester Union Leader the NH GOP paid GOP Marketplace $15,600 to set this up. Democrats, whose phones were jammed for two hours until Verizon managed to block the incoming barrage, say many elderly people missed rides to the polls as a result. GOP Marketplace refuses to comment, but the Idaho telemarketing firm is cooperating with police. This embarrassment comes on the heels of the whole Republican astroturf exposure--a campaign to get press releases published on local "letters-to-the-editor" pages, with local signatures attached. (The latest such effort is so far in 101 local papers under 101 different names.) The Web and cgi-scripts made that piece of trickery possible, while good old Google and bloggers doomed it to exposure."

	"And now from NJ comes yet another embarrassing story. The national GOP set out to recruit a NJ newspaper editor, promising lots of public flattery, even a dinner with Bush. This may be a common way to woo donors, but this time the Republicans didn't want money--they wanted to rent his name for their press releases. They had the technology to woo him with a personalized phone message from Tom DeLay, but not the wit to realize--he's not Republican! And he printed the whole funny story up for his paper."

[ more plastic... ]    

show almost all: 66 commentsbest: 14 comments by oldest first (ignore threads) newest first highest scores first oldest first newest first (ignore threads)

1.  Does it reach beyond New Hampshire?   by JC65       at Sat 8 Feb 8:48pm score of 1     It seems the dirty trick was noticed at a phone bank in New Hampshire, but with a Republican PAC in Virginia and a telemarketing firm in Utah in on it it could easily involve many more states. Josh Marshall is apparently doing some journalism (something sadly lacking at many news outlets these days) and is teasing his results at his site by saying "One clue: it doesn't stop in New Hampshire. More to come on each of these questions very soon ..."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

4.  Whoops   by JC65       at Sat 8 Feb 9:14pm score of 1   in reply to comment 1     It's a telemarketing firm in Idaho, not Utah.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   9.  An easy mistake to make...   by BetsyDevine       at Sun 9 Feb 6:13am score of 1 irrelevant   in reply to comment 4     ...in fact, I suspect some astral link between Utah-ites dropping bowling balls from planes and Idaho-ites phoning me at dinner time. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

2.  Crime   by Anonymous Idiot       at Sat 8 Feb 8:51pm score of 1 astute     This embarrassment comes on the heels of the whole Republican astroturf exposure "Embarrassment"? It's a crime, under State and Federal law. Throw in conspiracy and election tampering, and you have a number of these people looking at long stints in Federal prison.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

25.  Re: Crime   by rough ashler       at Sun 9 Feb 9:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 2     It may be a crime, but who is going to decide that, and who would press the charges?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   26.  Re: Crime   by snarkism       at Sun 9 Feb 9:56pm score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 25     Ummm, the police and the courts? Who the hell else do you think is responsible for upholding the law? It's a pretty basic concept of how thw US is supposed to work. snarkism That's using your ass.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   28.  Re: Crime   by evilhenchdyke       at Sun 9 Feb 10:37pm score of 1   in reply to comment 25     Could be a set up for a class action suit on behalf of the voters who were disenfranchised illegally because there are people with room temperature IQs in powerful positions in American political parties. This sounds like it might be some dumb frat prank, if not for the fact that people have fought and died so we could have the right to vote. Would those who think it's no big deal feel the same way if they didn't get to vote because of some stupid prank?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   49.  Re: Crime   by SerpentSkirt       at Mon 10 Feb 9:38am score of 1   in reply to comment 28     I don't know if they could win a class action on those grounds. Is a person disenfranchised because they cannot get to the polls, even if they're indirectly prevented by means of dirty tricks? I could argue that they have the right to use an absentee ballot if they don't have an assured way to the voting booth. Hmmm. If a polling place was at the top of 4 flights of stairs it would clearly be infringing on the rights of the elderly and disabled -- and would be illegal. But if the polling place is in a reasonable location then it becomes the responsibility of the voter to arrange for transport. I think the phone banks and the firefighter's union -- those parties whose phones were actually disabled -- have a stronger case than the actual voters. And I would love to see a telemarketer smackdown. -SS   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   54.  Re: Crime   by Killjoy       at Mon 10 Feb 11:19am score of 1   in reply to comment 26     The police and the courts do not enforce and uphold the law as anyone who has had first-person dealings with either can tell you. The can be embarrassed into doing so on a case-by-case basis with high-profile media exposure. If you are the organizer of such a thing, be prepared to move to another state when the case is finished because the police and the courts will go back to their usual doings, only this time they'll know your name. Step 2. Smite enemies with burning pigs.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   60.  Re: Crime   by evilhenchdyke       at Mon 10 Feb 4:46pm score of 1   in reply to comment 49     I would love to see a telemarketer smackdown. Such clarity! Who WOULDN'T love to see a telemarketer smackdown? I concur wholeheartedly!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   61.  Re: Crime   by JDillinger       at Mon 10 Feb 5:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 49     I could argue that they have the right to use an absentee ballot if they don't have an assured way to the voting booth. OK, imagine this then: The night before an election, a coalition of hard-line Republicans rove around town and slash the tires of all the registered Democrats, keeping them from the poles. Property damage aside, if the culprits are caught, shouldn't they be punished? I mean, technically those Democrats could've used an absentee ballot. I mean, how reliable are cars anyways? Their batteries wear out, their engines run down, their tires get slashed... The point is that the system that the senior citizens were relying upon should not be considered any less reliable or legitimate than a station wagon or sports car. If there had been no physical tampering of the phone lines, they would've been able to vote just fine. But if the polling place is in a reasonable location then it becomes the responsibility of the voter to arrange for transport. Ahem, they DID arrange for transport. Thus the whole 'having people pick them up and drive them to the polls' thing. -JD --- "Every letter started broken hearted/ And ended way too soon." - The Wrens ---   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   63.  Re: Crime   by MAYORBOB       at Mon 10 Feb 7:13pm score of 1   in reply to comment 49     I could be wrong about this, but I believe that you have to show a need beyond it just being difficult to get to a polling place on election day to use an absentee ballot. You need to apply for one ahead of time and give a reason why you aren't available to make the trip to the polling place (e.g., business travel, military duty, vacation travel, etc.). In any case, you cannot apply for an absentee ballot on election day, when these voters were disenfranchised effectively. Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   70.  Re: Crime   by JC65       at Tue 11 Feb 4:29pm score of 1   in reply to comment 63     That varies state by state. Oregon encourages pre-voting by mail, while some states actually discourage absentee ballots.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   71.  Re: Crime   by cy guy       at Tue 11 Feb 4:55pm score of 1   in reply to comment 70     But is the case in NH, you have to be away on travel, or physically disabled. New Hampshire law generally requires that votes be cast in person at the polling place on election day. Voting by mail using the absentee voting process may be used if the voter certifies by affidavit that: 1. The voter will be absent on November 5th from the town or city where the voter is registered to vote; or 2. The voter can not appear in public on November 5th because of his or her observance of a religious commitment; or 3. The voter is unable to vote in person by reason of a physical disability. . "Everybody's plastic, but I love plastic. I want to be plastic."-Andy Warhol   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   50.  Re: Crime   by Stevis       at Mon 10 Feb 9:57am score of 1   in reply to comment 2     Hell, my first thought was that this is high treason. Legally, I'm sure I'm wrong. Is there anyone who knows the legal definition of treason well enough to offer opinion on whether it can be bent enough to even make it plausible? Maybe we should make election fraud treason, including the most severe penalties? Stevis We've got two lives, one we're given, and the other one we make.--Mary Chapin Carpenter   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

3.  The Quality of Justice   by charlies       at Sat 8 Feb 9:08pm score of 2 brilliant     It is time to reflect that Congress spent $40M or some godawful sum investigating one so-so Clinton blowjob. How much will they spend on this? All the world awaits... We're fighting in a war we lost before the war began.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

23.  Re: The Quality of Justice   by swalve       at Sun 9 Feb 9:16pm score of 1.5 funny   in reply to comment 3     My guess? 'bout three-fiddy. "If silence is golden, you couldn't raise a dime!"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   57.  Re: The Quality of Justice   by Djerrid       at Mon 10 Feb 11:55am score of 1   in reply to comment 3     a www.ardemgaz.com link Here you have more info on how much various independent counsels have cost over the last twenty years or so. The most telling is that the Lewinsky/Whitewater investigations cost $47 million while the Iran/Contra investigation cost $48.5 million. 'In cases of major discrepancy, it's always reality that's got it wrong.' -Douglas Adams   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

5.  Allright, we're jamming   by gordon shumway       at Sat 8 Feb 9:21pm score of 0.5 disingenuous     It seems everyone likes to jam up New Hampshire. In the 2000 Democratic primary Al Gore operatives created a traffic jam in order to thwart suburban Bradley supporters from making it to the polls.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

13.  Re: Allright, we're jamming   by musiquestar       at Sun 9 Feb 8:02am score of 2.5 astute   in reply to comment 5     How many supporters would you have to get to create an entire traffic jam? Personally, my voting area is so close to my home I never come near a freeway, and if I had to, I wouldn't check traffic reports before I left. I'm confused as to how the logistics of this would work, or how the first person to suggest it wouldn't be laughed out of the office. If it was on a much more massive scale than I'm seeing possible, someone go ahead and correct me. I don't see how anyone can cause-and-effect this as to being the only reason Gore won. Just like the telemarketing phone jams were, most likely, not the only reason Bush won. It did contribute, I'll allow that much. Your fantasies are unlikely, but beautiful.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   19.  Does this story make sense?   by BetsyDevine       at Sun 9 Feb 6:14pm score of 2 helpful   in reply to comment 5     According to the Sunday issue of the Union Leader (link elsewhere in thread) the Gore staffer allegedly "quoted" about this denies it happened. More to the point, how far is it from your house to your polling place? Would a traffic jam alleged (even in the story you cite) to have been created on a big interstate highway stop you from getting to a polling place, presumably pretty localsomeplace so close to your house? There's something wrong with this story, not that Democrats are virtuous, but that this particular story is fishy. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   20.  Re: Does this story make sense?   by jhe       at Sun 9 Feb 6:47pm score of 1   in reply to comment 19     The New York Sun is kind of like the Washington Times, except without the moonies. I don't think we're under any obligation to treat it as a serious news source. "Because a person's a person, no matter how small" -- Theodore Geisel   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   51.  Re: Does this story make sense?   by Megalon       at Mon 10 Feb 10:11am score of 1   in reply to comment 19     From the Phoenix: Gore team organized a caravan to clog highway I-93 with traffic so as to discourage potential Bradley voters from getting to the polls. How ludicrous does that sound? First of all, you can't just clog an interstate with a bunch of cars; large number of cars are par for the course on most major highways in urban areas. What, did they just park their cars five vehicles deep in all lanes? Please! Secondly, I highly doubt that any potential voter would have known or heard about any traffic jam on the interstate that day. Even if they did they would either ignore the report or take an alternate route.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   35.  Re: Does this story make sense?   by gordon shumway       at Mon 10 Feb 6:08am score of 1   in reply to comment 20     The Sun was citing this article, from the Boston Phoenix, which I believe to be a lefty paper.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   38.  Re: Does this story make sense?   by eidilon       at Mon 10 Feb 7:44am score of 1   in reply to comment 35     The Boston Phoenix is not a "paper". I've never met anyone who uses it for anything other than the classifieds...and they give it away for free now.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   44.  Re: Does this story make sense?   by tdahnsn       at Mon 10 Feb 8:16am score of 1   in reply to comment 38     I've used it to make Pirate hats! Arr! Why? What's the most callous thing you've said today?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   40.  Re: Allright, we're jamming   by dwoz       at Mon 10 Feb 8:02am score of 1   in reply to comment 5     The alleged traffic jam was said to be on I-93, I can only presume to mean the Manchester area. A 1/2 hour traffic jam on this road due to Boston commuters is entirely typical at about 5:00 pm. There would be no reason to go anywhere near this road if you were driving to vote, no matter where you live. dwoz   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

6.  class action, anyone?   by captainebo       at Sat 8 Feb 9:23pm score of 1     Let's assume that this is a fairly widespread crime the GOP is committing. Let's also assume that, because of this crime, or similar attempts to skew the polls, at least one contested Senate seat tipped Republican which could reasonably be expected to shift Democratic otherwise. As an American citizen who's been undoubtedly damaged by the GOP majority, what legal recourse do I have? Ebo "In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds." -Martin Luther King   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

14.  Re: class action, anyone?   by MC Nally       at Sun 9 Feb 8:14am score of 3 brilliant   in reply to comment 6     As an American citizen who's been undoubtedly damaged by the GOP majority, what legal recourse do I have? Vote in the next election? (and the one after that, and the one after that, ad infinitum..)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

7.  I like The Guardian   by Misch       at Sat 8 Feb 10:29pm score of 2 funny     I like the story from The Guardian: MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) - The executive director of the state Republican Party [Chuck McGee] resigned Friday after being accused of lying about hiring a telemarketing firm to jam Democratic phone lines on Election Day. . . . McGee did not answer his cell phone and could not immediately be reached for comment.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

8.  The hell with the technology.   by MAYORBOB       at Sat 8 Feb 11:27pm score of 2 interesting     Whoever the dim bulbs were in the New Hampshire Republican Party apparatus who thought that the phone jamming thing was a bright idea needs to have a remedial lesson in basic math. Up in New Hampshire, in politics, the math has a decided Republican bent to it. Lets look at the way the political offices are divided in New Hampshire: 1. Governor -- Republican. 2. U.S. Senator -- Two Republicans. 3. U.S. Representative -- Two Republicans 4. State Senators -- 18 Republicans and 6 Democrats 5. State Representatives -- 283 Republicans and 117 Democrats (does New Hampshire really need 400 elected state representatives?) Now, what this tells me is that hardly anybody is going to vote Democratic anyhow. So, why bother to pay money to have somebody do something illegal? Unless the spirit of Richard M. Nixon lives on. Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

11.  Re: The hell with the technology.   by pushall       at Sun 9 Feb 7:25am score of 1   in reply to comment 8     Actually its the spirit of Tammany Hall of New York and Mayor Richard Daily of Chicago along with Richard Nixon. The two parties have a long history of fixing elections in this country. Granted the last one was the most obvious fix we have seen in a while. The interesting question is. Is it because the fixers have become sloppy? Or is it because they have lost all respect for the electorate? Or because they no longer care about the consequences?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   18.  Re: The hell with the technology.   by superdude       at Sun 9 Feb 5:18pm score of 2 helpful   in reply to comment 11     Actually its the spirit of Tammany Hall of New York and Mayor Richard Daily of Chicago along with Richard Nixon Don't knock the Chicago machine. They'd pay people to go to the polls, sure, but at least the money was going directly to voters and not to political consultants. They cut out the middle-man and pass the savings on to you! And Chicago aldermen were much more accessible to their constituents than your average modern politician. You didn't have to be a fatcat to go to your alderman and have your parking tickets "fixed." At any rate, just because there have always been dirty tricks in elections doesn't mean we should shrug them off when they occur.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   33.  Re: The hell with the technology.   by dinkum       at Mon 10 Feb 5:41am score of 2 astute   in reply to comment 11     And what consequences might those be? We live in a country where the Presidency WAS STOLEN and it only took a few months before people stopped talking about it and moved on to thinking about the next reality TV show. Our government contains copious examples of the type of stuff we would use as reason to isolate another country due to its abusive government practices. But the very people who need to say, "This will NOT stand" are too busy slobbering over that new SUV they just MUST own to give a shit. So it continues. And will continue. Until people--EVERYONE--say ENOUGH and act like citizens of a democracy and put the doggies back on the leash. But it's not going to be easy because they are waaaaaay to used to being free running. Now, really knowing about and being critical of the government is being painted as "unpatriotic" and most people think being politically active is "someone else's job." Throw on any old thing and you'll look great.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   36.  Tom Tomorrow cartoon   by BetsyDevine       at Mon 10 Feb 6:39am score of 1   in reply to comment 33     He feels your pain, and even has a name for it: Outrage overload . And please don't mod me down as irrelevant before checking the cartoon yourself, because it is relevant. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   46.  Re: Tom Tomorrow cartoon (ot)   by cy guy       at Mon 10 Feb 8:37am score of 1   in reply to comment 36     He feels your pain, and even has a name for it: Outrage overload. And the guy in the 'toom doesn't even mention tax policy or the environment. And please don't mod me down as irrelevant before checking the cartoon yourself, because it is relevant. While it is relevant as response to Dinkum's comment, it's not particularly relevant to the thread in general. BTW - please warn people when linking to premium content on SALON. It's great that you can now get to it for free by watching a flash ad, but people won't know the specific content you're linking to is on the premium side unless you tell them. "Everybody's plastic, but I love plastic. I want to be plastic."-Andy Warhol   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   47.  Re: Tom Tomorrow cartoon (ot)   by BetsyDevine       at Mon 10 Feb 9:08am score of 1   in reply to comment 46     Sorry, folks. Props to cy guy for kindly help to the newbie. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

10.  For balance, a Democrat dirty trick (alleged)   by BetsyDevine       at Sun 9 Feb 7:08am score of 1     Today's Manchester Union Leader has a powerful editorial titled "Dirty Politics: What ever happened to running on ideas?" . They deplore the Republican's phone bank tricks, and talk about a traffic jame Gore staffers allegedly created to keep Bradley voters away from the polls in the Democratic primary. The Union Leader editorial says the Gore staffer now denies the remarks attributed to him, but you can read them online in the Providence Phoenix. The problem here isn't that Republicans are 5-e evil but that the polarization, anger, and ruthless rhetoric that increasingly mark US politics can make victory seem more important than ethics. The trouble with technology (as I sit here typing on my beloved laptop) is that it lets one angry person with money make big trouble, without having to get an okay from anyone else who might have acted as a restraining influence. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

22.  Re: For balance, a Democrat dirty trick (alleged)   by snarkism       at Sun 9 Feb 7:46pm score of 2 astute   in reply to comment 10     The problem here isn't that Republicans are 5-e evil but that the polarization, anger, and ruthless rhetoric that increasingly mark US politics can make victory seem more important than ethics. But why is it that when Democrats are accused of this, there seems to be no substantiating evidence, and is blown out of all proportion? While meantime, Republicans, time and time again, lie, misrepresent and manipulate - not just opinions, but the very electoral process. Sure, the Democrats are pretty dirty, and I'm not a supporter of them. however, I don't know how any 'balanced' observer could conclude that the "Democrats are just as bad" when it comes to election tampering. Add it up: The election results in Florida, Republican rent-a-crowds, SCOTUS making dubious decisions, black voters being turned away, military votes being falsified, astroturfing letter campaigns, pro-gun 'researchers' falsifying data and using internet pseudonyms to make themselves look good, and the electronic voting systems being owned by conservative Republiblican linked organizations. It just goes on and on. I have only scratched the surface here. Something is VERY wrong here. While the Democrats are dirty, they are dirty in an entirely different way to this. It seems the Republicans don't have any sense of what an electoral system is all about. It's "win at any cost", no matter how illegal or unethical. Can you point me to any evidence that the Democrats have come even close to this kind of stuff? If not, you are merely being an apologist, not balanced. snarkism That's using your ass.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   45.  Re: For balance, a Democrat dirty trick (alleged)   by dangerous richard       at Mon 10 Feb 8:27am score of 1   in reply to comment 22     ah yes snarky, but you see the republicans have GOD on their side and as we all know, when you have GOD on your side it's ok to do all that kind of stuff. if they didn't do it to win and stay in power, why then the EVIL people would be running things wouldn't they? look mommy, there's an airplane up in the sky...   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   34.  Traffic jam story a joke, says alleged source   by BetsyDevine       at Mon 10 Feb 6:01am score of 1   in reply to comment 10     Here it is, the guy who supposedly engineered the traffic jam categorically denies the story. He says there was no traffic jam, and no planned traffic jam. The Gore motorcade, like any other motorcade, may have slowed some traffic temporarily. I'm amazed that the Union Leader still reproached Democrats for this supposed dirty trick a day after publishing this interview, which very convincingly denies it happened. Don't you think they ought to have to find at least one other source, maybe one Bradley Democrat who got stuck in a traffic jam, before they push this story again? Ah, the wonderful world of "balance" in political reporting. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

12.  As a New Hampshire Democrat   by ddp42       at Sun 9 Feb 7:30am score of 3 interesting     I can attest to another deceptive practice in the last campaign. I got a call from someone who said they were conducting a survey (pretty common occurrence here in election years) and asking for whom I would be voting. When I responded that I would be voting for the Democratic candidate, I was then treated to the caller reading a diatribe listing various reasons I should vote against that candidate. Some "survey." The likeliest outcome will be to make it extremely difficult for honest pollsters to achieve any valid results from their efforts, as more and more people simply refuse to respond to surveys at all. Of course, if Republicans and Democrats become equally resistant to polls, it might not matter too much, but if it's more often Democrats who are subject to deceptive practices like the one I described and so more often Democrats who become poll-shy, poll results might have a bias that isn't immediately apparent. Not all flowers open in the morning.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

15.  A New Hampshire Democrat? We must be related!   by BetsyDevine       at Sun 9 Feb 8:34am score of 2 informative   in reply to comment 12     I grew up in Manchester, NH, which is probably why this phone-jamming story caught my eye to begin with. When I was just a kid, my dad used to take me along to the kind of get-out-the-vote efforts the Republicans were trying to foul up. We're talking about the old days, before Idaho phone banks and "paid volunteers," which both parties are using now for all I know. In those days, it was an actual smoke-filled room. I remember one elderly man who, very meaningfully, showed me a dime with Roosevelt's picture on it. He talked about the Depression, what it was like to be hungry, and see your kids hungry, and have no work--and then the New Deal came in and he got a job. "That's why I'm a Democrat," he told me. "That's why I'm here, working, every election day." "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   21.  Push Poll   by logan       at Sun 9 Feb 7:00pm score of 2.5 interesting   in reply to comment 12     What you got is called a push poll. The idea is to get you talking politics, and then push their ideas on you while pretending that they want your opinion. A script goes something like this: "Have you decided who you're going to vote for?" Yes "May I ask who?" Bob Democrat "Would you still vote for him if you knew that he was pro-flag burning, pro-abortion, and is a practising homosexual with ties to Osama bin-Ladin who has sworn to bankrupt Social Security and raise your taxes?" I've received a few of these. My standard response is something along these lines: "Ah, a push poll. A particularly sleazy campaign tactic where a candidate's staff pretends they're interested in my opinion in order to promote their candidate. Where are you calling from again?" Generally, they get very confused, and madly backtrack. Now, I know I'm slamming the GOP, but the Dems have never tried this on me. Dianne Feinstein used an autodialer in the last election cycle, but that's it. "Spockmate!"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   32.  I'm no fan of the Republicans, but...   by Arkestra       at Mon 10 Feb 3:34am score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 21     ...if you always answer "Bob Democrat" to the caller, then even if the Democrats were doing a push poll, you'd never know! Now, I know I'm slamming the GOP, but the Dems have never tried this on me. Any Republicans out there who've had this happen to them? I'm just curious... Down pokey quaint streets in Cambridge / Cycles our distant spastic heritage   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   48.  Re: I'm no fan of the Republicans, but...   by grimbil       at Mon 10 Feb 9:27am score of 1   in reply to comment 32     Any Republicans on Plastic?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   55.  Re: I'm no fan of the Republicans, but...   by logan       at Mon 10 Feb 11:24am score of 1   in reply to comment 32     -1 disingenuous. But since I have to spell it out for you, "Bob Democrat" is a FICTIONAL name I used in this MADE-UP conversation to indicate that I'd be voting Democratic. I've had only two people call to ask how I was voting, and they were both GOP. The Dems have called me twice: Once with a pre-recorded message from my Diane Feinstein (I was so cheesed I thought about voting Green just to spite her), and another asking only if I'd voted yet. I had, so there was no point in them pushing. Now, I'm not saying that the Dems wouldn't have tried the Push Poll trick on me simply because they're better people and not eeeeevil to the core like the GOP, I'm saying that being as I'm a registered democrat, it's never happened to me. If they did, I'd be just as pissed off, as it's see above) a really sleazy campaign tactic. "Spockmate!"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   56.  Re: I'm no fan of the Republicans, but...   by Arkestra       at Mon 10 Feb 11:42am score of 1   in reply to comment 55     "Bob Democrat" a fictional name? Well I never! Of course, I might have been using the name for exactly the same placeholding purposes as you... Give me the benefit of the doubt on that, please, and read my post again if you can be arsed. Personally speaking I'm off to the pub now so apologies for whatever offence I appear to have caused... Down pokey quaint streets in Cambridge / Cycles our distant spastic heritage   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   30.  Bias in telephone polls   by hl2g       at Sun 9 Feb 11:31pm score of 1.5 interesting   in reply to comment 12     I heard a story on NPR not too long ago about how telephone polls (particularly those attempting to be objective) are becoming biased in favor of Democrats, because Republicans are more likely to have caller-ID and call blocking of phone center calls (which includes both telemarketers and people doing surveys). Sorry I can't find a link on NPR for this. But it is an issue being studied. I agree there are also a lot of push polls, and this provides yet another way in which the Democrats would be more heavily hit by such polls.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   64.  Starting to look like a bunch of fun house mirrors   by BetsyDevine       at Tue 11 Feb 8:19am score of 1   in reply to comment 12     Your "push poll" phone calls are part of this same story. And, hilariously, so is the NJ GOP blooper of trying to get a liberal newsman to help them astroturf. A former NJ politician named Allen Raymond may be the missing link in all three stories. www.politicsnh.com is following the phone-bank scandal, and has some interesting info on GOPMarketplace, the firm that paid Idaho telemarketers to jam NH phones. A related site's article headed "Consultant with N.J. ties implicated as New Hampshire campaign trickster" dishes the New Jersey dirt on political phone bank scandals, singling out Allen Raymond, who now heads GOP Marketplace, as a likely suspect. The NJ Attorney General handed down a 20-count indictment against 2002 Senate candidate James Treffinger for a scheme to deceive Jersey voters with false negative phone calls about his opponents. Speculation abounds that Raymond, who was working for Trafficant, is the "consultant" mentioned in the indictment. Raymond, once a field representative for the Republican National Committee, is currently Executive Director of the Republican Leadership Council. If I'm not mistaken, that's the group whose approach to a NJ newspaper guy ended up in his paper--and, of course, here in Plastic. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   66.  Oops, subtract one of those fun house mirrors...   by BetsyDevine       at Tue 11 Feb 9:51am score of 1   in reply to comment 64     The Republican Leadership Council isn't part of the Republican National Committee, although Allen Raymond has ties to both. I sorted out the NH/NJ push-poll story a little better in my blog. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   68.  Re: Starting to look like a bunch of fun house   by cy guy       at Tue 11 Feb 2:37pm score of 1   in reply to comment 64     When you say he was working for "Trafficant" in last sentence of the fourth paragraph, did you really mean Treffinger again? If not this is even more complicated than anyone could have imagined. "Everybody's plastic, but I love plastic. I want to be plastic."-Andy Warhol   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   69.  Re: Starting to look like a bunch of fun house   by BetsyDevine       at Tue 11 Feb 2:55pm score of 1   in reply to comment 68     You're right, I really meant Treffinger again. Too bad, it would have been funnier if it were Trafficant. "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

16.  Actually, This Is Good News   by uncarved block       at Sun 9 Feb 10:35am score of 1.5 intriguing     Politics is, and likely will always be, a very dirty business, and every election somebody is bound to think they can break the law and not get caught-- especially when it comes to fundraising, as both parties have gutted the FEC so much that only the stupidest and most obvious incidents will be prosecuted. This seems one such case; I mean, the first rule of white collar crime is to leave no paper (or electronic) trail, and this is the equivalent of yanking your opponents signs out of yard in full daylight-- dumb, dumb dumb.       But as my title indicates, this is great. A century ago (or less), this would have been actual physical intimidation, of candidates or voters, and nobody would ever have seen the inside of a court as a result. Stunts like this are being pulled because the dead vote, and repeat voting, have mostly been eliminated, meaning that real live voters have to be courted or thwarted. Small progress, but then progress is usually glacial in social institutions.       On the matter of astroturfing, balance impels me to note that unions might well be said to have begun the process. Sure, you can claim your x-thousand members support a candidate, but the actual percentage who end up voting the union pick could be significantly lower-- how many members of unions that opposed Reagan voted for him, for instance? No, it's not exactly the same, but should be included for context.       Kalet seems to have had the notion of the 'donor class' thrust upon him. Somebody, perhaps David Brooks, first brought up this concept-- that a certain class/income of people seem to be targeted (and rewarded) by fundraising. What happened is doubtless embarrassing, but isn't going to stop either party from looking for similar donors. (For a current example, the Bush campaign was able to break fundraising records by rewarding supporters for raising hundreds of mid-sized donations, effectively subcontracting out what politicians lovingly call "dialing for dollars". Expect the Democrats to follow suit, if not in 2004, then by 2008; it's easy to imagine Hillary Clinton setting up a similar practice, given her popularity with a certain level of well off Democrats). Eschew Obfuscation Assiduously   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

27.  Re: Actually, This Is Good News   by Mad Professor       at Sun 9 Feb 10:13pm score of 2 succinct   in reply to comment 16     Not to mention that 500 years ago we would all be farming turnips and wearing hair-shirts in our sod-homes, thanking God for the mostly beneficient rule of the divinely mandated aristocracy. (we should fix the problems rather than count our blessings)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   31.  Touche   by uncarved block       at Sun 9 Feb 11:42pm score of 2 succinct   in reply to comment 27     I have the historian's problem of looking backwards too much, and you're right to call me on it. To be succinct (for once), I thought it was progress that this asshole might see jail time for something that might not have been prosecuted even 30 years ago . . . Eschew Obfuscation Assiduously   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

29.  Hoax?   by drmarcj       at Sun 9 Feb 10:45pm score of 1     Is it me or does the topic seem wrong? Where's the hoax here? 'Fraud' or 'theft' would be a better topic. I'm just sayin'...   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

37.  Glad this was slotted under "Hoaxes"   by rdww       at Mon 10 Feb 7:34am score of 1     ... along with that other bit of sophistry quoted above... "This embarrassment comes on the heels of the whole Republican astroturf exposure" Republicans were... gulp... organizing letter-to-the-editor writing campaigns? Monstrous! Sometimes Officer Barbrady is right... "Nothing to see here folks... just move along."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

39.  Is there a...   by BatGuano       at Mon 10 Feb 7:52am score of 1   in reply to comment 37     ..."Republicans Against Democracy" category? Yeah, the astroturf thing just shows that Republicans have a hard time writing original letters. The phone-jammin' thing shows that Republicans would just like to stop people from voting. your radio friend, Bat Guano   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   41.  Mmmmmm, sophistry!   by BetsyDevine       at Mon 10 Feb 8:03am score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 37     Republicans were... gulp... organizing letter-to-the-editor writing campaigns? What is your point? * The Republican astroturf scandal was exactly the same as a normal letter-to-the-editor campaign. * Their phone-bank trickery to keep people from voting was exactly the same as those old-fashioned get-out-the-vote calls of yesteryear? Congratulations! If you can't see any difference--or if you can see the difference but hope to boost your own side of the debate by confusing the issue--a well-paid job waits for you in "public relations." "making trouble today for a better tomorrow"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   42.  President Bush is Demonstrating Genuine Leadership   by rmurf62       at Mon 10 Feb 8:12am score of 1   in reply to comment 37     Republicans were... gulp... organizing letter-to-the-editor writing campaigns? Monstrous! Um, no. Republicans were abusing a forum for public opinion. (So was Planned Parenthood, but it's still an odious tactic.) The "laugh track" analogy makes perfect sense to me: something presented as a genuine human response which is obviously fake, used to hype ideas that should be able to stand on their own merits. Lame political policy, like lame comedy writing, shouldn't need phony "sweetening" to appear funny/compelling. (And as Mayorbob points out upstream...why in the hell were republican pollsters trying to stop democratic voters in one of the most republican states in the country?) YYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGH!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   52.  Yeah, but they are hardly original   by jbou       at Mon 10 Feb 10:21am score of 1   in reply to comment 37     The Republicans are really bad at this grassroots thing. They had to pay the people to protest down in Florida after the elections. They have to reward the letter senders(they aren't writers since the letter is already written) with GOP points that they can use at the GOP store. Leave grassroots to the people who are good at it, you conservatives just look silly when you try to play the victim, let's try to remember, you are the opressor. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   58.  Grassroots protest v. political propaganda   by rmurf62       at Mon 10 Feb 12:03pm score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 52     Leave grassroots to the people who are good at it, you conservatives just look silly when you try to play the victim, let's try to remember, you are the opressor. But remember, contemporary politics is all about perception. IMHO, one of the reasons the republicans have been so successful in the past few years is that, through Karl Rove they've gotten very, very good at image manipulation. They've managed to co-opt the elements of populist grass-roots protest and make them look genuine - i.e., the 2000 election "people's protest" in Miami manned by paid republican pollsters. (Kind of like food in TV commercials that looks much, much better than real food, when it's in fact sprayed with nail polish & shellac for the cameras.) And also keep in mind another unfortunate strength of the Bush administration: if you keep repeating bullshit with enough frequency, the public will eventually believe it. YYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGH!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   62.  Re: Grassroots protest v. political propaganda   by Irish       at Mon 10 Feb 7:13pm score of 1   in reply to comment 58     The CNN article you linked to is reporting on a poll that showed 75% of respondents believe war is inevitable. Now, I'm not sure what you were intimating by providing the link, as you did not make that clear, but if what you meant is that by "repeating bullshit with enough frequency" 75% of the public now believes war is necessary, then you are mistaken about what you read.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   65.  Re: Grassroots protest v. political propaganda   by rmurf62       at Tue 11 Feb 8:24am score of 1   in reply to comment 62     I was looking for a GW Bush quote, and couldn't find one in a rush. My bad. My point in the link was that the US public (& most of the world) now believe that war is inevitable because this administration has been banging war drums incessantly for > 1 year. YYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGH!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   67.  Re: Grassroots protest v. political propaganda   by Irish       at Tue 11 Feb 1:29pm score of 1   in reply to comment 65     Okay, I can see and pretty much agree with your point there. Thanks for clarifying.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]