Posts Tagged elections

Activist Wants Police Called On Lawful Carriers In Polling Places

From USA Today:

Gun-control groups are launching a “voter protection campaign” to keep guns out of the polling booths this Election Day.

The social media campaign is encouraging voters who see people with firearms to text “Guns down” to 91990. Reports will be sent to nonpartisan election protection experts, who may contact authorities or send a lawyer to the polling place.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Texas AG Allows Armed Election Judges

From Bearing Arms:

Two things tell us that we live in a free society: elections and private firearm ownership. Neither of those things really takes place in despotic societies. Some might create the trappings of democracy, but it’s funny how often the party in power wins those elections despite widespread opposition. None, however, are big on guns.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

DHS Probed Georgia’s Voting System

From The Daily Caller:

Georgian IT specialists traced 10 such scans back to a DHS IP address. DHS officials confirmed the attacks came from an unnamed contractor attached to the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia, a part of DHS.

FLETCO officials have refuse to identify the contractor and the agency did not respond to a DCNF inquiry about the intrusions.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Wendy Davis Only Said She Supported Gun Rights to Get Elected

From The Washington Examiner:

“There is one thing that I would do differently in that campaign, and it relates to the position that I took on open-carry,” Davis told the San Antonio Express-News on Monday. “I made a quick decision on that with a very short conversation with my team and it wasn’t really in keeping with what I think is the correct position on that issue.”

Davis added that she does support “people’s right to own and to bear arms in appropriate situations,” but fears that open carry would be used “to intimidate and cause fear.”

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Study Shows Foreign Nationals Voted in 2008 and 2010

From Judicial Watch:

Now the CCES confirms this, specifically that large numbers of foreign nationals vote in U.S. elections. The “participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections,” according to a mainstream newspaper article written by two of the political science college professors that conducted the study. “Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress,” the researchers write. “Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.”

Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races, the professors confirm. More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote and some actually voted. Based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010. This is outrageous, to say that least, and illustrates the need to clean up voter rolls in this country.

, , ,

No Comments

Nigeria: Opting Out of an Insurgency

Nigeria: Opting Out of an Insurgency is republished with permission of Stratfor.”

Summary

Editor’s Note: This is the third installment in a three-part series on militant activity in Nigeria. 

In some ways, the future of northern Nigeria’s counterinsurgency rests in the hands of Nigerian voters. If President Goodluck Jonathan is elected for another term, the Boko Haram campaign will intensify. If Jonathan loses, the presidency would go to a northerner, who would be better suited to developing the political, social and economic relationships needed to wage an effective counterinsurgency.

Analysis

Of course, the presidential election is a national contest, not a regional one, and so the consequences stretch far beyond northern Nigeria. Though Boko Haram has captured the attention of international media, it is not the only militant group with which Abuja contends, nor is it the only group that has a vested interest in the election’s outcome. If Jonathan is not re-elected and Niger Delta militants lose their political patronage, they will probably attack oil infrastructure in the country’s southwest, as they did in the mid-2000s. Nigeria conceivably could see two active insurgencies, depending on how the election plays out.

However, it is still possible to placate Niger Delta militants even if Jonathan loses. If Niger Delta officials are appointed to senior posts in the new administration, they could keep their patronage networks intact. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Elections Don’t Matter, Institutions Do

Elections Don’t Matter, Institutions Do is republished with permission of Stratfor.”

By Robert D. Kaplan

Many years ago, I visited Four Corners in the American Southwest. This is a small stone monument on a polished metal platform where four states meet. You can walk around the monument in the space of a few seconds and stand in four states: Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah. People lined up to do this and have their pictures taken by excited relatives. To walk around the monument is indeed a thrill, because each of these four states has a richly developed tradition and identity that gives these borders real meaning. And yet no passports or customs police are required to go from one state to the other.

Well, of course that’s true, they’re only states, not countries, you might say. But the fact that my observation is a dull commonplace doesn’t make it any less amazing. To be sure, it makes it more amazing. For as the late Harvard Professor Samuel P. Huntington once remarked, the genius of the American system lies less in its democracy per se than in its institutions. The federal and state system featuring 50 separate identities and bureaucracies, each with definitive land borders — that nevertheless do not conflict with each other — is unique in political history. And this is not to mention the thousands of counties and municipalities in America with their own sovereign jurisdictions. Many of the countries I have covered as a reporter in the troubled and war-torn developing world would be envious of such an original institutional arrangement for governing an entire continent. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Both Colorado Senators Recalled!

The New York Times has the story:

The recall elections ousted two Democratic state senators, John Morse and Angela Giron, and replaced them with Republicans. Both defeats were painful for Democrats – Mr. Morse’s because he had been Senate president, and Ms. Giron’s because she represented a heavily Democratic, working-class slice of southern Colorado.

 

, , , , ,

No Comments

U.S. Presidential Elections in Perspective

U.S. Presidential Elections in Perspective is republished with permission of Stratfor.”

By George Friedman

The U.S. presidential election will be held a week from today, and if the polls are correct, the outcome will be extraordinarily close. Many say that the country has never been as deeply divided. In discussing the debates last week, I noted how this year’s campaign is far from the most bitter and vitriolic. It might therefore be useful also to consider that while the electorate at the moment appears evenly and deeply divided, unlike what many say, that does not reveal deep divisions in our society — unless our society has always been deeply divided.

Since 1820, the last year an uncontested election was held, most presidential elections have been extremely close. Lyndon B. Johnson received the largest percentage of votes any president has ever had in 1964, taking 61.5 percent of the vote. Three other presidents broke the 60 percent mark: Warren G. Harding in 1920, Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1936 and Richard Nixon in 1972.

Nine elections saw a candidate win between 55 and 60 percent of the vote: Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, Theodore Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan. Only Eisenhower broke 55 percent twice. Candidates who received less than 50 percent of the vote won 18 presidential elections. These included Lincoln in his first election, Woodrow Wilson in both elections, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Nixon in his first election and Bill Clinton in both his elections.  Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , ,

No Comments

Character, Policy and the Selection of Leaders

Character, Policy and the Selection of Leaders is republished with permission of Stratfor.”

By George Friedman

The end of Labor Day weekend in the United States traditionally has represented the beginning of U.S. presidential campaigns, though these days the campaign appears to be perpetual. In any case, Americans will be called on to vote for president in about two months, and the question is on what basis they ought to choose.

Many observers want to see intense debate over the issues, with matters of personality pushed to the background. But personality can also be viewed as character, and in some ways character is more important than policy in choosing a country’s leadership.

Policy and Personality

A candidate for office naturally lays out his plans should he win the election. Those plans, which may derive from an ideology or from personal values, represent his public presentation of what he would do if he won office. An ideology is a broadly held system of beliefs — an identifiable intellectual movement with specific positions on a range of topics. Personal values are more idiosyncratic than those derived from an ideology, but both represent a desire to govern from principle and policy. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , ,

No Comments

U.S. Midterm Elections, Obama and Iran

U.S. Midterm Elections, Obama and Iran is republished with permission of STRATFOR.

By George Friedman

We are a week away from the 2010 U.S. midterm elections. The outcome is already locked in. Whether the Republicans take the House or the Senate is close to immaterial. It is almost certain that the dynamics of American domestic politics will change. The Democrats will lose their ability to impose cloture in the Senate and thereby shut off debate. Whether they lose the House or not, the Democrats will lose the ability to pass legislation at the will of the House Democratic leadership. The large majority held by the Democrats will be gone, and party discipline will not be strong enough (it never is) to prevent some defections.

Should the Republicans win an overwhelming victory in both houses next week, they will still not have the votes to override presidential vetoes. Therefore they will not be able to legislate unilaterally, and if any legislation is to be passed it will have to be the result of negotiations between the president and the Republican Congressional leadership. Thus, whether the Democrats do better than expected or the Republicans win a massive victory, the practical result will be the same.

When we consider the difficulties President Barack Obama had passing his health care legislation, even with powerful majorities in both houses, it is clear that he will not be able to push through any significant legislation without Republican agreement. The result will either be gridlock or a very different legislative agenda than we have seen in the first two years. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

DOJ Accused of Stalling on MOVE Act for Voters in Military

Oct. 26, 2004: U.S. Army Sgt. George Scheufele prepares to mail in his completed absentee ballot after voting in the American Presidential and Congressional election while at Camp Eagle in the battle-torn Sadr City neighborhood of Baghdad, Iraq.

“The Department of Justice is ignoring a new law aimed at protecting the right of American soldiers to vote, according to two former DOJ attorneys who say states are being encouraged to use waivers to bypass the new federal Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act.

The MOVE Act, enacted last October, ensures that servicemen and women serving overseas have ample time to get in their absentee ballots. The result of the DOJ’s alleged inaction in enforcing the act, say Eric Eversole and J. Christian Adams — both former litigation attorneys for the DOJ’s Voting Section — could be that thousands of soldiers’ ballots will arrive too late to be counted.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/28/exclusive-doj-stalls-voter-registration-law-military/

, , , ,

No Comments