Petition to do a Revote of the Arizona Dem. Primaries because of voter suppression has been made

[Cal33]

100,000 petitions are needed by April 21. This number has already been surpassed - 101,651.
Let's see how it will turn out.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/do-revote-arizona-primary-due-voter-suppression

[Gothmog]

1. This is very unrealistic and will not happen

The ordering of a revote is a very rare remedy that will not happen in this case. I volunteer in voter protection efforts and have worked with the Texas Democratic Party on vote id issues. I have been following the Texas voter id case very closely and that case would not give you much hope for this remedy. The DOJ sued Texas on the voter id law. Even though 7 federal judges have ruled against the Texas voter id law, we were stuck with in during the March 1 Texas primary. The DOJ and the Texas Party tried to get the 5th circuit to rule on this law before the primary but the court ignored their filings. See http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/SupplementalAuthoritiesFiledbyAppelleesMsImaniClarkandTexasLeagueofYoungVotersEducationFund1.pdf

Right now, the DOJ and the private plaintiffs are asking the SCOTUS to lift the stay of the 5th Cir See
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Veasey-ApplicationToVacateStay03252016.pdf In addition to the DOJ, one of the lead plaintiff attorneys, Chad Dunn, also happens to be the Texas Democratic Party outside counsel (Chad is representing Congressman Marc Veasey in this case)

It is not that easy to fight voter suppression. The remedy of a revote is not going to happen

[Cal33]

8. I hope things will turn out differently in Arizona. What happens in one state does not necessarily

have to happen in another.

[Gothmog]

48. In the real world, re-votes are almost never ordered

I looked and the cases of re-votes are very few and far between and require proof of fraudulent ballots stuffing.

The good news is that the DOJ will investigate this but I doubt that there are legal grounds sufficient to order revote. Bush and company gutted the DOJ voting rights and civil rights sections. AG Holder did a good job of rebuilding these sections and the current head of the DOJ voting rights section is a former law professor who did the study showing no in person voter impersonation. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/for-governments-top-lawyer-on-voting-rights-presidential-election-has-already-begun/2016/01/13/b9942d36-b953-11e5-829c-26ffb874a18d_story.html

The Justice Department has brought on a well-respected election law professor to oversee its voting section and lead the department’s battles over voting rights during this presidential election year.

Justin Levitt of the Loyola Law School in Los Angeles has begun serving as the deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division at a critical time, with Justice Department lawyers litigating several voting-rights cases across the country. Levitt will hold the position, which does not require Senate confirmation, until next January.

Levitt, 41, takes charge as the Justice Department awaits high-profile court decisions on voting rights in North Carolina and Texas. The presidential election this year will be the first since a divided Supreme Court invalidated a critical component of the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965. Also, more restrictive voting laws will be in effect in 15 states for the first time in a race for the White House.

“The biggest change since the last presidential election is unquestionably the Supreme Court’s decision [on voting rights],” Levitt said in an interview in his fifth-floor office at Justice Department headquarters.

Levitt also makes a practice of flying without his drivers license just to prove that the TSA rules do not require one of the limited number of voter ids mandated by gop state legislatures.

I am confident that there will be some DOJ investigation but it is almost impossible to order revotes

[Blue Meany]

36. Perhaps, though, they can allow those who were

unable to vote to do so on another date.

Of course there will always be opposition. A court order to allow this in one county in Illinois where there were not enough ballots for a lot of people was overturned by the intervention of the (Democratic) Attorney General who argued that allowing people to vote after election day was unfair and inconsistent (equal rights and all that). Of course, not letting them vote at all is even less fair, so some people suspected it was because she was active in the Hillary campaign.

[geek tragedy]

2. Lol, no. Especially after all of the Bernie people gloating

over the NV chaos and blaming it on 'lazy' Clinton supporters who have to work on Saturdays.

[PowerToThePeople]

5. So, if they had to work

why did they volunteer to be a delegate? Not as though they were not informed of when the next stage in the caucus process would be occurring.



I do not buy your narrative.

[geek tragedy]

7. The Arizona vote is over. If Bernie people want to stamp

their feet and sign petitions demanding the impossible, it won't accomplish anything but allowing them to express their sanctimony.

[PowerToThePeople]

10. When states make voting impossible, it’s for a very clear reason

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/24/what_happened_in_arizona_wasnt_an_accident_when_states_make_voting_impossible_its_for_a_very_clear_reason/

What happened in Arizona wasn’t an accident: When states make voting impossible, it’s for a very clear reason

Arizona residents were forced to wait hours on line in order to vote in this week's primary. Some were turned away.

Once again, an American election was unnecessarily thwarted by long lines and not enough ballots. To say there’s no excuse for such nonsense, especially in a nation that prides itself on its representative democracy and, yes, its exceptionalism, is understating the problem. This time around, it happened during the Arizona primary where countless voters were forced to stand in lines for hours, while others were told they weren’t registered in the first place.

In Maricopa County alone, election officials infuriatingly reduced the number of polling places by 70 percent. Such a drastic reduction meant there was only one polling place per 21,000 residents of the highly populated Phoenix metroplex. Officials including County Recorder Helen Purcell (a Republican) said the cutbacks were due to budgetary concerns. Uh-huh. Of course, I doubt members of either party who were forced to wait in five-hour lines would’ve minded the additional expense to facilitate our most basic right as Americans. Elsewhere, independent voters who switched their registration to the Democratic Party were allegedly told they hadn’t registered at all, forcing them to sit out the closed primary.

It’s yet another example of why the federal government should take over the election process. Local and state officials are clearly in too far over their heads to handle a task of this magnitude, as evidenced by the reality that every time we hold an election in this country, one numbskull or another flummoxes the whole thing — intentionally or not.

“Intentionally” is an appropriate word here since many of the electoral shenanigans at the state level are, indeed, intentional.

(more @ link)

[geek tragedy]

11. Yes, Arizona needs to fix that by November.

But the Bernie people latching on to this in hopes of voiding the votes for Clinton there aren't fooling anyone but themselves.

[PowerToThePeople]

12. I do not think anyone wants to void any votes

They just want all votes counted.

Isn't that what democracy is?

[geek tragedy]

13. Votes were all counted. nt

[PowerToThePeople]

14. Link?

[Cal33]

20. The behavior of Republican-lites does remind me of that of Republican-heavies.

[geek tragedy]

34. If the Bernie people had ever demanded action to redress

vote suppression in a state that he won, there would be a possible argument that this is a matter of principle.

But, nope. It comes down to Bernie fans making excuses and inventing conspiracy theories and making absurd demands every time he loses.


He lost Arizona. Get over it.

[KingFlorez]

15. The votes were counted

Clinton won, Sanders lost. Get over it.

[PowerToThePeople]

16. Proof or gtfo.

eom

[KingFlorez]

18. Check the results

http://apps.azsos.gov/election/2016/PPE/Results/PPE2016Results.htm

Sanders lost. The results show it very clearly. Is he supposed to be declared the winner even though he received less votes?

[PowerToThePeople]

21. Fail.

You appear to take the Stalinist view of elections.

Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. - Joseph Stalin

[KingFlorez]

23. When you bring up Stalin, you have lost it

There is no evidence that votes were thrown out, known at all, yet that is what you are implying. There were issues with having enough polling places, but I've heard nothing about votes being thrown out or not counted.

Bernie Stalin, oops Sanders, needs to get the hell on.

[PowerToThePeople]

24. Not counted

Not being allowed to vote has the same result as your vote not being counted.

I stand by my post.

[KingFlorez]

25. Whatever

At the end of the day, Clinton still won. End of debate.

[PowerToThePeople]

27. fail

my ignore list just grew by one.

[KingFlorez]

29. Good riddance

[Cal33]

22. Please see my Post #20 just above.

[daleanime]

26. And you're happy with the results....

so the problems need to remain where they are.

[Cal33]

31. I guarantee they'll not be so happy if the same thing happened to them.

[geek tragedy]

35. Do you care about voter suppression or are you upset

that Bernie lost?

We know the answer. Which is why the idiotic petitions to void hundreds of thousands of legally cast votes are a transparent partisan temper tantrum completely void of any principle.

[Cal33]

37. I care about both. Cheating shouldn't be happening at all. It shouldn't even be a problem.

[geek tragedy]

38. There was no cheating on the Democratic side

There was vote suppression, but it applied across the board.

There will be no do over.

[CentralCoaster]

39. Yup. And in these times if it can happen, it's because someone wants it to happen.

It seems to be that fixing it would be very simple, so that it continues to happen suggests that the broken system is serving someone or some group.

[geek tragedy]

32. The problems need to be fixed.

By November.

[geek tragedy]

33. No one is saying don't fix the problems.

They are saying that the votes that were cast should not and will not be voided because Bernie people aren't happy with the result.

[geek tragedy]

41. I am not saying only Sanders supporters were harmed by this.

No reason to think they were affected more than Clinton supporters were.

This being Arizona, a lot of Trump and Cruz supporters also got hurt by it.

There needs to be accountability. If there's evidence of crimes, they should be prosecuted.

[sweetloukillbot]

42. The areas with the least number of polling places were heavily Democratic and minority

They have favored Clinton. Republicans are upset because Rubio got a large number of early votes and had dropped out by the time of the primary.
It was fucked all around. I am not happy with the way it happened and I want Purcell, Reagan and Ducey held accountable, but it wasn't a conspiracy against Sanders. And I don't believe the results would have been any different.

[geek tragedy]

43. I doubt the outcome would have changed much, if at all.

It's not like he was ahead in the polling there, or that the closed primary and demographics favored him.

[Turn CO Blue]

28. Delegate is an elected position and the schedule should be taken seriously as a commitment.

and because of that, you are advised at caucus what the date and time are, and that if you can't attend, then you are advised that you should NOT RUN FOR DELEGATE.

And yes, you are "running" for election to the position of delegate, even if everyone winds up "volunteering" for it, even if you have to scrape up enough volunteers for delegate and alternate.

At the higher levels (to get to national) you actually DO have to run a campaign, with buttons/ posters, make a speech, etc.

You are told earnestly -- by the PCP and by your campaign's caucus captain -- that if you don't show, and that if there aren't enough valid, credentialed alternates for YOUR candidate, then ANY credentialed alternate from your District will be seated in your place and will vote with YOUR credentials.

So either Hillary's Caucus Captain messed up, or the elected delegate messed up by forgetting (most likely) or by allowing a scheduling conflict.

The alternates showed up just like they committed to do.


I don't like it, and I don't like caucuses actually but nobody broke any rules here -- but we saw the most astonishing example of this in action in 2012 in Iowa, when hardly any of Mitt Romney's delegates showed up, and Ron Paul who barely passed viability on caucus night, wound up winning Iowa at the last minute at the Iowa State Convention and was able to seat 23 NATIONAL delegates at the National Republican Convention.

Delegates absolutely HAVE to show up.

[firebrand80]

3. I'm sure the AZ GOP will be happy to pony up the funds for this nt

[sweetloukillbot]

4. How exactly does the Obama administration make a state hold a revote?

And shouldn't the Republicans do one also? Weren't they being disenfranchised as well? And who will be allowed to vote? The people who showed up, or anyone? And what about the rest of the counties that didn't have issues? Or the people who voted early with no issue? Should they get a do-over because their candidate dropped out after they voted?
Points for hearts being in the right place, but Jeez...

[Agschmid]

9. They don't.

[Vinca]

6. I think it would be more realistic to petition the Democratic Party to toss the vote

and reduce the number of delegates needed by the amount available in Arizona.

[MadBadger]

44. Talk about disenfranchisement

[Vinca]

45. You actually expect an entire state to hold another primary?

It would be nice, but it won't happen in a million years. That leaves the options of accepting an inaccurate and manipulated vote or tossing the vote. The voters have already been disenfranchised.

[JaneyVee]

17. So they can fuck it up again?

[KingFlorez]

19. Better yet, do a caucus at Bernie Sanders house

Only open to Sanders supporters. That would be a fair revote.

[DesertRat]

47. lol nt

[brooklynite]

49. How many petitions were sent to the Arizona State Government?

The slactivists who signed the White House could have used their time more effectively taking a refresher course in Civics. The President has NO authority to order a State to redo an election.