It looks increasingly like Rick Scott's win is illegitimate. If so, what do we do?

[onenote]

86. Ultimately it is still all about getting people to want to vote.

Let's use Florida as an example. In terms of certain types of vote suppressing activities, Florida actually isn't at the extremes. Photo ID is requested (and can be satisfied by a fairly wide range of items, including student IDs) and you're not barred from voting if you don't have an ID. You cast a provisional ballot, sign your name and if the signature matches that on your registration, the vote is counted. Its more restrictive than many states, but less restrictive than several of the newer mandatory photo ID laws. Same with early voting: Florida is better than some, worse than others (including the dozen or so states that don't allow early voting at all). It is unlikely that a court would overturn either the Florida ID law or the early voting rules because to do so would be to effectively set national standards that all states have to follow and that isn't going to happen. Where Florida stands out in terms of restricting votes (and which was featured in the Moyers piece that started off this thread) is its policy of not allowing convicted felons to vote. Taking at face value the reports that indicate that around one in five African American in Florida is a convicted felon, and that the impact of the restriction falls disproportionately on African Americans, establishing a legal basis for challenging their requirement (althoug, again, courts likely will be reluctant to set a national standard for how all states have to handle ex- felon voters). The problem is that while the impact is disprortionate, it would be difficult to prove that it has impacted the outcome of any election. That is because, in absolute numbers, there probably are close to two white ex felons that can't vote under the Florida law for every African American. And, with the exception of the 2012 presidential election, African Americans vote turnout is, on a percentage basis, usually lower than white turnout. Some of that is due to suppression efforts, but it appears to be the case pretty much across the board, even in states with the least restrictive voting rules. And where they allowed to vote, the turnout of ex-felons is less than that of non-ex-felons. All of this taken together establishes two things: (1) its nigh near impossible to prove the outcome of an election was swayed by the rules in place in Florida (even if you assume that every African American ex felon that voted would have voted for Crist and only half of the white ex felons would have voted for Scott -- percentages that do not reflect the actual turnout results) and (ii) it really does come down to turnout -- when we can mount a campaign and offer candidates that motivate voters to come out and support our candidates -- African American voters, ex felon voters, white voters -- we win. If we don't, we lose.