will Democratic party take vote suppression and rigging seriously in November?

[yurbud]

Or will this be a rerun of 2000 and 2004?

John Kerry made noises about fighting it in 2004 after the regulation irregularities of 2000 but did nothing.

The GOP has far more incentive to cheat this time. They are unlikely to win fairly and demographics make it more and more unlikely each passing election so they have to grab power while they can.

Since Hillary is cut from the same Establishment Clause as Carrie and Gore I suspect that she will do little about this as well.

However the stakes are too high to do nothing. The invention of the Tea Party and rise of a candidate like Trump are no accident. Some portion of the financial Elite realize they can't hold power through fake democracy for much longer and rather than give it up they will cheat or resort to force. And if they get it either fairly or by cheating they have a great incentive to hold on to it by force which is why I think they created the Tea Party. Not because tea party politicians have different policies but because they are more extreme in their tactics and frankly too stupid to think of the possible negative consequences for themselves if they pull the trigger on full fascism.

I think something like that was in the pipe during the bush years but too many republican politicians are gun shy about full fascism not because of democracy but because they understood what would happen to them if they fail.

Corporate Democrats do not seem to act like this is a possibility even when Republicans make it clear this is their intent and when they brag about vote suppression.

7 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	the Democratic party will fight for a clean election and the right of every voter to vote
	2 (29%)
	the Democratic party will make a token effort to appease activist but not take any effective action
	5 (71%)
	the Democratic party will do nothing this is unseemly conspiracy theory garbage
	0 (0%)
	other
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Phlem]

1. Of course they'll take it seriously.

There were too many leaks this time around. The high water mark is theft w/o recognition.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. LMAO

both sides benefit, no need to take it seriously until average voters take to the streets in millions, and that will be a maybe.

[yourout]

3. party big wigs DO NOT CARE if we win.

Their job is to protect the one percent.
As long as Bernie is stopped they are happy no matter what happens in November.

[Gothmog]

4. Kerry did attempt to fight voter suppression

I was one of 3000 out of state attorneys who went to Florida in 2004 as part of the Kerry Edwards voter protection team.

This year the Clinton Victory Counsel program is gearing up. Marc Elias, the head of the Victory Counsel program, is busy suing Wisconsin, Arizona, Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina. Marc Elias, the chief counsel for the Clinton Victory Counsel program, is busy suing the GOP and fighting GOP vote suppression http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/16/voting-rights-lawsuits-_n_7594960.html

The general counsel for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign is heading up three high-profile lawsuits against Republican-backed voting restrictions in what is shaping up to be a perfect political and legal storm leading up to the 2016 election.

The attorney, Marc Elias, is involved in lawsuits challenging measures passed in Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin, arguing that laws cutting back early voting, restricting registration and requiring photo identification to vote, among other measures, disproportionately impact racial minorities.

Conservatives have argued such measures protect against voter fraud, and have called the lawsuits a political effort to energize Democratic voters. The financial involvement of the billionaire liberal philanthropist George Soros, who is supporting the suits, has only incensed them further.

There are high stakes to the lawsuits, as the Supreme Court displayed a certain skepticism about federal voting rights legislation when it struck down a key section of the landmark Voting Rights Act in 2013. That provision had required states and localities with a history of voting discrimination to first clear any changes to their voting laws with the federal government or in federal court. The VRA still bars voting procedures that discriminate against racial minorities, but the strength of that section hasn’t been tested since the court’s controversial decision two years ago.

So, while the politics of Elias’ cases have attracted most of the attention — Clinton recently decried measures supported by Republican governors, like fellow presidential hopeful Scott Walker of Wisconsin — there is an equivalent amount of intrigue on the legal side. Some of the provisions targeted in the lawsuits, like Wisconsin’s voter identification law, have already been challenged, while others, like Virginia’s photo ID law, haven’t yet seen the inside of a courtroom.

The GOP is very good at voter suppression and I am glad that Marc is fighting against the GOP. Unfortunately, the Wisconsin voter id law will be in effect for Tuesday primary. The Elias lawsuit is schedule to go to trial in May

[yurbud]

5. Did Democrats get anyone prosecuted for suppression in the past couple of election?