Voter suppression in Utah

[BainsBane]

Last edited Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:19 AM - Edit history (1)

Frenzy of voters overwhelm caucus sites around Utah

(KUTV) Utah is experiencing a frenzy of voting activity for the Democrat and Republican caucuses Tuesday night. Long lines have been reported in Davis County, Salt Lake County and Utah County, among others.

Long lines, a shortage of ballots and crashing websites all played havoc with a voter turnout that seems significantly higher than political parties expected.

The Democratic website was down but returned to service Tuesday evening. It listed about 90 caucus locations for Democrats. The party didn't require registration to vote.

The Vote.Utah.Gov website also experienced errors, returning an error message when citizens tried to locate their caucus locations. Later in the evening Tuesday, that site also seemed to work.

http://kutv.com/news/local/frenzy-of-voters-overwhelm-caucus-sites-around-utah


Yesterday, CNN was reporting a mile-long line in Salt Lake City. Yet somehow the only state that causes concern today is Arizona.
I wonder why?

Does this mean the results of the Utah caucuses should be nullified as well? Is it DWS' fault? Hillary's?

[democrattotheend]

1. Few if any of us are saying Arizona should be nullified

Bernie certainly isn't. What we are saying is that the voter suppression should be investigated, preferably prior to the general election. That is something all of us should get on board with prior to November.

This is the first I am hearing about problems in Utah, but if there were problems, then absolutely, we should all take a stand against voter suppression.

[BainsBane]

5. There is a petition at the top of GD-P now

If it's the first you're hearing of it, you're very selective in your news consumption. Clearly Arizona has been highlighted because Bernie lost, which should surprise no one since he trailed in the polls by roughly the same margin that he lost by.

[George II]

12. Even funnier was an OP this morning that claimed "1.2M voters were turned away"!!!

That's about 300,000 MORE than actually voted, and also 300,000 more than the record turnout for a primary in Arizona.

"Twitter feed says 1.2 million turned away and they are staying in line AZ"

[bravenak]

28. That was the best

Fucking twitter

[MADem]

9. I read it here, on DU...and all over FB and twitter!

Hell, there are demands here that we sign a petition to have a Bernie Do-Over in AZ.

It seems that every time Clinton wins a state, the dramatics start.

It's getting tiresome.

[BainsBane]

18. Exactly

and never with similar problems in states that Bernie wins.

[NWCorona]

2. No Soros

[TCJ70]

3. There's a pretty big difference with one website...

...among many that can tell you where your polling place is not working, and people's party registration not being correct when they show up to vote, which in a closed primary means they can't.

[jillan]

4. Hellooooo???? The difference is that everyone in that line in Utah got to vote.

[CorkySt.Clair]

8. And Bernie won

Another critical difference.

[BainsBane]

11. The ones who were willing to wait for hours to vote, you mean

I love the excuses. It just proves that the problem is not lines, not enough ballots, or bad information about polling places, all present in Utah--but that the guy you wanted to win didn't.

If people were concerned about democracy, they wouldn't have tried to come up with ways to discount votes in Southern states. They wouldn't ignore irregularities in two states yesterday to focus exclusively on the state Bernie lost. We have heard time and time again about how African Americans and other people of color are too ignorant to vote as they are supposed to, meaning how people on this site demand everyone in the country vote. Those of us who have chosen to support another candidate have been insulted on a daily basis for having the audacity to exercise our own democratic rights. Then we have Tad Devine announce that the new strategy is not only to turn the superdelegates for Bernie but to flip pledged delegates, thus overturning the results of already decided elections. I haven't seen a single Sanders supporter object to that. That combined with the excuses here make absolutely clear that the concern is not democracy or voting rights but doing anything and everything to install in office a man who trails by 2.6 million in the popular vote, even if that includes subverting the results of popular elections, which is precisely what that petition seeks to do.

You may fool yourselves, but you sure as hell don't fool me.

[morningfog]

25. All problems like this should be looked into and fixed.

I'll make one point. Hillary was creamed in Utah. There is no chance whatsoever that the outcome was significantly affected. The issues were fewer and in areas of large marginal losses.

Arizona's issues were systemic and may have affected the outcome. Maybe not.

Btw, Devine's mention of flipping pledged delegates is idiotic. It won't happen (unless and until there is a second ballot).

[blueintelligentsia]

46. You're missing the point...

[morningfog]

6. No link.

[baldguy]

7. How do we fix the voting problems in America?

By being sure to elect staunch Democrats in all levels of govt to change the rules & enact legislation to do it.

Staunch Democrats like Hillary Clinton.

[MoonRiver]

51. +1000

[DesertRat]

52. +1

[Else You Are Mad]

10. The complaints about Arizona...

... aren't because Clinton won. We are complaining that thousands of Democrats were disenfranchised. We are more concerned about the fact that votes were prevented than trying to discount Clinton's win.

Stop trying to make a conflict when one doesn't exist.

[BainsBane]

14. That it focuses on Arizona to the exclusion of Utah

and that you insist by my posting about Utah I'm creating conflict shows that it is entirely about the result of the election.

[Else You Are Mad]

15. No.

If there is evidence of election fraud in Utah, I would be against that too. I just haven't seen anything about it. If there is election fraud that unfairly benefited Sanders, I would be against that.

[bravenak]

30. Please

The terms are voter suppression and disenfranchisement

I keep seeing fraud and then realizing people mean suppression and disenfranchisement

[Else You Are Mad]

31. Except ...

In it's most broad sense, fraud is the use of dishonest means to obtain one's goals. The last time I checked voter suppression and disenfranchisement are two dishonest strategies used to obtain illegitimate voting results.

You understand that the fraud stems from the use of those two things?

[bravenak]

34. Ok. But the terms are necessary to differentiate between different types of vote manipulation

[reformist2]

13. Please stop obsessing over Hillary-vs-Bernie. These lines are unacceptable, no matter who wins.

It's voter disenfranchisement, and we should be united in our efforts to bring it to light, so that we can embarrass the Republican administrations in these states into doing the right thing.

[BainsBane]

16. Oh, I'm not supposed to mention Utah

or Idaho and pretend it's only Arizona, go along with efforts to overturn the result of the election, because it really isn't about Bernie. And by daring to bring up lines and voting irregularities in a state that Bernie won, I'm engaged in wrong doing because the only legitimate focus is a state he lost.


Of course the states didn't do the right thing, but to pretend that people here are outraged about the lines rather than the outcome of the election doesn't hold water. They are right now in this thread making excuses for Utah. Of course it's about Bernie's career. Just as scheming to find ways to discount votes in the entire South was about Bernie, and the blanket insults of African American voters for failing to vote as people here demand was about Bernie. People who care about democracy don't look to find ways to subvert or overturn the popular vote to promote a politician's career.

[Else You Are Mad]

17. That is simply not true.

Anyone that cares about disenfranchisement in AZ cares about it in other states. This has nothing to do with our disapproval of Clinton. Merely because someone opposes your candidate does not mean that person is looking to overturn that candidate's popular vote. People are allowed to have a differing opinion and political belief
There is nothing nefarious about supporting a different candidate.

[seabeyond]

20. Then I should not be seeing post after post vilifying Clinton or Democratic Party as if this has

Anything to do with them. Yet... I see so much disgusting accusation without any kind of reason, I am beyond disgusted. Democrats fight this shit. Yet too many Sanders supporters are using this to vilify those that are also tge victim of it.

[Else You Are Mad]

22. Maybe, but...

There are similar posts from your side. Maybe the rational among us can stop associating the more passionate supporters with the more rational supporters. I don't know, I just don't get the vitriol that we have for each other.

[pat_k]

19. The lines are intolerable.

I agree that the intolerable lines in both Idaho and Utah should be getting a lot more attention. But, it's my understanding that the process is administered by the Utah Democratic Party, not the Secretary of State.

The "duty of care" a political party must meet to ensure the integrity of its process for selecting delegates ought to be as high as it is for a state government, but I don't think it is. I'm not aware of any law requiring a political party to guarantee voting rights, but I'm pretty sure laws exist under which a case could be made against them (although I don't know off hand what those would be).

The upshot is that when the process is the responsibility of a political party, I think the participants are stuck with looking to the courts, not state executive or legislative officials, to remedy failures.

I think AZ gets more focus because the state has assumed responsibility for the conduct of the presidential preference election. The AZ SOS has a clear duty under the law to ensure voting rights are not violated (e.g., ensure voter registrations are accurate, ensure the number of polling places is sufficient, and so on).

[BainsBane]

26. You're correct that caucuses are run by parties and primaries by Secretary of States offices

The SoS office plays a role in caucuses by maintaining a website and notifying voters of caucus locations. That's how it works in my state anyway.

Yet here people on DU have blamed the Democratic Party, DWS, and Hillary Clinton for problems in Arizona. There were pictures of long lines with captions insisting there were enough Bernie supporters to form a third party. There are petitions to overturn the result of the AZ election but not the caucuses.

I'm not sure exactly who presided over changes in Utah. CNN reported that this current caucus went to system with one location per country rather than precincts, hence the astronomical, mile-long line in one location. I would hope that Democrats would be able to exert pressure on the Utah Democratic party without going to the courts, yet here the emphasis seems to be on insisting that Utah wasn't a problem. The clear difference is the outcome of the vote.

[pat_k]

29. Wow, one location per county? That sounds...

Last edited Thu Mar 24, 2016, 03:09 AM - Edit history (1)

...like a receipe for disaster.

i for one hold the AZ SOS responsible for the conduct there. I wouldn't see nullification as a remedy. Allowing "late voting" is a reasonable "after the fact" remedy that has a recent precedent.

I wouldn't expect it to change the outcome, but it does seem that, regardless, eligible AZ voters should be given the opportunity to get their vote on record. And that goes for the Republican, Democratic, and Green elections.

On edit: And of course, I would want to see eligible caucus goers in Idaho and Utah who were unable to brave the lines be afforded a similar opportunity to get their preference on the record.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. I was at the Sanders rally in San Diego, Press Shtick

and this is the first I hear of this.

So this is crystal clear to you, I don;t care who does it, or if the candidates are the man on the moon and santa claus, democracy in this country is ON FUCKING LIFE SUPPORT.

Oh and I do not expect my vote to count in either the pretend primary or the pretend general election, Ah yes, to be that cynical again. But I just don't.

[morningfog]

23. LINK???

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Here is a decent one

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=39015076&nid=757&title=sanders-wins-big-but-utah-dems-still-havent-awarded-delegates

Not that the OP will ever bother.

Seems the problem was not flipping voter registration, but running out of ballots, which has been a chronic problem nationwide

[BainsBane]

39. Gosh, I'm sorry

I forgot it and only just saw your post!

http://kutv.com/news/local/frenzy-of-voters-overwhelm-caucus-sites-around-utah

[Tarc]

24. This is why we should do away with a) the caucus system, b) voting during a workday

[BainsBane]

40. Agree, make it a national holiday

and far more polling sites.

[cosmicone]

27. Simple rule

If Bernie wins, there is no voter suppression, disenfranchisement or fraud.

If Bernie loses, all sorts of nefarious things kept him from winning.

[Jamaal510]

42. +1

[lunamagica]

32. K&R.

[BainsBane]

38. Because of the four paragraph copyright rule

Last edited Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:49 AM - Edit history (1)

There was still a mile long line.

So lines, running out of ballots aren't the problem. Now it's that the media called the election too early? That's the grounds for overturning the vote? Because all day long I've been hearing about lines. Now they suddenly aren't a problem.

Now you're upset that the state law doesn't allow for registration up until the election? There are many, many states that operate that way. And, by the way, after Nevada the complaints here was the opposite: People insisted the Clinton campaign was committing fraud by informing voters they could register at caucus sites, which is in fact Nevada law.

How about just admitting that any election that doesn't result in a win for Bernie is by definition fraudulent? Because that is obviously the only point of concern. I know people often compelled to deceive themselves in order to justify conflicting points of view, but this isn't even mildly convincing.

[Ken Burch]

45. They don't USE ballots in caucuses.

They do fan-outs. So it isn't possible to run out of ballots.

There was nothing suspect at all in the Utah results. You just don't like them.

Sanders people would be raising the same issues about Arizona if we were leading there. Our campaign believes in making sure everybody gets to vote.

[Bettie]

35. Shouldn't be nullifeid

but the problems should be addressed before the general election.

Same thing I said about Arizona.

[Cha]

37. Thank you for this, BB.

[Ken Burch]

43. Unless the media was broadcasting Utah results WHILE those people were still waiting in line

it isn't comparable to the AZ situation.

[me b zola]

44. I initially rec'd your thread, until I read your last line

We should stand united against voter suppression and election tampering and not make it an issue that divides candidates. I don't care what anyone else has posted, just saying that this could have been a good thread.

[BainsBane]

49. I don't see any effort to stand together

Or anyone telling Sanders supporters trying to overturn the popular vote in Arizona that they ought to care about the will of the people. I am fed up with being lectured to and held to a standard that people make no effort to uphold themselves. It is clear to m than elections and the popular vote are viewed as an obstacle installing in power a candidate rejected by the popular vote.

I am not a person who has spent the last six months hurling insults at Democratic voters for failing to do what I demand. Take your outrage to one of the many people who has shown contempt for democratic choice and the very rights of anyone but themselves to make political decisions. Or how about lecturing the people in this thread making excuses to insist Utah wasn't a problem?

To be able to divide implies there is some sort of unity. Sanders supporters have made clear for months now tha anyone who doesn't do as they command is a corporatist shill, a vagina voter, and the enemy. It's too damn late to worry about division. People cannot be insulted and demeaned every day for months and then be expected to believe there is some commonality left. That bridge was burned a long time ago.

[me b zola]

50. My post was not intented to lecture, nor express outrage

I simply expressed that on the issue of the right of people to cast a vote, it would be to our benefit to unify around this one issue.

Have a good day

[blueintelligentsia]

47. I suspect Utah wasn't mentioned as much because of the delegates up for grabs....

But also it is hypocritical that I heard about it so late. Where is the petition to sign to get this investigated. It should be like AZ.

[BainsBane]

48. Hypocritical on whose part?

This was covered on CNN on Election Day. That's hardly an obscure source.