Same as it ever was.
For all the GOP whining about voter fraud, it’s patently obvious that the only fraud being perpetrated is by Republicans against Democrats:
Ohio residents are voting Tuesday on Issue 2, a ballot referendum on a controversial measure known as SB 5. The law restricts collective bargaining rights for state employees, among other provisions. Opposition to the legislation inspired large protests around the state earlier in the year.
“Hi, I am calling to remind you that tomorrow is Election Day,” said the voice on the message. “It is critically important that you go vote and protect the future of our country. Tomorrow, please go to the polls and vote YES on Issue 2, and vote YES on Issue 3. Paid for by American Future Fund and not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee. 866-559-5854.”
Voting yes on Issue 2 means voting in favor of SB 5, Gov. John Kasich’s anti-collective bargaining law.
The number on the call goes to an automated message, directing callers to the website of the American Future Fund, a conservative advocacy group. The message also asks people if they would like to be added to the group’s do-not-call list.
A spokesperson for American Future Fund called it a mix-up and said the group would be calling voters back to say “Oops! Our bad!”
Mandy Fraher, a spokeswoman for American Future Fund, acknowledged that automated phone calls were being made on Tuesday telling recipients that the election was being held “tomorrow.” She insisted that the mix-up was due to “gross incompetence on behalf of the phone vendor” and that the group was “working to correct that problem immediately.”
“As soon as we realized the problem we stopped those calls and we started calling those people back who received a call to inform them that today is Election Day,” said Fraher.
Union officials, however, are calling bullshit: Anthony Caldwell, a spokesman for SEIU District 1199 said the following:
“For a group [American Future Fund] that has coordinated a million dollar mail campaign, I find it highly unlikely they would make a simple clerical error and send out a robocall to non-supporters telling them to vote the day after Election Day.”
This is no clerical error. Republicans have engaged in these sorts of shenanigans before, all across the country. (Check out this Alternet post from 2008 — shenanigans as far as the eye can see.)
I’m in California where nothing exciting is happening, so I’ll be living vicariously through you. Let me know what’s going on where you are. Drop a comment to report any shenanigans, tomfoolery, skullduggery, or chicanery.
Talk to me, Goose.
[cross-posted at ABLC]
Ben Cisco
They should be prosecuted for this and fined back into the Paleozoic.
debg
unbelievable
I wonder if the same thing is happening in Mississippi.
Ben Cisco
Mayoral and school board races here among others.
__
Turnout at 11:30 was very light.
Bubblegum Tate
I’m trying to think of an election cycle in which the Republicans didn’t pull this stunt, and I’m coming up empty.
The Moar You Know
Ahhhh, the Republican party we all know and love.
Serious question: why don’t Democrats do this?
General Stuck
The Ohio wingnuts can cheat all they want, but they messed with muther nature in a big union state, and will get trounced for it. Kasich can pound sand at 33% approval. Winger over reach is our friend and ally
as for me, I’m an idiot for not throwing away my fav mug that was cracked and shattered while washing and near cut off me right pinky. out of commission after this comment. but GO Ohio, most of all!!
Gremcat
The big question is: Did they target Democratic voters? If so they are should seriously be prosecuted.
If not, then they are merely incompetent.
deep cap
It’s amazing they try this year after year. Does it work?
Satanicpanic
They hate democracy, that’s why they do this every time.
Mike in NC
@Bubblegum Tate:
I can say it was SOP when I lived in Maryland and Virginia.
bobbo
But the good news is they’re telling YES voters to vote tomorrow. Isn’t this an epic fail?
West of the Cascades
It’s hard to figure out how that robo-call could possibly have been effective in getting people inclined to vote “no” on SB 5 to go to the polls a day late. Wouldn’t it be more effective to say “tomorrow is election day, go to the polls tomorrow to vote ‘NO’ on SB 5”?
That is, you would want to get the attention of the people you want to react by calling “NO” to their attention, and add the message that they have to go to the polls tomorrow? Seems like, besides being fraudulent, it’s also a big waste of money for little likely benefit (but that also sounds like the definition of the Republican Party these days).
I’m really curious what the psychology of the GOP trying to mix these messages (“tomorrow” but “vote YES”) is. It seems like it would be really, really ineffective (and more likely to get their own supporters or people on the fence to wait a day too late), but I’m sure they’ve done some focus groups to justify it.
I don’t know much about robo-calling (obviously!!) but I’m also curious how parties can target particular callers as “supporters/non-supporters.” By voter registration? Something more sophisticated (e.g. what you have “liked” on Facebook?)?
Yevgraf
It is important to remember that these big corporate conglomerate Americans United protected ad buys came at the expense of wages, benefits and new hires, not to mention diminished dividends.
The best part is that a lot of that money goes to wingnut owned and approved media outlets like Clear Channel.
Jay in Oregon
@deep cap:
If it didn’t, I don’t think they would be trying it again and again. Kinda like Cain making smooooooth with the ladies…
There’s no accountability for pulling shit like this when it’s Republicans doing it; I bet the motivation for messing with people’s civil rights would go waaaaaaaay down if, when they got caught, they spent several years in federal prison making license plates or picking tomatoes.
Ian
@The Moar You Know:
Because it isn’t ethical?
George Lakoff had a model (I dont wholly agree, but it is illustrative) of politics. Republicans fell into a father-authoritarian view of government. Democrats in this model were the mother-nurturer. The authoritarian view of politics views elections as a sports game, with the ultimate goal being the victory. The nurturer model wants all of the participants in the game to be treated equally and fairly.
For refrence the book is called ‘Moral Politics’
Litlebritdifrnt
This actually sound more like incompetence than shenanigans.
artem1s
vote or die indeed. I have voted D for every election for the last 20 years at my current address and phone. But for the first time this year I have been getting rightwing nutjob push poll and issue calls from every Kochsucking supported group out there in the swampland. It’s a huge waste of money for them to be casting such a wide net (I’m assuming its a zip code thing or that I still have a land line) so I guess I don’t mind so much (except for the F**king Pat Boone robocalls). Either they have ridonkulous amounts of money to spend or they have the worst strategists ever.
I’m betting on a
littlewhole lot of both.David Hunt
I don’t know which makes me sadder. My total lack of surprise that Republicans are still just plain old outright lying about when the election is in an attempt to misdirect their opponents away from the polls, or my total lack of any expectation that they will suffer any form of consequences from their obvious vote suppression.
Jay in Oregon
@Litlebritdifrnt:
Except for the fact that it happens again, and again, and again, and again.
And it always seems to err on the side of benefiting Republicans.
John Weiss
@The Moar You Know: We don’t do this because we really believe in the democratic process. Silly us.
Villago Delenda Est
And, in other breaking news, water is wet and the sun rises in the east.
The vermin of The Village will of course find it remarkably easy to simply ignore this.
PeakVT
@The Moar You Know: The cynical answer is: because Democrats are held to a different standard than Republicans, and some petty little shenanigan like robocalls with lies would become a national scandal.
cleek
OT: FYI: new pie filter has the ability to add pie to blockquoted bad-guy text. if someone has a @badguy backlink followed by a blockquote, the blockquote will be replaced with pie.
Larv
@bobbo
The “vote YES” thing is just to cover their ass. If a conservative group was telling people to vote “NO” it would be a little too obvious what they’re up to. This way they can claim it was just a big mistake (just like their spokesperson is doing). But I suspect that an investigation of the phone list they’re using (today, at least) would reveal that it’s heavily weighted towards Democratic voters or people likely to vote “NO” (union members, for example). They may even have sent the same message to “YES” supporters yesterday, then just switched phone lists this morning. I hope somebody does look into this.
singfoom
Is this not a type of election fraud? I thought Republicans are always worried about election fraud. I’m confused. Can they be doing something that they say they are against?
No, that couldn’t happen, could it?
Dee Loralei
And didn’t good Christian ex Baptist Minister Mike Huckabee tell Republicans in Ohio to do this exact thing? And to let the air out of the tires of No on 2 supporters? Of course he was just joking, being a jocular good-humored guy. Like talking about being sexually harassed at Popeyes because the waitresses all called him honey and darlin’ and asking if he wanted breasts or legs or thighs. Har. De. Fucking Har. Har. Har.
J. Michael Neal
@artem1s: You keep getting them because robocalls are cheap. I mean, really, really cheap. Just set it up and let it run. It would be nice to think that the Republicans were wasting a lot of money on this, but it’s almost certain that they’re not.
David Hunt
@West of the Cascades:
Plausible deniability. The people who put that message together are a conservative advocacy group. I don’t have to look at their website to be 110% certain that they’re in favor of the union-busting SB 5. They were clearly identified as the people behind the message. As long as the massage advocates their actual position, they can claim that the robocalls were supposed to go out Yesterday and it was just a foul-up instead of blatant vote suppression that they’re telling people to go vote the day after the polls close.
ETA: Of course the calls were going to people they thought would vote Democrat. I figured that would go without saying, but then figured I’d put it down explicitly.
gelfling545
Today we have the opportunity to get rid of our jackass county executive. The polling up to today was very close so it’s a tossup and I have no real expectation that the Dem. challenger will be a great deal better but at least he will be different.
Spaghetti Lee
Well, from the polling I’ve seen, looks like it won’t matter. Can’t wait for all the Galt-wannabes to start sobbing into their sticky-paged copies of Atlas Shrugged when Issue 2 goes down tonight.
Bubblegum Tate
@efgoldman:
One of the guys behind that wrote an eye opening book called How To Rig an Election that really digs into the kind of shit Republicans do in order to steal elections. He explicitly takes on the “both sides do it!” bullshit, pointing out that Democrats make the occasional ham-fisted attempt, but they’re basically a JV team up against the seasoned pros of the GOP.
West of the Cascades
@David Hunt: Thanks, that makes sense.
I’m still curious whether this really works (or just works in the frenzied imaginations of the ratfuckers who come up with this idea)?
Although — even as I pose that question — I guess it’s not really the sort of thing any reputable polling organization is going to poll, is it? Anyone know of any research on this, or previous investigations?
BTW, none of these questions are trying to minimize the seriousness of the fraud — whether or not it works, it’s heinous, and costs time and money for the Democratic Party to respond to it. It just seems like it would be sort of funny if, in addition to constituting genuine voting fraud, the GOP’s tactic was wholly ineffective in influencing actual voters (although maybe I’m answering my own question if — even if it doesn’t influence actual voters — it is a big distraction and potential resource-suck to the other party trying to GOTV, and therefore “worthwhile” for the GOP)
Mnemosyne
I’m leaning towards “epic fail” myself. They’re so used to using this cheat that they weren’t able to correct themselves when they were shilling for their own votes.
Carol from CO
@West of the Cascades:
They know who voted in the last elections and elections before that and they know who is registered and how they are registered, i.e., R, D, I or ?.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
Midday turnout in (a very D leaning) Cinti district was quite brisk, with a poll worker commenting that turnout seemed “more like a presidential election.”
artem1s
@J. Michael Neal:
well, it’s not wasting money per say, just time and effort. Yes, robocalls are cheap but there’s no evidence (at least that I’ve seen) that the broad brush has any affect at all unless you are running a get out the vote effort. Calling a registered D, who gives no demographic indication whatsoever that they are likely to swing your way?…you are really running the risk of pissing them off and guaranteeing they will turn out in a off year election. I haven’t seen much in the way of a winning strategy on behalf of SB5 until last night when I finally saw the deluge of TV time I was expecting all along.
seems to me that Kasich hired some of his buddies to run his campaigns and they are sucking in a spectacularly wonderful way, just as when they were formulating investment strategies at Lehman.
trollhattan
O/T An important win in federal appeals court for the Affordable Care Act today.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_11/conservative_appeals_court_jud033357.php
Lol
Beyond separating out supporters found by actual contact with voters, campaigns use microtargeting to build models of how likely a person is to support a candidate, an issue or even vote.
Party registration, vote history (including primaries), age, gender and (in some states) race from the state’s voterfile are combined with consumer data from external sources (income, education, children, etc) and sometimes census data.
This allows you to focus persuasion on people with mid-level support in te model but a high likelihood of voting and gotv efforts on people likely to support but unlikely to vote.
The end result is that you can trim the potential voter contact universe to the portion where your field efforts will be most effective.
The GOP was ahead of the game and started doing this in 2002 or so but Dems finally caught up in 2006 and have surpassed the on the data side. The Obama campaign takes analytics like this very seriously and it’s been a big part of its success.
West of the Cascades
@trollhattan: interesting 63-page dissent by Judge Kavanaugh arguing that the court doesn’t have jurisdiction to even hear the challenge until 2014 when the individual mandate takes effect. He doesn’t address the merits … it sounds almost like a conservative judge laying out in excruciating detail a way for the Supreme Court to kick the issue three years down the road when it comes before them. That might not be a bad result (certainly not a bad result compared to the Supreme Court wiping out decades of Commerce Clause law by rejecting the individual mandate).
Steve
I have my doubts that this was actually shenanigans. For every person you trick into staying home because the election is tomorrow, there’s probably two people who weren’t thinking about the election and will be reminded to vote. In other words, I think as an evil scheme this would be too clever by half.
A legitimate scam is like what they did in Maryland in 2008 where they called Democrats around 6 p.m. with a message saying “we accomplished our goals, Obama won, you can stay home and celebrate.” Now that might actually fool someone.
I’d be all in favor of someone getting their call list to see if this was actually targeted at Democratic voters, but I just have my doubts.
xian
Dee got in before me. this is exactly the advice Schmuckabee gave as a “joke,” har har.
opie jeanne
I dropped off my ballot this morning, just outside Seattle. Still getting used to the way things work here.
The big issue in my immediate neighborhood was the water commission seats. Two seats open and two guys running on scare tactics, hoping to attract the low information voters. I voted for the incumbents.
Other than that we have the statewide vote on liquor stores, and I had to decide between the convenience of being able to buy liquor at Costco and putting 80,000 state employees out of work. I really wanted to vote yes but I kept thinking about the two times my husband was laid off and just couldn’t.
opie jeanne
@xian: Lordy! I hope my next door neighbors didn’t hear him.
The Other Chuck
You know, there’s a really easy way to tell whether this was just a “oops my bad” fuckup or not. Seize all the equipment, analyze when the order was put in, see if it matches the story. You know, investigate. They might still get away with it, but at least they’d have to try a little harder.
Oh, that would require election laws that were actually enforced, wouldn’t it? My bad.
harlana
What’s a private entity doing going around calling people to “remind” them to vote on the wrong day? I know the standard answer (IOKIYAR) but, seriously, shouldn’t there be laws against this sort of thing?
/awaits numerous snarky responses
The Other Chuck
Given that this happens over and over, how about a law that says you cannot tell people when to go out and vote without actually saying out loud the month, day, and year. Then you make giving the wrong date a felony.
Oh I forgot, this is democracy, not anything actually important.
Sloegin
It’s shenanigans. As far as shenanigans go, a dumb one.
A better one is to make sure your parties favored districts get plenty of voting machines, and the others just get a sprinkling. That way your voters easily and conveniently vote, and theirs get stuck standing in lines all day, leaving in frustration, or are unable to vote within the allotted time frame.
Larv
@Steve:
Sure, but anyone who wasn’t thinking about it probably doesn’t know when the election is. So they may be reminded to vote, but they’ll do it a day late.
FTR, I’m entirely willing to believe this is just incompetence. But given the history of similar vote suppression shenanigans on the part of conservative groups, I’d really like to see an analysis of the phone #s that were actually called on the wrong day. They’re saying that they called the people who received the mistaken call to correct it, so they obviously have access to this info. Were those #s mostly associated with likely supporters or opponents?
The Other Chuck
The Voting Rights Act is targeted at a number of states and basically says “you guys have fucked up so often and so badly that we don’t trust you any more so you need to run all your election law changes by us.”
We need to extend the VRA to individual organizations. The concept of democracy itself should trump the First Amendment.
Larv
Another thing that makes me think this is shenanigans is the wording of the call. Why would you say “tomorrow” instead of “tuesday”? And not just once, but twice? “Tuesday” seems much clearer and less likely to cause confusion, unless confusion is the goal. Maybe this was just tossed off at the last minute without much thought, but it’d be nice to know one way or the other.
MikeJ
@The Other Chuck:
1)Indidual organizations don’t write laws, so the idea of having the DOJ check out laws for them doesn’t make sense.
2) If you say that an org can’t participate in GOTV, the org can disappear and a new one hire all the same people, rent the same office space, use the same computers, etc the very next day. Is anybody really going to notice if the “American Future Fund” shutters its doors, only to be replaced by the “Fund for America’s Future”?
Steve
@Larv: Sure, if you’re sitting there thinking “hey, what if someone runs our calls on the wrong day? Should we maybe just say Tuesday?” Otherwise, if your plan is to write a script for calls to be placed on Election Eve, “vote tomorrow” seems amazingly clear.
It’s honestly hard for me to imagine how this particular dirty trick could actually work on anyone. You have to assume someone who doesn’t know when the election is, and doesn’t know that elections are always on Tuesday, yet is well-informed enough to ignore the substance of your call and vote “no” instead of “yes.” Like I said, I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of shenanigans, but the arguments I see people making are actually causing me to lean more in the direction of a mistake.
Larv
@Steve:
Yeah, maybe. But I think if I were writing it I’d replace one of those “tomorrow”s with a “tuesday”, if only to avoid repetition. It’s hardly proof of anything, but it does increase my suspicion a little.
I think your assumptions about voters are too restrictive. What about a largely non-political union member who knows that he should vote, but doesn’t usually pay enough attention to politics to know that elections are always on Tuesday or has simply forgotten about it? I think that (or something similar) probably describes a larger number of potential voters than you seem to think. Vote suppression efforts are usually aimed at marginal voters, and an election like this is likely to have more than the normal number of those.
Steve
@Larv: Union members always know it’s election day because they get the day off! Remember, if the person doesn’t even know there’s an election, all you can do with a robocall is remind them that they ought to check the Internet or something. The only way suppression actually works is if you have someone who was planning to go out and vote today, but then they get this call and think “oh, my bad, it’s actually tomorrow.” I think the number of people who would fall for that is smaller than the number of people who would have their memory jogged.
IL JimP
They’ll correct by calling them all tomorrow to let them know that they needed to vote today.
What a bunch of a-holes.
Larv
@Steve:
Well, I was thinking more about people who had a vague sense that they SHOULD vote “NO” on this issue in the upcoming election but who aren’t sufficiently engaged to remember exactly when that is. Maybe they’ve been convinced by a politically engaged family member or friend that this is important, but otherwise don’t pay much attention to the news or politics, and are irregular voters. I have a couple of coworkers like that. If they got a call like that, they’d probably think nothing of the date discrepancy, because they’d never really fixed the date in their mind in the first place.
But yeah, I concede that simple idiocy is just as if not more likely. I’d like to see somebody do the relatively simple analysis of just who received the mistaken calls, but I won’t be terribly surprised if it reveals nothing.