Thanks for your unsolicited and unwanted suggestion about my commenting style – I’ll take that into consideration.

In every presidential election that has taken place in the US in modern times, either corporate candidate has failed to win more votes than those who voiced their dissatisfaction by not voting.

Entrenched interests like labor unions, corporations and trial lawyers get the elected officials they pay for. We, the electorate, are merely observers. Until we abandon the two-party system, nothing will really change.

What do you mean “corporate parties”?

As for stories of voter suppression being confined to blogs, I think you must not have been paying much attention to the many, many journalists and academics who have documented cases in which agents or agencies of the government take positive action to disenfranchise voters.

I’m very sorry your hobby-horse candidate or third party can’t get on the news. The truth is, you just haven’t convinced enough people that the Democratic party and the Republican party are somehow acting in concert with one another.

I’d recommend picking up a newspaper and having a look at what’s going on in this country. If you think Al Gore would have governed the way George Bush governed, and if you think Obama would be no different than McCain, then I might as well be talking to a wall.

Voter suppression and fraud are inconsequential. If they were you know that your conspiracy theories would get a lot farther than useless blogs. Meanwhile the institutional tyranny of the two parties isn’t illegal because they make the laws to their own benefit.

I don’t understand how you can defend an argument that likens or compares the competition of the Democratic party with Nader (which is after all legal and carried on in the open) and actions taken by STATE OFFICIALS (ever hear of Katherine Harris?) to disenfranchise voters.

There simply is no reasonable comparison to be drawn here.

You say my position on this matter is a form of “bigotry.” That is a pretty strong assertion. I don’t see how you’ve backed it up with facts or reasoning.

If you can make a case that Nader has in some way been treated unjustly I’ll listen. So far all you’ve done is make unsubstantiated accusations and smirky smiley faces.

By the way, you shouldn’t use bold font either in this kind of forum. Use diction and syntax to clarify and emphasize your most important ideas.

Christopher, you seem to have a lot of wrong beliefs, but that’s the problem with beliefs – it’s not required to back them up with facts. Along with the above, you can add your unquestioning obeisance to the corrupt two-party system. No wonder with apologists like you, there’s little positive change.

As for “political bigotry” you can read your last few comments here – that should give you an idea what it looks like.

The Republicans steal an election in 2000, so to deflect accusations they claim Dems are trying to steal the election in 2004.

They then successfully steal the election again in 2004, so of course they are again claiming the Dems are trying to cheat in 2008.

Of course the vast majority of people are utterly digusted with Republicans, so their only hope in 2008 is to one again try and steal the election.

This time it won’t fly, however, as way too many people are going to turn out to vote Dem tickets, and there will be more polling scrutiny than ever due to the last two thefts.

It is absurd to compare attempts on the parts of Democratic candidates to marginalize competitors in other parties to actions taken by states to disenfranchise voters.

Political parties are vehicles for this kind of competition. Believe me, if Nader could have excluded Gore from a ballot, he would have done it.

I admire and respect Ralph Nader. I think he should have joined the Democratic party and fought with us on the left wing to improve the overall platform.

Instead, he ran vanity campaigns that went nowhere and would have gone nowhere no matter what Gore, Kerry, or anyone on the DNC did.

We have a two party system, although that means something different than the Coke/Pepsi caricature we hear from third-party people.

You choose the party you think is worth fighting to change, and enter the fray.

I’m sorry it’s not so easy as just casting a single ballot for the candidate you think will bring us Utopia.

And I still thing emoticons are stupid. Use your words, AV.

Quite a few people have been looking into voter fraud at the Justice Department and they haven’t found any major voter fraud problem. So the assertion of “cheating” seems debunked.

Regarding winning – doesn’t seem to be any rampant issue with Democrats winning much since 1994? They’ve pretty much been losing.

Ridiculous assertions of Democratic voter fraud in the context of Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004. Just ridiculous.

It is unseemly to use “emoticons” to express glee or triumph unless you are thirteen years old.

Actually, it wasn’t glee or triumph, but a smile. And it’s not unseemly to use emoticons, unless you are a sourpuss. Relax and don’t be so uptight. Since we don’t have facial features and voice tones to go with our written words, emoticons can and do help convey that aspect, and sometimes reduce the chances of misinterpretation. Seems like you’re new to the internet – better get used to the emoticons.

When you say “people like you,” meaning people who are going to vote for a Republican or a Democrat next week

No, you misunderstood that. I meant people like you who try to rationalize actions that exclude others from participating in the democratic process, and defend the two spoiler parties for corrupting the system.

Vote for whoever you want – that’s your right. I didn’t say anything about you voting for a specific candidate, however you want to define “better suited candidate” – maybe it involves their sartorial sense. Just don’t try to pass off the Democrats as some angels who have a radically different approach than the Republicans when their voting record indicates there’s little difference between the two.

Got it?

It is unseemly to use “emoticons” to express glee or triumph unless you are thirteen years old.

When you say “people like you,” meaning people who are going to vote for a Republican or a Democrat next week, you understand that you are referring to something like 120 million of your fellow citizens.

Are you so wise?

Look, support Nader or whomever. But don’t try to tell me that voting for Barack Obama is supporting some kind of oppressive status quo.

Honestly, I don’t know what the term “political bigotry” means at all. I live in Wisconsin. I’m going to use my vote to support the Democratic candidate, who is by far better suited to the office that John McCain, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Warren Beatty, or anyone else who might be running. Does that answer your question?

There was no mention of how easy it is to hack into the machines. http://techdirt.com/articles/20080909/2333082218.shtml

People who say that we shouldn’t “point fingers” are ridiculous. If there is massive historical evidence of large scale election fraud from one party much much more than any other, then we should be pointing fingers at that party. It would be dishonest and harmful to try to be “evenhanded” or non-partisan when that would be skewing what the facts say.

I don’t think that the Republican Party will hesitate for a second to try to purge massive amounts of votes, switch votes or do whatever they can. I don’t say this because I’m an angry liberal, I say this because this is what past elections have shown us, and this is what evidence from this election is beginning to show us.

Well said, thanks. Let’s not forget the partisan hirings, where there was a litmus test applied.

Thank you so much for validating my point by your unsuccessful attempt to rationalize the inexcusable actions of the Democratic party.
It’s people like you and your thinking of supporting the duopoly that makes third parties a necessity in the US more than ever. Sadly, the term “political bigotry” is well-deserved as it reflects the thinking of a good chunk of people/Democrats.

I utterly and thoroughly and roundly reject your notion that the “finger pointing needs to stop.”

Rubbish. We haven’t even gotten started.

The finger needs to point at years of attempts on the part of Republicans to corrupt or elections.

The finger needs to point at Jusice Department officials who fired a prosecutor who refused to help.

The finger needs to point at the endless acts of incompetence, greed, squalor, failure, war-mongering, fraud, Moloch-worshiping and contempt for government and decency and civilization that has characterized Republican rule for the past thirty years.

No quarter.

I’m sorry, but I reject these false comparisons.

The Nader issue is complicated. The Democratic party is a political party, not a church choir. They fought to keep Nader from taking votes from them. That is simply not the same thing as the agents of the STATE purging voter rolls to disenfranchise black voters or homeless voters or any other voters.

Sam, I need to you to focus. If Donald Duck registers, what harm is done if no one presents himself as Donald Duck to vote?

I agree that there is a minor infraction of the law in registrations malfeasance. However, it does not amount to voter fraud.

Voter fraud is a completely different issue. Implying we are somehow obliged to give it equal time the worse symptom of our current political disease, which values tolerance over truth. It is merely true that not every story has two sides. This is a case in point.

Christopher, I agree with you that voter suppression is a serious issue. That’s why I find it so puzzling as well as frustrating that Democrats even as of today (incorrectly) call Nader a “spoiler,” yet I never hear them mention the disenfranchisement of thousands of black voters that happened in Florida in 2000, which was researched and well-documented by the journalist Greg Palast in his book “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.”

In 2004, the Democrats, in a prime example of their commitment to democratic principles and practicing inclusive democracy, spent a lot of time and energy on keeping Nader off the ballots. Instead, if they’d directed those efforts in Ohio, or elsewhere in getting out the vote, there’s a possibility the outcome would have been different.

So much for liberalism and progressive ideas in action, and so much for Democrats being the office-bearers of these values!!

1. Democrats need to admit that these third party group probably should not be registering voters; even if their fraudalent registrations are not leading to voter fraud our electoral system is far too valuable to cast suspiscion on it in this way. The Secretary of State’s need to be pushing get out the vote efforts with State employees who are not paid based on the number of registrants signed up.

2. Republican’s need to admit that they probably have been more zealous than necessary and that the well intentioned laws they passed have led to some very negative consequences. They might even need to do a house cleansing.

3. All this fingering pointing needs to stop; I think it’s at least as harmful to our democracy as this voting system is. Both sides have blood on their hands, after all it was the Democrat nominee who launched his political career by challening the legitimacy of ballot petitioners. If we can’t come together to wash our hands there will be severe consequence and people like you Mr. Kennedy who are pointing the finger as opposed to working together with your opponents to make a better system will be to blame.

4. Unfortunately, there maybe some Republicans who have tried to game the system but by in large we want the same thing that Democrats do a fair system. While I can’t necessarily say I agree with McCain’s comments towards ACORN; I think they are very understandable. If you were running for President and your opponent was working with an organization that was regestering ‘Donald Duck’ to vote wouldn’t you say something about it? McCain isn’t trying to deprive minorities of the right to vote any more than Obama is trying to stuff ballot boxes with votes from ‘Donald Duck’.