--- Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm surprised that you seem to be saying this as if > it were taken for > granted. Is the existence of this "machine" > documented somewhere? I > don't even understand how an outsider to such a > system could evaluate > its size or effectiveness. If it were so obvious > that outsiders could > make such judgments, wouldn't dozens of lawyers be > all over it? > > Nick
I think the best _recent_ book on it is John Fund's "Stealing Elections". George Will talks about it in a column he wrote on the subject recently: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55781-2004Oct22.html Fund is a Republican, so he focuses too much on only one side of the coin, but it's done fairly well. The existence of a wide-spread and effective practice (all at the local level, of course) to do such things is certainly well known. It's somewhat suspicious, for example, that (as Will notes) Franklin County, OH has 815,000 residents 18 and over and 845,000 registered voters. This is a remarkably high voter registration rate, to put it mildly. You also do kind of have to wonder why the Democratic Party in locality after locality will fight a war to the death to make it impossible to even ask for the _photo IDs_ of voters. This does not strike me as an entirely unreasonable request. How large is it? I don't know. I don't think anyone knows. Almost certainly not large enough to matter in most elections. Which is the major reason no one has cared about it in the past. But large enough to matter in this one? Quite possibly. ===== Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Freedom is not free" http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
