Comments (41)

Anonymous wrote on November 23, 2007 4:43 PM:

They really need to be more creative.

Charles "Chep" Hurth III, a Missouri lawyer, is the registered agent of this "effort."

Mark Ferdinand "Thor" Hearne II, a Missouri lawyer, was the registered agent of the fraudulent "American Center For Voting Rights" ""effort"".

Has the makings of a very bad movie.

jen wrote on November 23, 2007 6:44 PM:

Woot!! So thrilled the TPM crew is on this one! You guys are the best at taking on things and not quitting! Reminds me to send in a donation!

Joel wrote on November 23, 2007 6:56 PM:

Just a reminder, don't sign initiatives unless you really know what you're signing.

Signing thoughtlessly at the supermarket and leaving it to the voters to sort usually becomes a burden for progressives to fight off.

The initiative process has gotten out of control in California. Don't sign unless you're absolutely sure!!!

Donald from Hawaii wrote on November 23, 2007 8:06 PM:

Anonymous: "Has the makings of a really bad movie."

I disagree. I'm quite convinced that we're living in a Fellini film.

goodgirlroxie wrote on November 23, 2007 8:58 PM:

I am so glad you guys are on to this! Carla Marinucci at the San Francisco Chronicle exposed the people behind the last scheme and stopped it about two months ago. Now they're back, and the Chronicle has laid off so many of its reporters I doubt this issue will get the coverage it needs, despite being incredibly important for California and the rest of the country. Is there anything that Sec. of State Debra Bowen could do about this? Is it in her jurisdiction as the state's overseer of our election system? If it's shown that signatures were collected fraudulently, SURELY the petition can be thrown out!

Joshua the Teacher wrote on November 23, 2007 8:58 PM:

One would assume he is also supporting similar ballot initiatives in Texas, New York, Illinois, Florida, Ohio, and Michigan, no?

Hands off my state, Singer!

justin case wrote on November 24, 2007 1:29 AM:

I live in California. I agree with Joel. My strategy with pretty much all ballot measures is to not sign any petitions and to vote against them all unless there is a very compelling reason to do otherwise. They're almost always ill-considered. Don't sign the petitions, don't help them make the ballot - instead, let's have the legislators do their damn jobs.

jeffgee wrote on November 24, 2007 2:02 AM:

Republicans can't win without cheating or rigging the system. And they know it.

Dawn Kehoty wrote on November 24, 2007 2:34 AM:

A friend in Ventura said that someone came to his door with a petition for "protecting the environment."
When my friend read the text he saw it was actually the electoral college initiative.

God save us from these bastards.

breakspear wrote on November 24, 2007 11:36 AM:

This.Singer.guy.is.an.idiot...why.not.win.the.state.the.right.way..you.know,like..Reagan.did.twice...the.man.so.many.Republicans.admire...sheesh,gotta.steal.elections..they.have.a.track.record.that.GOP

POed Lib wrote on November 24, 2007 12:37 PM:

This is the guy that Chuckie Schumer is protecting. He is a hedge fund manager. Why does he have billions to attack and damage Democrats? Because he pays 15 % on his corrupt theft profits in his hedge fund.

Why is Schumer protecting this toad? This is the enemy. These guys must be taxed at 40-50% to make up for the theft they have gotten away with for the last 20 years.

POed Lib wrote on November 24, 2007 12:39 PM:

If they come to you with one of these petitions under false pretenses, tear it up.

CJ Testify wrote on November 24, 2007 1:03 PM:

This is great for Californians.

The state is just to large to have so many people like myself, conservative, silenced by the antiquated system. Hopefully other states will also take this approach so that the liberals in the heavy urban areas no longer control the states entire vote.

This makes our vote count.

New Jersey should be next.

Dilapidus wrote on November 24, 2007 2:05 PM:

Follow the money.

There is exactly one thing Mr. Singer wants, and that is to protect his income from being taxed the way your income is taxed.

He stands to protect something like a 100 million dollars in a good year (15% cap gains rate versus 38% marginal rate).

Off the cuff numbers, but the point is the same. Greed.

Joe Monster wrote on November 24, 2007 2:31 PM:

CJ- the popular vote would be an even better remedy than to discount the significance of states. Then cities would overrun you. You'd be taxed by and for people who rent. Bring back the welfare state?

Consider that cities are full of people who don't drive cars and wouldn't mind jacking the gas tax to $12/gallon to make their air cleaner by depressing combustion. They also don't have yards, so your property taxes would disappear as an issue. Stuff like public education, health care, public transportation would gain.

I like the all-or-nothing method. States really are the units of our Federal system.

Laney wrote on November 24, 2007 3:31 PM:

Donald from Hawaii wrote I'm quite convinced that we're living in a Fellini film.

Based on a Philip K Dick novel. Or maybe William Gibson.

CJ Testify wrote on November 24, 2007 5:06 PM:

Joe Monster,

Your points are interesting points, just irrelevant. They do not address the subject at hand so I do not understand how you can make a discussion on this issue with irrelevant points? If you are in California I hope you will be part of the conservative majority that will drive the state to declare this new more effective approach the law of the state.

Ultimately, Joe I think the country will dispose of the Electoral College but in a series of steps over a few decades however I disagree with your assertions. Time will tell.

See ya at the polls…

Dave Bowman wrote on November 24, 2007 5:26 PM:

CJ must be writing from an underground bunker in Orange County. How can the CA Republicans run an effective govt. in CA when they can't even fund their own Party?

If you want to take down the 'antiquated system' then fine, do it nationwide. Meanwhile, this effort is what it appears to be--more wingnut games.

Neil B. wrote on November 24, 2007 5:31 PM:

Folks, we have to fight this California vote-splitting with all our might. Yet OTOH, (and I see much support here for this view) we really should support getting rid of the Electoral College (but all at once) in the interests of fairness, no?

POed Lib wrote on November 24, 2007 6:41 PM:

I agree with the repukeliscum trolls. We need to get rid of the electoral college. With no electoral college, Bush II would not have been elected.

This country is majority Democrat. We need to allow for majority rule.

Actually voting each congressional district would be the best. Allow CA to do this, but only if a majority of states joined her. Then each district would vote, and the tyranny of WY, ID and the other miniscule states would diminish.

Jean wrote on November 24, 2007 7:22 PM:

This is OK only if ALL states move to it. Not just one or two with the most population. OR the ones targeted by whatever they are. I can hardly bring myself to type r..... these days. The win at any cost types.

lib in texas wrote on November 24, 2007 10:28 PM:

Hey guys,

I know I am little late to the party but I happened to think that something like this would be a great idea (applied across the board and not to specific states only). I think it sucks that the GOP is selectively trying this in only CA, but I would like to see something like this applied to all states.

I live in Texas and since I have been eligible to vote for President (1988) my candidate has not won my state, so my votes have not counted. Yes, my candidate has won the election but not because of anything I did. I think the candidates should get the percentage of the electoral votes that they won in the popular vote. I am not sure how it would work or if we would have had outcomes that we would have enjoyed in the past but it would give all states a chance in the campaign game. I am tired of having everything come down to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina in the primaries and just a few possible swing states in the general election. Yes, we don't have to deal with constant annoying commercials but check and see how many times candidates make appearances in states they know they can't win? We maybe had Kerry a couple of times in 2004. Perhaps if he had a chance to have a 30% go to 35% in Texas and have that added to his total, then maybe we would count for more and they would have to pay attention to all of us that make up we the people.

Just a little tidbit of info to scare you or not (it scares me.) If a candidate wins the top 11 most populous states by a 51% - 49% margin they can lose the remaining 39 states without a vote and still be Mr. or Madame President. Now I know you would have a lot of popular votes, but is this really what we want?

California 55
Texas 34
New York 31
Florida 27
Illinois 21
Pennsylvania 21
Ohio 20
Michigan 17
Georgia 15
New Jersey 15
North Carolina 15

Total 271

Do you think someone in the GOP vote-rigging machine hasn't figured this one out yet? I doubt it. I know it is far fetched, but then again half of what they do is far fetched and they keep getting away with it.

Matt S wrote on November 24, 2007 10:57 PM:

I just don't understand why they are doing this, the measure is clearly unconstitutional.

Article II, Section 1:

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."

The legislature has to do this, not a voter initiative. If the Republicans were rolling in money I could understand this, but not when they are behind in fund raising.

norrismorris wrote on November 25, 2007 12:17 AM:

TPM getting on this California Issue and GOP/Rudy involvement to steal the next election is to be commended.

We need to create a huge groundswell effort to expose it nationally throughout the Internet and MoveOn.

Moreover this can be defeated if we the people are engaged by blogs like this to act in our behalf and oppose and fund opposition to this GOP action in California to cheat America once again.

Please keep up the good work as we desperately need to stop this ASAP and arouse us to immediate action against this subversive tactic to steal another election.

xvet wrote on November 25, 2007 10:58 AM:

If these goof-balls can't win fairly and squarely they'll win it thru deception. I thought this was dead but obviously the rock these slimy creatures slid out from under wasn't heavy enough to hold them down . Evidently we need a bigger rock.

xvet

SolarFlex wrote on November 25, 2007 12:01 PM:

It would be great for the people of California to have this choice. I look forward to signing the petition when it comes my way. California is too large of a state for this system and we the people need the chance to decide.

My bet is the initiative will win if it is fully considered, my concern is the level of shrill and fear mongering that the left will go to defeat this. You see it all over here in these posts, the name calling and unsubstantiated hollow accusations.

I hope that through all the lefts distortions and screaming the people will see that this is a valuable step forward for individual voting rights. The system has served its purpose but technology and communication has brought us a chance to improve on it.

Dave Bowman wrote on November 25, 2007 1:13 PM:

What 'unsubstantiated hollow accusations' are there? Here is a key graf from the NYT article:

//
Over the years, Mr. Singer has been a major donor to Republican causes. He gave $1.5 million to the Progress for America Voter Fund, an advocacy group set up in 2004 to advance the policies of the Bush administration. The group ran commercials during the 2004 presidential campaign in Midwestern battleground states featuring the smoky ruins of the World Trade Center, while portraying Senator John Kerry as weak on military budgets. Mr. Singer was also a donor to the Swift Vets and P.O.W.’s for Truth, which ran advertisements attacking Mr. Kerry’s Vietnam War record.

But what has attracted notice recently is Mr. Singer’s September donation of $175,000 to a group called Take Initiative America — California, a corporation that had been set up in Missouri the day before, and which then donated the money to a group called Californians for Equal Representation.

//

Apparently, according to wingnut logic, it's a noble effort when a New York moneyman, and a shady Missouri organization attempt to influence California's election laws, and any attempts by the citizens of CA to oppose this outside influence are characterized as 'shrill and fear mongering (sic).'

Where is the distortion here?

P J Evans wrote on November 25, 2007 3:12 PM:

For all the people who think this is a great idea:
Reverse 'Democrats' and 'Republicans' in your statements, and see if you still like the idea.
Then think about how you'd feel if one of those parties was the Greens.
Then think about the idea that the people collecting signatures are being paid
_by the signature_ by money from _another state_ and
_someone who wants to be president_.

Can you smell this?
It's the smell of people who can't win based on their own ideas and principles.
It's the smell of bought votes and election fraud.
It's the smell of Karl Rove and the Republican party.
It's the smell of dying democracy.

SolarFlex wrote on November 25, 2007 5:06 PM:

Dave Bowman;

I got to ask you, why is it that libs always point to the Swift Boaters and their supporters as if they have done something wrong? They are great Americans that stood up to what they considered to be lies from a veteran that concocted stories to support his receiving 4 Purple Heart medals. And just in case you are not aware of it their accusations continue to go un challenged by Kerry or anybody else with any credible evidence. In fact for over a year now a one million dollar reward is available to anyone that can prove the swift boaters to be liars. Nothing… , they weren’t lying, Kerry is the liar.

As for your other points, you need to read my post again, you seem to have missed what I was saying regarding the 'shrill and fear mongering. My point is that the opponents of our right as Californians to vote on this issue will be using these techniques of fear mongering and 'unsubstantiated hollow accusations' to deceive the Californians against this proposition.

Xenos wrote on November 25, 2007 5:53 PM:

If they come to you with one of these petitions under false pretenses, tear it up.

Of course this is illegal, but makes for an interesting approach toward civil disobedience. One could also, of course, just offer to sign the petition and run away with all the papers attached to the clipboard.

You can give it back after photocopying it, so you can then call everybody listed and ask them if they knew what they were signing. If the poll-taker wants to file a criminal complaint they have to identify themselves, at which point you can file a criminal complaint w/ affidavits of any signers who feel they were mislead into signing for the initiative.

Still, the grabbing of the clipboard and running away sounds like the most fun...

Xenos wrote on November 25, 2007 6:18 PM:

"And just in case you are not aware of it their accusations continue to go un challenged by Kerry or anybody else with any credible evidence."

So much dishonest trollery, so little time. There is a substantial, certified, contemporary set of documents behind every medal won by Kerry. I would say that the burden of evidence and the burden of persuasion rests on anyone who wants to challenge this evidence. This never was forthcoming.

Typical dishonest Roveism - accuse your opponent of the very crime you are committing.

SolarFlex wrote on November 25, 2007 6:31 PM:

Hey Xenos,

How many of the "substantial, certified, contemporary set of documents behind every medal won by Kerry" did Kerry write?

Since you seem to be unaware of the detail that was in fact the accusation - Kerry’s accounts appear to be contrary to the others that were there, except for the one where he shot the guy in the back, apparently everyone agreed with that event, he did shot the guy in the back.

Otherwise everyone that was involved or witness to the various events seems to believe Kerry was lying in the reports.

Xenos wrote on November 26, 2007 7:31 AM:

"Otherwise everyone that was involved or witness to the various events seems to believe Kerry was lying in the reports."

Everyone? Are you serious? More lies.

SolarFlex wrote on November 26, 2007 9:59 AM:

Name one person from Kerry’s Platoon or any others that witnessed the events that has agreed or stepped forward to support Kerry’s version of the events. Just One?

That is the thing you seem to miss overwhelmingly the men that served with him claim he has not told the truth but a tool like you will go on believing the traitorous politician in the absence of anything other than his word.

This is the man that sat and lied to the Senate about the murderous American solders. How many of our solders in Prison camps received an extra dose of torture for what Kerry said? Any idea?

Xenos wrote on November 26, 2007 10:22 AM:

'This is the man that sat and lied to the Senate about the murderous American solders.'

More urban myths. All he testified to was that the Winter Soldier organization received reports about atrocities - he NEVER testified that he knew them to be true - only that there were alarming reports that merited investigation. The most extreme reports were later shown to be untrustworthy, and Kerry proceeded to disassociate himself from the Winter Soldiers.

I guess that make him a liar in your eyes. Believe what you want to - you clearly have a tenuous grip on reality.

SolarFlex wrote on November 26, 2007 11:17 AM:

Xenos,
You offer nothing in the form of evidence or a single name to support any of your points above, none, you avoid evidence because you have none, just your opinions as if they are fact, well here’s my opinion.

He defamed the uniform and betrayed his fellow solders. He was there for forty some odd days and he had the gall to consider him the ‘conveyor of the truth’ give me a break, he did it to get face time with the cameras, his agenda was to promote himself at the expense of our nation. He’s a dog!

Larry wrote on November 26, 2007 1:15 PM:

I don't agree with Paul's politics. I had the opportunity to work for him for over six years. If every executive took care of his/her employees like Paul does this would be a really good country. Ture, you screw up and Paul will have fit you work and everybody is treated well. What I remember most is when the bomb alert went out for the subways, an e-mail was sent out that no one in the firm would take public transportation home. Cars would be provided. That went from the head trader down to the receptionist. I had a smoke escape kit under my desk so that in case of fire I could get out. People had good life and health insurance. If there was a problem at home the firm understood. Employees were treated like people and valued.

Best evidence is how few people leave Elliott and they've got a lot of talent there. There are ways around non-competes and hedge funds can throw money at people but it would be hard to find a nicer group of professionals to work with. Most hedge funds have lots of big egos, not Elliott That's why people stay.

By the by Paul knew my politics and didn't care. Oh and Paul is very fair to his investors you get a far better deal from Paul then a lot of hedge funds give out.

Mike wrote on November 26, 2007 3:16 PM:

Rudy Guliani was too busy before 9-11 protecting the interests of Kerik who is now under federal indictment.He knew about his mafia connections and kickbacks.
He was protecting his friend - a pedophile preist.
He got kickbacks from the company that made defective radios that firemen had to use.
He was seeing another women while married.
No wonder he did not protect Americans before 9-11.
And murder rates went up by over 3000 in 2001 alone while Guliani was the mayor of new york.

SolarFlex wrote on November 26, 2007 4:15 PM:

Mark- you really think that blaming Giuliani for the 2001 terrorist attach is reasonable? What a jerk. Honor- you have none. (Honesty is part of the term honor)

Giuliani reduced the murder rate in NYC by 61% during his term as mayor. It became the safest large city in the country. End of Story!

You're a deceitful despicable person in my opinion. The world needs to watch out for the likes of you.

Dave Bowman wrote on November 26, 2007 6:44 PM:

SolarFlex, you are a troll, and your assertions about Kerry are false. Here are the facts, along with sources, which is 100% more than you've supplied:

//

Of those who served in Kerry's boat crew, only Stephen Gardner joined SBVT.{[1] He was not present on any of the occasions when Kerry won his medals, including his Purple Hearts. Gardner appeared in two of the group's television advertisements.
All other living members of Kerry's crew supported his presidential bid, and some frequently campaigned with him as his self-described 'band of brothers'. Kerry crewmembers have disputed some of SBVT's various allegations: "totally false" (Drew Whitlow), "garbage" (Gene Thorson), and "a pack of lies" (Del Sandusky).[18][19][20]
No members of SBVT were aboard Kerry's boat during any of the incidents for which he was decorated. The only member of SBVT who was present at the Silver Star incident, Rood's crewmember Larry Clayton Lee, praised Kerry's tactics and stated that he earned his Silver Star; he stated that based on discussions with other SBVT members, he came to question whether Kerry deserved other medals for incidents at which he was not present.[21][22]

//

source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swift_Boat_Veterans_For_Truth

Also, regarding Giuliani, and your last comment--take a look in the mirror!

RW wrote on November 27, 2007 4:14 PM:

So we should allow the populace centers of California and New York to decide who is the next president??
If we take out the immigrant strongholds of Los Angeles and San Fransisco, California appears to be Republican to me.
Since you have desensitized everyone to what is going on around them with your politically correct scheme of the Clintonista era, we are now going to allow them to pick our President????
Go figure! The left only worry about what they perceive as being good for the country, when in fact, they are the weakest link and refuse to consider anything other than their own drival.
By the way, what ever happened to the lawsuit against the Clintonistas for fraudulent fundraisin in California?
Or did the liberal bastion of Cali sweep that under their rug?