House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby chiggerbit » Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:20 pm

serious enough to pull a hamhanded stunt like this one?


They do their politics mean down there. I'm just remembering the McCain-fathered-a-black-baby-that-he-and-his-wife-adopted story. That was SC, right? I'm not sure they know how to do it any other way.
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby lupercal » Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:43 pm

^ Mean and dirty, apparently. Yeah I think SC is where McCain had his heart of darkness moment in 2000, after which he never left the reservation, not that it did him any good.

Link to BradBlog's latest update: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7891
User avatar
lupercal
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby compared2what? » Sat Jun 12, 2010 10:28 pm

lupercal wrote:^ maybe not so strange, except for the national reporting. Planting candidates and rigging polls appears to be business as usual in SC:



I was just about to say something more or less like that back when MinM's post was the last one on the thread. But I suddenly got kicked offline. Because....One reported point that I forgot to mention is that evidently the SC Democratic party did not want any investigation.

Which made me remember what state we were talking about. Because I really, really doubt the SC dems got anything to hide wrt Greene. It's just that South Carolina state politics are kinda-sorta notoriously corrupt that there probably isn't a single significant figure in either party in the whole state who would just as soon not attract scrutiny from any federal branch of government with some law enforcement powers if she or she could avoid it.

But....I don't know.

Like my two hypotheses indicate, I think it's not -- strictly speaking -- a dirty political trick. It just feels to me more like a really ugly racist practical joke by some...I don't know, maybe right-wing lobby shop or law firm or advocacy group or something like that?

I kinda picture some wealthy white guys who never miss a reunion of [whatever the U. of SC's most BMOC greek-letter fraternity that wears, like, hooded robes and black-leather jockstraps while it paddles the asses of its naked, bound and blindfolded would-be inititiates until they bleed while in a state of near-lethal alcohol intoxication because they have no other outlet for their homoerotic desires] sitting around over beers at some barbecue joint cracking themselves up for having (from their point of view) made Obama and/or Clyburn look like the monkey they believe he (and/or he) really is.

Know what I mean? That kind of a scenario, definitely done by some group that's active in far-right SC political circles, and maybe even by the Whatever County Republican Party Headquarters. But whoever it was, their goal wasn't electoral, per se, I don't think. They were just being pricks and trying to turn up the heat on the race hatred even higher than it already is.

That's just gut-feeling, though. I got nothing to back it up.

Greene really does look and sound controlled, doesn't he? But....Let's be open-minded. He could be being blackmailed. Or he could just need money. And his dad has diabetes. Maybe he needs some kind of procedure or something?

Or possibly he's been with them since frat-house days! OMG, they've been indoctrinating him since hazing!

Except that backstory was just my dumb flight of fancy. Dammit.

Poor guy, though. It can't be fun.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby lupercal » Sun Jun 13, 2010 2:17 am

C2W I'm not sure I'm fully following all your points so I'll just pull out a few statements I'd tend to disagree with:

One reported point that I forgot to mention is that evidently the SC Democratic party did not want any investigation.

I can buy the idea of a nationwide pattern of Dem party officials bought or scared off of calling attention to election fraud, even though Dems usually take the hit. Case in point: the DNC's whitewash "investigation" of 2004 fraud in Ohio, even though the Dem candidate, Kerry, went down. But in this case, isn't it Clyburn and SC Dems who are calling for the investigation?

Because I really, really doubt the SC dems got anything to hide wrt Greene.

So do I, but on the other hand, he was on the ballot for a statewide office, so you'd think they'd have made an effort to find out something about him, and surely they can't be as clueless as they're letting on here (from the Chris Good blog quoted above):

Democrats aren't sure who is behind any of this, but they think something fishy is going on. Clyburn has suggested there was a conspiracy to plant those three candidates. "Honestly, we have no idea," South Carolina Democratic Party spokeswoman Keiana Page told me when asked whether they have any idea who may be responsible for the alleged planting.

They'd have to be brain dead not to have SOME idea of who planted Greene.

But whoever it was, their goal wasn't electoral, per se, I don't think. They were just being pricks and trying to turn up the heat on the race hatred even higher than it already is.

I have no trouble believing this was a run-of-the-mill dirty trick. "Strategists" like Atwater, Rove, Floyd Brown (the genius behind the Willie Horton ad), etc etc etc have been perfecting this game for decades. Ditto election fraud, long before 100% unverifiable machines appeared in 2004. Scratch any anomalous GOP win in the last 50 years and you'll probably find fraud, for example, George Dukmejian's defeat of Tom Bradley, the popular black mayor of Los Angeles, in the 1982 Calif governor's race --Bradley won the actual election. as pollsters had predicted, but then Dukmejian miraculously pulled ahead when absentee ballots were counted. Uh huh, sure.

Greene really does look and sound controlled, doesn't he?

From the KO interview I don't think he looks as bad as all that. Totally inadequate, yeah, but not crazy, retarded or drugged. More like he's doing a job and just glad he gets to keep his clothes on doing it. I imagine it has something to do with staying out of jail on that decency charge or maybe debts. Or, as you mentioned, he could be an intel player from way back, or a Manchurian candidate under hypnosis or MK, but to me that seems very unlikely.

So my conclusion is that he's there to keep Rawl from catching on with coastal SC voters and driving DeMint out of office next fall, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if nothing happens and he's still on the ballot in November.
User avatar
lupercal
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby Nordic » Sun Jun 13, 2010 2:43 am

FW little IW, I know some Dems here in California who register as Repubs just to mess with the votes (in their minds anyway). One of them told me he voted for Orly Taitz for Sec of State here last Tuesday.

However if that were the case in SC with this guy, there should be a lot of evidence for the planning of this on right-wing message boards, which would be pretty easy to check out. It's not like they'd keep it a secret IMO.

I'd say the whole thing is decidedly fishy, and I half expected him to have been described, when he handed over the check, as having that same expression on his face that mass killers do who seem to be hypnotized. Guess I'm just conditioned for that now.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby MinM » Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:46 pm

lupercal wrote:So my conclusion is that he's there to keep Rawl from catching on with coastal SC voters and driving DeMint out of office next fall, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if nothing happens and he's still on the ballot in November.

I agree with that. Plus, after losing both Arlen Specter and Bob Bennett in the Primaries, the Spooks could not afford another hit to one of their own in the U.S Senate. Especially a recently productive one who just earned his bones in Honduras...
American Dream wrote:http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/78899.html

Honduras shows Latin America's 'strongman' is Jim DeMint

James Rosen | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: November 16, 2009 08:00:11 AM


WASHINGTON — Sen. Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican known for his efforts to influence domestic immigration and health-care issues, has scored a foreign-policy coup by helping to compel the Obama administration to shift its stance on strife-ridden Honduras...

viewtopic.php?p=299038#p299038
Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3286
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby compared2what? » Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:25 pm

MinM wrote:
lupercal wrote:So my conclusion is that he's there to keep Rawl from catching on with coastal SC voters and driving DeMint out of office next fall, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if nothing happens and he's still on the ballot in November.

I agree with that. Plus, after losing both Arlen Specter and Bob Bennett in the Primaries, the Spooks could not afford another hit to one of their own in the U.S Senate. Especially a recently productive one who just earned his bones in Honduras...
American Dream wrote:http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/78899.html

Honduras shows Latin America's 'strongman' is Jim DeMint

James Rosen | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: November 16, 2009 08:00:11 AM


WASHINGTON — Sen. Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican known for his efforts to influence domestic immigration and health-care issues, has scored a foreign-policy coup by helping to compel the Obama administration to shift its stance on strife-ridden Honduras...

viewtopic.php?p=299038#p299038


That's a false analogy. Both Bennett and Specter were widely known to be all but dead in the water before they lost. And in both cases, that was fundamentally because they couldn't withstand challenges from the right, not because they couldn't withstand challenges from the left. I mean, it's true that Specter technically lost to a more liberal opponent. But that was only because he was a Republican who switched parties in order to have some hope of avoiding what would have been his totally guaranteed loss to a more conservative opponent had he remained in the GOP.

DeMint, on the other hand, wasn't in any serious danger of being lost to the Spooks. The one and only poll with results that you could conceivably stretch into a misleading suggestion to the contrary was internally contradictory and either had very poorly phrased questions on some points or questions on some points that were intentionally phrased to get a topline number for DeMint that was lower than 50 percent (the lowest number at which incumbents are believed to be secure). And even then, they couldn't jam him any lower than 49 percent.

Further -- and not so coincidentally -- that poll was conducted by Public Policy Polling, which makes its money working for local Democrats. Who would obviously have had a fundraising interest in depicting DeMint as more vulnerable than he actually was at the time that it was conducted.

Per every other measure, he's popular enough in state to have been a pretty safe incumbent even against a more seriously well-funded and supported opponent than Rawl. Particularly in light of his having the loyal donor support of the health care industry, which isn't exactly in a position to ask itself what he's done for it lately.

And last but far from least: The overall national trend in political upsets is decidedly to the right, even in states less conservative that South Carolina -- eg, the recently elected junior United States Senator from the great state of Massachussetts, Scott Brown.

Plus, that's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to signs and indications that DeMint was going to sail to re-election with the wind at his back, barring some yet-to-surface major-league scandal or something like that. Which would not only have to be very major-league but also very unambiguous to make a decisive difference at this stage of the game (ie -- indictment, not investigation or whatever).

So I really don't see why Spooks would have been bothering their little heads about the race at all, let alone going all in on a gambit so obvious that they were at some risk of being caught in the act of interfering with domestic elections. Because (a) that's not formally a part of their brief; and (b) it's the kind of thing that even the apathetic public tends to feel very strongly about. For the obvious reasons.

In summary: I respectfully challenge the logic of your premise and humbly dissent wrt to your conclusion.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:42 pm

This thing seems a bit too amateur for the spooks. As c2w? points out, there's no need to secure DeMint's overwhelming incumbency advantage. As for the possible psy-op benefits of reinforcing South Carolina racism... um, I daresay it's even more secure that DeMint himself. So secure that the idea of local machine-politics racists putting Greene's win together as a fun thing to do seems quite plausible. Remember if this planting or prank or whatever it is had been done more credibly, you wouldn't even know about Greene outside the state. The weirdness of how it happened is causing the danger of backfire to whatever purpose it had. If this is exposed as some kind of plot and a stronger candidate is put in, he'll have a hell of a beef to run on (whether or not DeMint was involved) and might actually endanger DeMint (odds of 10 to 1, instead of zero).

My dream scenario is this turns out to have been done by machine manipulation (presumably by outside hack, which is even better because it demonstrates that anyone can fuck with DRE) and gets the widest possible coverage as such and turns into the end of ES&S and DRE.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby compared2what? » Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:27 pm

lupercal wrote:C2W I'm not sure I'm fully following all your points so I'll just pull out a few statements I'd tend to disagree with:

One reported point that I forgot to mention is that evidently the SC Democratic party did not want any investigation.

I can buy the idea of a nationwide pattern of Dem party officials bought or scared off of calling attention to election fraud, even though Dems usually take the hit. Case in point: the DNC's whitewash "investigation" of 2004 fraud in Ohio, even though the Dem candidate, Kerry, went down. But in this case, isn't it Clyburn and SC Dems who are calling for the investigation?


My bad, I mispoke. And was also mistaken. Yes, Clyburn and SC Dem Party Chairwoman Carol Fowler are calling for an investigation. I was misremembering a TPM item in which DSCC chairman Sen. Bob Menendez (D - NJ) -- and I'm very broadly paraphrasing here -- responded to questions on the matter by saying, "Please allow me to drop this issue like a box of rocks before fleeing for the nearest hills."

Or, for those who insist on accuracy:

    The chairman of the Senate Democrats' campaign arm would say little about allegations surrounding Alvin Greene's mysterious Senate candidacy in South Carolina, telling reporters today it is a matter for the state party to handle.

    Asked by TPM about Greene and the South Carolina Democrats' call for him to step aside at a briefing today, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) put both hands out in protest. He dodged several questions about charges from Rep. James Clyburn and the state party that Greene may not be a legitimate candidate, saying the "appropriate officials" are looking into it. He wouldn't answer a TPM question about whether he supports the state party, which is calling for Greene to step aside despite winning the primary Tuesday night.

    The bottom line is that Democrats recognize it's not going to be a competitive race to challenge Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), regardless of the candidate chosen as his rival. Menendez said the party is "not engaged there" and that it is "not a place that I am focused on."

    "I will allow the South Carolina Democratic Party and Congressman Clyburn, who I serve with and I know can be tenacious, to continue to pursue it and we will look at," Menendez said.

Portion congruent with issues addressed in my previous post bolded, and LINK, and, yes, you are totally correct, whereas I was absolutely fucking wrong, mistaken and in error. And witlessly so, to boot.



Because I really, really doubt the SC dems got anything to hide wrt Greene.

So do I, but on the other hand, he was on the ballot for a statewide office, so you'd think they'd have made an effort to find out something about him, and surely they can't be as clueless as they're letting on here (from the Chris Good blog quoted above):

Democrats aren't sure who is behind any of this, but they think something fishy is going on. Clyburn has suggested there was a conspiracy to plant those three candidates. "Honestly, we have no idea," South Carolina Democratic Party spokeswoman Keiana Page told me when asked whether they have any idea who may be responsible for the alleged planting.

They'd have to be brain dead not to have SOME idea of who planted Greene.


I agree. I mean, I think it probably did take them by surprise when it happened, because until then, he was just some guy who paid the ten-grand plus registration fee and disappeared as far as they were concerned.

But I'd also imagine that they looked into it pretty damn fast, as well as thoroughly enough to have a clue or two about what was up within 24 to 48 hours. They're just better off letting an investigation reveal whatever it reveals than they are throwing stones themselves, which would leave them more open to being portrayed as sore-losers/racists/non-respecters-of-the-will-of-the-people than they need to be.

But whoever it was, their goal wasn't electoral, per se, I don't think. They were just being pricks and trying to turn up the heat on the race hatred even higher than it already is.

I have no trouble believing this was a run-of-the-mill dirty trick. "Strategists" like Atwater, Rove, Floyd Brown (the genius behind the Willie Horton ad), etc etc etc have been perfecting this game for decades. Ditto election fraud, long before 100% unverifiable machines appeared in 2004. Scratch any anomalous GOP win in the last 50 years and you'll probably find fraud, for example, George Dukmejian's defeat of Tom Bradley, the popular black mayor of Los Angeles, in the 1982 Calif governor's race --Bradley won the actual election. as pollsters had predicted, but then Dukmejian miraculously pulled ahead when absentee ballots were counted. Uh huh, sure.


You could well be right. Even I wouldn't argue that was anything more than just a feeling. And it's certainly not, like, a firmly held conviction. I don't really know what the what is.

Greene really does look and sound controlled, doesn't he?

From the KO interview I don't think he looks as bad as all that. Totally inadequate, yeah, but not crazy, retarded or drugged. More like he's doing a job and just glad he gets to keep his clothes on doing it. I imagine it has something to do with staying out of jail on that decency charge or maybe debts. Or, as you mentioned, he could be an intel player from way back, or a Manchurian candidate under hypnosis or MK, but to me that seems very unlikely.


Well....That was actually intended as more of a chatty question than it was as an assertion of my opinion. Although I can totally see how it would read like the latter. But as I said, he could just be doing it for the $$$. And, you know, there's a thin-line between MK hypnosis and extreme personal discomfort as far as what can be inferred from a few TV interviews goes. So again, no arguments here with any of the above.

So my conclusion is that he's there to keep Rawl from catching on with coastal SC voters and driving DeMint out of office next fall, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if nothing happens and he's still on the ballot in November.


Not to get all repetitive or anything, but I really just don't see any indication that there was enough of a risk of that happening to merit the investment, let alone to justify doing something so flagrant that it was likely to invite investigation.

Because....I mean, yes, South Carolina did technically have one Democratic Senator as recently as 2005 in the form of Fritz Hollings.

But he was basically an immovable fixture and last-living-Dixiecrat type who'd been in office since 1966, who had a warm working relationship with his SC senatorial colleague Strom Thurmond. And who voted against Thurgood Marshall's confirmation but for those of both Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. To choose an aspect of his record that speaks concisely rather than comprehensively to how far he went in crossing party lines wrt very high-profile and significant issues.

So I just don't see why elaborate defensive maneuvers would have been called for. Rawl was a place-holder, not a serious challenger.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby lupercal » Sun Jun 13, 2010 4:43 pm

JackRiddler wrote:This thing seems a bit too amateur for the spooks.

No direct spook participation needed, as SC politics are apparently run by "political consultants" managing both Dem and GOP campaigns, though I don't imagine the fixers behind this one gave Greene a business card. To me it doesn't seem very amateur, either, considering he won the damn thing while out on bail for an alleged sex crime.

JackRiddler wrote:As c2w? points out, there's no need to secure DeMint's overwhelming incumbency advantage.

Maybe not: "Rawl was only seven points behind DeMint in a recent InsideAdvantage/StatehouseReport poll." (from "The Manning-churian Candidate: Unknown Alvin Greene Wins Senate Primary," by Corey Hutchins, Columbia Free Times, June 10th, 2010, http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat ... 6100935349 )

Finally, the random prank theory is hard to swallow once you realize dirty tricks are SOP in SC, and interfering with federal elections is a serious crime, even if inadequately prosecuted.

p.s. oops, didn't see C2W's latest, can't wait! :P
User avatar
lupercal
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby compared2what? » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:00 pm

Nordic wrote:FW little IW, I know some Dems here in California who register as Repubs just to mess with the votes (in their minds anyway). One of them told me he voted for Orly Taitz for Sec of State here last Tuesday.

However if that were the case in SC with this guy, there should be a lot of evidence for the planning of this on right-wing message boards, which would be pretty easy to check out. It's not like they'd keep it a secret IMO.

I'd say the whole thing is decidedly fishy, and I half expected him to have been described, when he handed over the check, as having that same expression on his face that mass killers do who seem to be hypnotized. Guess I'm just conditioned for that now.


I hear that. And point well-taken, imo. I mean Orly Taitz isn't exactly what you could call a stealth candidate. Whereas Greene just showed up, registered, and disappeared, whoever backed him (assuming he was backed) didn't even use him as a proximate occasion for airing their talking points in the free media. It just doesn't conform to any pattern along those lines that I can figure.

Which doesn't mean that it might not turn out to conform to some pattern along those lines, needless to say. It just won't have been one that I could figure if it does.

And, you know: Wouldn't be the first time, that's for damn sure. So it could be the case, though it's pretty submerged if it is, at least as far as my eyes can see.

However, I freely admit that I have no idea WTF is going on, really. It's just a very intriguing and anomalous scenario of the kind that practically begs for speculative analysis, afaic. I genuinely don't have a very strong opinion about what the non-speculative explanation for it will turn out to be.

I mean, based on currently publicly available information, some explanations make a lot more sense to me than others, obviously. But since equally obviously, publicly available information doesn't adequately explain the stuff that made it an anomalous scenario to begin with, I kind of have to assume that the explanation -- if there ever is one -- is going to involve information that isn't presently publicly available.

Which could be anything, for all I know. I mean, common sense does set some parameters and dictate some odds on an interim basis. And absent extraordinary events, I guess I'm more inclined to expect those to hold up than not. But even then I wouldn't bet the farm on it. Right now, it's an unsolved mystery, imo.
__________________

Sorry Nordic:

Point well-taken, dude!***

***Is what I set out to say.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby Nordic » Sun Jun 13, 2010 5:11 pm

I totally agree, c2w, all we can do is speculate. But something tells me it wasn't his 10 grand that he used. I'd say that's a pretty safe bet. So the question is whose money was it and why?
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Jun 13, 2010 6:35 pm

lupercal wrote:
JackRiddler wrote:This thing seems a bit too amateur for the spooks.

No direct spook participation needed, as SC politics are apparently run by "political consultants" managing both Dem and GOP campaigns, though I don't imagine the fixers behind this one gave Greene a business card. To me it doesn't seem very amateur, either, considering he won the damn thing while out on bail for an alleged sex crime.

JackRiddler wrote:As c2w? points out, there's no need to secure DeMint's overwhelming incumbency advantage.

Maybe not: "Rawl was only seven points behind DeMint in a recent InsideAdvantage/StatehouseReport poll." (from "The Manning-churian Candidate: Unknown Alvin Greene Wins Senate Primary," by Corey Hutchins, Columbia Free Times, June 10th, 2010, http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat ... 6100935349 )

Finally, the random prank theory is hard to swallow once you realize dirty tricks are SOP in SC, and interfering with federal elections is a serious crime, even if inadequately prosecuted.

p.s. oops, didn't see C2W's latest, can't wait! :P


To be clear, I don't believe in a "random" prank, but it might be a kind of hobby piece by exactly the dirty-tricks operators who have pulled off so much other racist crap in SC dating back to looooooong before the McCain baby trick. And interfering with federal elections (insofar as that means faking the vote) is a serious crime, and anyone caught doing it should get penalties comparable to those for mass murderers.

The amateur part of this is, notwithstanding whatever successful manipulation was carried out, either by machine or by cross-over vote, the fact that no one bothered to build any advance credibility for a Greene win. And voila, we're all talking about this and it's big, highly suspicious news. So whatever was intended may backfire badly.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby anothershamus » Sun Jun 13, 2010 6:58 pm

On edit found it.

http://riordansdesk.markcoggins.com/2010/06/could-alvin-green-be-character-in.html

It's also been suggested that his election was the result of e-voting fraud or error.

These posts on The Brad Blog and Tech Dirt discuss the possibility, pointing out several red flags in the results, such as the fact that the absentee ballot results were wildly different than the e-voting tally from election day and the fact that Green received 75% of the vote in a number of precincts, which is unusual even for a popular incumbent. Another flag is that the voting seemed to go against racial preferences. White counties gave Green large majorities, while black ones picked Green by slim margins.

The kicker is the machines that South Carolina uses have no audit trail (i.e., no permanent paper record of each vote cast), so as The Brad Blog puts it, South Carolinians have engaged in "faith-based voting" with no way to confirm the results.

All of this--particularly the red flags--will sound familiar to readers of my novel, Runoff. In it, a powerful business woman in Chinatown hires August Riordan (my PI protagonist) to investigate the results of a San Francisco mayoral election when the Chinese candidate she is backing fails even carry the Chinese precincts. She is convinced that someone must have rigged the outcome by hacking the city’s newly installed touch-screen voting machines.

Check out Runoff if you want to find the solution to that election mystery. I'm not sure the answer to the one in South Carolina will be as easy to uncover.

(Hat tip to Ann Hillesland for pointing me to the Tech Dirt article
)'(
User avatar
anothershamus
 
Posts: 1913
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:58 pm
Location: bi local
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: House Whip Alleging Conspiracy (and Shenanigans) in S.C.

Postby Sepka » Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:56 pm

I think the most believable theory is that someone has a grudge against Vic Rawl, and financed a halfwit with a shady background but a solid, respectable-sounding name to run against him, knowing that Greene would benefit from the top ballot position as well. Once the election was over, Greene could be outed to the media, embarrassing Rawl not only by the fact that a substantial percentage had voted for Greene rather than Rawl, but also calling the legitimacy of Rawl's victory into question by showing that many of the voters had no real idea even who the candidates were.

Sometimes, of course, you get lucky. Instead of embarrassing Rawl, they've pretty well destroyed him.
- Sepka the Space Weasel

One Furry Mofo!
User avatar
Sepka
 
Posts: 1983
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 2:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests