>>>>I think there are two separate issues. I agree with you that the Democrats are recruiting voters who would be unlikely to vote otherwise, and that it isn't necessarily an expression of the will of the people. (Stop the presses! -- I criticized the Democrats). But I think voter suppression is a very real issue, and we know which party is doing that. The Republicans have very specific, very targeted strategies for minimizing turnout in some areas. Fortunately, it isn't going to be enough to save them this time (evil cackle).
>>>
>>>Yeah, but a lot of the "strategies for minimizing turnout" include things like asking all voters to produce identification to match registration records. I live in about the whitest, most Republican suburb in Ohio and I have to do that every time I vote, even though the old lady at the registration table was in Eastern Star with my mother for 40 years.
>>>
>>>Treating voters differently based on arbitrary criteria is voter suppression. Asking voters to identify themselves at registration or at the polls to protect the integrity of the process discriminates against no one - except those who are voting in ways that are illegal.
>>>
>>
>>That certainly sounds unobjectionable in concept. But some of the efforts go beyond checking ID at the polling place. Here are some links.
>>
>>http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/22/voter_supression_guide/
>>http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/E2E3701C-CA33-472B-99B3-9CBDFD312882/
>>http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-88055
>>http://www.techimo.com/forum/debateimo-politics-religion-controversy/216708-republican-vote-suppression-fraud-fails-montana.html
>>http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6372
>>http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_republican_war_on_voting
>>
>>(The last one is a long one).
>
>My concern is not the accusations of fraud listed in the articles you cite above, but rather the way the articles were written. There is no real evidence that any fraud was committed by either side in those articles that I could see. It is all supposition and interpretation and the articles all have an obvious partisan slant. I have read the same accusing the Dems of voter fraud. That anyone would use those as evidence of fraud amazes me. They are not evidence and they are not fact. They are an interpretation of events that support a specific point of view. Can you point me to one news story reporting where anyone was found guilty of voter fraud or voter suppression? I scanned all of the articles on each link and didn't see any such thing. They all appeared to be op-eds to me and some were so heavily partisan it was suprising that you would post them. Having written that, I'm absolutely positve that voter fraud does indeed exist.

Did you follow any of the links in the articles? If so, then you saw courts of law stopping some of the things they were trying to do and a judge or two speaking quite harshly about the tactics. Even state supreme courts overturning republican attempts unanimously. Maybe that's still opinion of a sort, but then what sort of 'evidence' would be acceptable?