Home | About | Donate

Trump’s Man With a Plan ... to Suppress the Vote Nationwide


Trump’s Man With a Plan ... to Suppress the Vote Nationwide

Amy Goodman, Denis Moynihan

President Donald Trump can’t seem to get over the fact that he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton. He lost massively, by over 2.8 million votes, but he won the Electoral College, and thus the presidency. Yet he has repeatedly claimed that 3 million to 5 million people voted illegally for Hillary Clinton, a number that, if true, would mean that he also won the popular vote. The problem is, it’s not true.


I would expect to see a portrait of Goebbels on the wall in Kobach’s office.


With the Republicans having turned into what amounts to a rural party with little support in the Northeast and West Coast the Republicans have certainly analyzed demographic trends and realized their best hope for winning elections in the future is to suppress the vote. In the presidential elections they have lost the popular vote five of the last six elections. Even with electing a majority of House members the Democrats still sometimes get the most total votes. Along with voter suppression Republicans are winning with gerrymandering. In addition to manipulating the votes in these ways they rely on lying to hide the reality from the voters. They have little to offer voters other than smaller government and racist polities so they are resorting to completely undemocratic means to gain power.


Trump and cons must suppress the vote if they want to establish a master race of rich white golfers and thin blonde women with big breasts.


I guess most republicans have never read of the French Revolution. It was probably not in their white supremacist text books. History often repeats itself.


I’d say look for a connection to Cambridge Analytica, the firm that used personal data to target pro-Trump propaganda and was instrumental in his win. This is more than likely a form of collusion that will be eventually uncovered. Maybe too late though. I hate after-the-fact reporting, when it could have been investigated before.


In Greg Palast’s film, there’s an episode where he shows up at an (aw shucks) ice cream social in Wichita, to ask $ecretary of $tate Kris Kobach to make sense of the protocols used to remove voters from the voter roll.
Since Kobach is in public, he can’t make a scene, feebly tries to justify the program (which Palast shows him clearly doesn’t make sense), and then simply gets up and walks away from Palast.
Between the Russian hacking and this obvious scheme to disenfranchise voters, we clearly see that the Republican politicians are, at best, anti-democracy.


Gotta love Palast and his old-school style dogging of the the PTB!


I do. Just wish that Palast wasn’t seen as “old-school.” In my view, this is why he is more readily marginalized.


He’s made some wacky claims too. He sorta marginalized himself.


Can you name one (or more)?


To be honest, I’m on a camping/road trip through Nevada and don’t remember off the top of my head. Just piping in when checking in on things sporadically. I think it has more to do with his self promotion, making claims with weak evidence. The “shocking” Rove emails back in the mid-2000s that weren’t, as I recall, and his nonsense about the California primary that outright demonstrated he knew nothing about how we count provisional ballots just as a couple of vague memory examples.


Palast’s so-called “wacky” claims are more accurate than what passes for acceptably accurate information from the mainstream media (CIA).

More accurate than those of paid internet mouthpieces, defenders of the status quo.


Not saying he hasn’t done anything good, but he’s a big self promoter and has stepped beyond the evidence for clicks several times because of it. I can’t remember the exact details, but on the Rove email thing, he tried to sell a “big” story that he didn’t have and made a lot of people who once liked him start to doubt him (myself included). On California, he made a claim early in the process that showed he obviously didn’t understand the ballot counting process in California–that provisionals are counted like normal ballots and it takes a month to complete–then tried to double down after looking foolish.


He is an “investigative journalist” who actually investigates things instead of reading copy prepared by M$M propagandists. BTW, what else does this piece of shit, Kobach, have to do before he is brought up on charges? This seems treasonous to me. Of course, this so-called “Republican” party is more and more treasonous as they continue their loathsome agenda to wreck our Republic and replace it with a kleptocracy overseen by billionaires.


You just described Heaven for these appalling scumbags.


One of the people associated with Cambridge Analytica is the loathsome hard-right billionaire Robert Mercer who funded Trumpo the Klown’s campaign.


I of course meant “old school” as a plus for him, recalling all the great reporters of the early to mid-20th Century who were not afraid of failing to be seen as objective. “Old School” as in Murrow, for example.


Appreciate your reply.
Quite apart from his perhaps quirky attempts to promote his work, there is the solid fact that he went right into Kobach’s territory, and literally confronted him, asking him to explain the methodology used to remove voters from the rolls (and not “just” in Kobach’s state). Kobach and his like-minded, democracy-disliking acolytes are implementing this program (“Crosscheck”) across the entire country.
To me, then, Palast’s approach (as one or more here have agreed) is far more important than his personal style.