The voting problems in Arizona probably hurt Hillary more than Bernie

[Cali_Democrat]

The problems were mostly in densely populated areas with higher proportion of minorities. Maricopa county and downtown Phoenix specifically.

Hillary has been winning densely populated urban areas over Bernie Sanders. Hillary won Houston, Detroit, Chicago, Atlanta, Boston etc. That held true on Tuesday as Hillary blew away Bernie in Maricopa County 58.1% to 39.8%.

Hillary wins in more densely populated urban areas with more minorities. Bernie wins more suburban and rural areas with more whites.

So it would make sense that the problems in Arizona actually hurt Hillary more than Bernie.

Arizona primary:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/primaries/2016-03-22#AZ-Dem

[ladjf]

1. It doesn't matter who they hurt. They appear to be illegal and should be punished and stopped.

[Cali_Democrat]

2. Indeed. That's why the "Bernie or bust" crowd is so full of shit.

It was the Roberts court which gutted the voting rights act which would have stopped shit like this.

There's a Supreme Court vacancy and we have a chance to move the court to the left, yet some Bernites are screaming "Bernie or bust" and threatening to write in Bernie or vote third party which would help the GOP.

"Bernie or Bust" is the ultimate slogan of privilege.

[ladjf]

4. I'm sorry. I just don't understand your logic.

Are you saying that if Bernie were to become President, he would allow flagrant voting
processes to be used?

Also, I've heard the slogan that "Bernie or Bust" but I have no idea what it means other than your
description of it s the "slogan of privilege". Please inform me about the "Bernie or Bust" if you have time.

[auntpurl]

11. Not the poster you are replying to, but I'll answer.

"Bernie or bust" is a movement in which, if Hillary gets the nomination, they will write in Bernie's name instead of vote for her. The previous poster's comments were based on the idea of Hillary getting the nomination, in which case voting for Bernie will damage the Democrats' chances in the GE, and possibly allow a Repub into the WH who will nominate more ultra-conservative SC justices.

[ladjf]

59. OK. Thank you. nt

[kristopher]

63. It's a response to perceived foul play on the part of the Clinton campaign

The campaign started on the sour note of DWS and Clinton setting up a debate schedule designed to penalize HRC's challengers normal and expected media coverage. The folks making a lot of money are not keen to have anyone change the rules they've been wrecking the world with for the past 60 years.

[PowerToThePeople]

48. Bernie or Bust!

[tabasco]

3. Completely irrelevant.

What matters is that people who wanted to vote did not get to vote, through no fault of their own.

How many of these people were voting for the first time? How many are now disillusioned about their participation in democracy? All Americans should be outraged about this scandalous, illegal and intolerable failure by the government of Arizona to conduct a fair election.

[Karma13612]

25. well stated. thank you. eom

[spooky3]

33. It's not irrelevant re: the claim that the disenfranchisement helped Clinton more than Sanders

or that somehow Clinton orchestrated the whole thing. I've seen both claims here on DU, yet the second is impossible, since it is the state of Arizona that controls the # of polling places, etc. These claims are what the OP is addressing.

I think or at least hope that nearly every DUer would agree that it is outrageous when votes are suppressed. But it is clear to me that the Republicans who control Arizona are suppressing votes (if anyone is) in anticipation of the general election; problems in the Dem primary are simply collateral damage to them:

"Since Representatives and Senators are elected by exactly the same people, each House of the Arizona Legislature tends to have members with identical political philosophies, which is illustrated by the fact (see below) that the Republican party has two-thirds of the seats in each House."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_State_Legislature

and AZ has a Republican governor:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Ducey

[Loudestlib]

5. Jarrett Maupin, a civil rights activist (and Hillary supporter) in Phoenix

Maupin stated: "We cannot afford for her (Purcell) or her director of elections to be in charge of administrating a general election with so much at stake. It is 2016 not 1956 or 1966, what happened during yesterday's election was highly immoral and highly illegal."

One hour later.....

“There is no present threat to voting rights and civil rights in Arizona’s elections,” said Jarrett Maupin,
“I am no longer joining those few voices that are calling for resignations and investigations into what happened to yesterday’s election,” said Maupin said.



http://www.12news.com/news/politics/civil-rights-activist-forgives-maricopa-county-elections-organizer/98913425

[LiberalFighter]

23. He is wrong to suggest there is no threat to elections in Arizona.

Jarrett Maupin does not have any credibility considering he is apparently friendly with Sheriff Arpaio.

Others in the past have stated that he does not represent the black community in Phoenix.

[Karma13612]

28. Seriously?? Wonder who got to Maupin. That is quite an about face. Don't you think? eom

[Loudestlib]

31. Yeah, normally people don't do a 180 in an hour unless someone "helps" them change their mind.

[Karma13612]

38. Sigh. No wonder we have such low voter turnout. Everyone is so jaded. And

I don't blame them when you have nonsense like this happening.

I honestly believe we need to have some international election monitors come in to the United States and monitor our elections.

One at every precinct.

Yea, I know. Not practical.

But, it is needed.

[LiberalFighter]

35. I don't think Maupin gives a shit.

When he is willing to stand with Sheriff Arpaio he can't be a real Democrat.

[Karma13612]

39. Very true. eom

[Loudestlib]

44. .

[link:|

[libdem4life]

6. Uh, it's the "Bernie or Bust" people that have kept this alive.

Otherwise it would likely never have come up, or gone under as quickly as the retraction of an investigation. And I don't think it's over yet.

So, in line with your comments, I imagine you want to see this investigated and brought to a close as you think it likely hurt HRC more, or ....

Nothing to see here, move along.

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. I don't assume that

I would like to see a detailed analysis of how voters, in different groups, voted on election day vs how they voted if they voted early. From what I've seen so far Sanders solidly won election day voters while Clinton easily won early voters. These problems hit election day voters.

Even if you assumed that urban election day voters still backed Hilary (which is not clear) if her victory among them was narrower than with the early voters, it still could have cost Bernie some delegates to have those voters excluded.

But for the record I would want this fiasco investigated regardless of who it helped or hurt.

[LiberalFighter]

27. I agree that it should be investigated.

I want to know the number of voters that were affected and how many had their Democratic Party affiliation changed without their permission. Also, how many changed from no party affiliation or Republican to Democratic. Whether they changed it too late or did it timely.

Either way we need to know so that it is not based on just allegations.

[Karma13612]

30. +100 eom

[spooky3]

50. It may be important for the general election and future elections.

I agree that it should be investigated and problems (if any) resolved.

However, from what i have read, ALL people who could have voted on election day also could have used the early voting process instead (Bernie and Hillary voters alike). In some states, you have to jump through hoops to vote early. And given the huge # of early voters, I believe it was well-known among the electorate that this was an option. So I would be far more concerned if there were no early voting option.

[NCTraveler]

8. Fuck the Republicans.

Amazing how messed up it was at some places and a whole group of people are carrying their water.

The DNC needs to look at upcoming elections and see where additional resources might be productive for us.

[LiberalFighter]

32. There really isn't anything the DNC can do about this.

The Supreme Court's ruling on the Voting Rights Act took care of that.

State laws need to address this in a consistent way that provides more transparency. There should be limits on how many voters can be assigned to a voting location. Election workers need to have better training and they are either non-partisan in conducting an election or both parties represented at every voting location. Both parties should also serve on any election board at county and the state level.

For primaries the DNC keeps it mostly hands off due to the fact that if blatantly back the wrong person it could cause friction. That is why the woman from Hawaii resigned as a member of the DNC.

[NCTraveler]

46. Yes, there is.

They fund local candidates all the time. They look at candidates in many districts and help to fund them.

[LiberalFighter]

49. They don't fund them all.

Even after the primaries are over they don't fund them all. And it really doesn't come from the DNC. It comes from the Senate or House PACs generally. Also from state and local parties.

The DNC is also not going to get involved financially in a Presidential campaign until after the Convention. And any financial support they do provide to a candidate is going to be small compare to what they raise from supporters.

[ret5hd]

9. Translation:

Would you all just shut up!!! It probably (according to me) hurt ME more than YOU so what the hell are you crying about??? Just SHUT UP!!!

[Cali_Democrat]

10. Nope.

I want a Federal investigation.

[SDJay]

12. Who Gives a Shit?

Theories about who this may have hurt couldn't possibly matter less to me. I'd be just as pissed if the people who were disenfranchised were 100 percent HRC voters, SBS voters, whatever...

Different people and groups have been fucking with our democracy basically with impunity for far too long. It seems that they're only getting bolder since freaking no one will ever actually do anything about it.

Anyone who wants to make this an SBS/HRC issue can piss off. JMO.

[auntpurl]

13. I suspect people are making this point

because so many Bernie supporters on DU and across the internet have accused Hillary of being behind the vote suppression in AZ. Perhaps the OP is making the point that, why would Hillary suppress votes in a county that is demographically likely to favour her? I am not the OP, so I can only speculate.

Like you, though, I am most interested in stopping vote suppression. I would like this matter to be investigated thoroughly, preferably before the GE.

[SDJay]

14. I Get That

I just think it's a waste of time to be worrying about any HRC/SBS crap right now. The bottom line is that we ALL need to be prepared to raise freaking hell as soon as we see this shit happening in November, and I'd bet my bottom dollar that we will in droves.

These fuckers with the repukes are crazy but not all of them are stupid. They know they're a party that's slowly dying out - literally. So they're going to become evermore daring/crazy with their attempts to steal elections.

Find out who the hell was responsible for this debacle in AZ, nail their asses to the wall and set a precedent. Of course, I'm not nearly naive enough to think that's going to happen.

[LisaM]

40. Blaming Hillary is purposely diversionary, IMHO

I think that by keeping that false narrative going and stoking conspiracy theories, it distracts from the reality of what could happen in the fall in Arizona if they don't quickly add more polling places. I would guess that Sanders voters who had to wait five hours (and I've no doubt at all that there were many of them) are more adept at social media, better at sticking up for their rights, and complaining (rightfully) when they were disenfranchised or severely inconvenienced - and I don't use the term lightly - on election day than poor voters without resources or minority voters who might fear repercussions. This is just the reality people in different walks of life face.

It's far more important that we lay the blame where it belongs - with the Republicans who oversaw this debacle - and make sure that there are adequate polling places in November.

Trying to get people all upset at Hillary over something she didn't do is a successful employment of the old tried-and-true divide and conquer strategy. The OP correctly states that the areas most affected were areas where Hillary could expect to do well. Arizona was also a state she was expected to win. What benefit is there to the Clinton campaign to shut down voting (even if you accept the absurd notion that she had the ability to do so) in a state where she won handily?

[spooky3]

51. totally agree.

[seabeyond]

16. I give a shit so many Snaders supporters were vilifying Clinton and my Democratic party, insisting

they suppressed the vote of minorities. Damn straight I give a shit about such offensive misinformation.

[SDJay]

19. That's Great.

If you want to fling poo back and forth with someone about SBS supporters are evil/HRC supporters are horrible people, go somewhere else with it.

I'd just like everyone to be able to vote when it's time. If folks want to fight about that other stuff then go ahead.

Thanks.

[seabeyond]

20. Fling poo? How about stop the disinformation in its tracks knowing the effects.

Everyone on Du has been fighting for a decade and a half, the right to vote, .... dude. And no, I do not need to "go somewhere else".

[SDJay]

21. You Seem Upset.

Enjoy that to its fullest.

Have a nice day.

[seabeyond]

22. You fling poo, and pretend you do not play. Sanders does that too.

[SDJay]

26. Sure. Run With That.

Try a few deep breaths. If that doesn't work then go outside.

Either way, enjoy your outrage. All the best.

[seabeyond]

29. You just sound so familiar.... Who is it that worked so hard at what you are doing. hm...

[SDJay]

34. LOL. Are you STILL Humping My Leg?

My neighbor's chihuahua would be in awe of this display.

[IMG][/IMG]

Now I'm some mystery troll?

Whatever gets you through the day.

Thank you. These posts have helped me end my day with a few chuckles.

Enjoy your evening.

[revbones]

37. ^^ For the win ^^

[w4rma]

47. ^ HAHA! That reply is perfect. You win today's internet, SDJay. (nt)

[LiberalFighter]

43. I wonder how many were really Sanders supporters and how many

were trolls just stirring it up here. There are too many unsubstantiated accusations against Hillary for it to be just Sanders' supporters. Yes some could be Sanders' supporters. If they are mostly then it is likely imo new people that have never been involved before.

[seabeyond]

15. That is why I could not figure why Sanders supporters were blaming Clinton. That is a DUH. LOl.

She would have kicked ass just that much more.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. The problems mostly hurt the voters, not the candidates. Also, the very long lines in some places

are just part of what is actually a long running voter suppression problem in Arizona which strongly impacts rural Native American voters. This week was not a big surprise.
So sure, either candidate could have lost votes and both certainly lost some and who knows which one had the most votes left on the suppression table but it does not matter, it's about the voters and the next election, not just for President but for other offices as well.

[seabeyond]

18. Of course, and not the point as you know. And know why the point has to be made.

[Bluenorthwest]

45. Your snide crap is not welcome, and do not tell me what is not an important point to make.

It's not your place to command me about. So don't. You certainly foul DU with as much rhetorical refuse as you wish, so you really should just let others say what they like. Don't be a bully, you are not a DU cop.

[jillan]

24. Then why hasn't she come out and spoke out about it??? Her silence has been deafening. People here

have noticed. People in this state are starting to discuss it and are wondering if it is a coincidence that she has been silent, the exit polls were off and she won.

Bernie held a presser and sent out a mass email about the fiasco.

Where the F is she? Why isn't she demanding a resolution?

[dchill]

57. She came out and spoke - she gave a victory speech...

while people were still in line, waiting to vote. I don't expect her to have much more to add.

[jillan]

58. No kidding. Seriously, people in Az are talking.

[NorthCarolina]

36. Low Voter Access=Clinton Win. It's really just THAT simple.

By design. To give credence to any other possible motive is incredibly naive denial. Always, always...look to who gains the most from the happenstance... who benefits when the turnout is low? The establishment. They have great difficulty running their shenanigans in caucus states to be sure, but in primary states they hold all the cards; and they will not hesitate to play them.

[spooky3]

53. It is NOT that simple. Low voter access typically disproportionately affects groups who support

Clinton. Remember Ohio in 2004?

Further, the state of AZ, which has a Repub governor and 2/3 control of both houses of the legislature, is in charge of elections. NOT either of the Dem candidates or their supporters.

[spooky3]

55. and see more evidence to the contrary posted here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1570599

[hellofromreddit]

41. Then I can assume we'll have your support

in efforts to fix these sorts of problems in other states before their primaries?

[Cali_Democrat]

61. Absolutely. nt

[UglyGreed]

42. Then where is Hillary and her

outrage???? Just like she did not care if 17 year olds could not vote in Ohio. It does not matter as long as she won. It's time to move along and forget about those who were disenfranchised.............. sounds like a user to me.

[LiberalFighter]

52. Unless I see otherwise I would have to agree with you.

There are two issues that way I see it. Only one of them at this time is verifiable. That is the lack of sufficient polling locations along with refusing to allow voters to vote that were in line. Tie in as to whether any decided to leave the line and not vote. Which demographic group would this be? Which demographic group would be those that were cut off from voting?

The other issue about voter having their voter registration changed needs to be substantiated. At this time it is hearsay without data to support the claim. The questions that need to be asked is how many were affected. Whether they were long time Democrats and had their party affiliation switched. Were Republican or independent and switched to Democratic. Whether those that switched did it by the deadline.

I'm guessing that based on the demographics that Hillary might have done better.

An anomaly that might be consider too is District 9 as to why it had a lower turnout than most of the other districts. Where were the voting locations for that area? It had only had 55% for Hillary compared to about 60% average for other districts in Maricopa county.

[spooky3]

54. good points

[peace13]

56. Then by god she should be speaking out to make certain that this clown show never happens again!

It was wrong. It was illegal. It was a crime against Democracy. Please tell me why she is silent!

[Cha]

60. Gracias for this, Cali~

[corbettkroehler]

62. That Is Moot - Democracy Above All!

It doesn't matter who was harmed. Even the Republican Secretary of State has decried the disenfranchisement

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511570596

Everyone who believes in the principle of "one person, one vote" should demand a re-vote in Arizona and sign the WH.gov petition to that effect

http://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/do-revote-arizona-primary-due-voter-suppression