What’s the bigger problem, the wrong people voting or the right people not voting?

I’ve always been skeptical of the theory that voter fraud is a big problem, at least in the 21st century (I’m not ruling out theories that it used to be a significant problem.)  Thus I’m more worried about this sort of problem, which will occur today in Wisconsin:

Randle’s account is hardly unique in Wisconsin. The lead plaintiff who challenged the voter-ID law, 89-year-old Ruthelle Frank, has been voting since 1948 and has served on the Village Board in her hometown of Brokaw since 1996, but cannot get a photo ID for voting because her maiden name is misspelled on her birth certificate, which would cost $200 to correct. “No one should have to pay a fee to be able to vote,” Frank said. Others blocked from the polls include a man born in a concentration camp in Germany who lost his birth certificate in a fire; a woman who lost use of her hands but could not use her daughter as power of attorney at the DMV; and a 90-year-old veteran of Iwo Jima who could not vote with his veterans ID.

Are there any reputable studies that voter fraud still occurs, in statistically significant amounts?  I suspect this is an attempt by the GOP to drive down turnout among minorities.

 


Tags:

 
 
 

87 Responses to “What’s the bigger problem, the wrong people voting or the right people not voting?”

  1. Gravatar of Eric Eric
    5. April 2016 at 09:01

    This Vox article might be useful
    http://www.vox.com/2015/8/6/9107927/voter-id-election-fraud

  2. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    5. April 2016 at 09:10

    Thanks Eric. That graph is very persuasive.

  3. Gravatar of David Pinto David Pinto
    5. April 2016 at 09:18

    How do these people get through life? I can’t buy a candy bar without showing an ID.

  4. Gravatar of Kgaard Kgaard
    5. April 2016 at 09:24

    What is the argument for allowing everyone to vote in the first place? Does it lead to better outcomes? We can see in, for example, Chile, that economic policy was far superior under Pinochet than it would have been under Allende, and better than it was under Pinochet’s successors. Chile’s boom was almost entirely attributable to Pinochet. As his policies were dismantled in the 90s, Chile began its shift to the left. Senators became popularly elected, taxes rose, regulations increased, growth slowed. Tattoos spread.

    US growth was generally stronger pre-1920 than post-1920.

    Singapore also an excellent example of the virtues of non-democracy. Does the US support democratic uprisings in the middle east precisely to destabilize regimes there? Sure seems that way.

    If the future of political entrepreneurship is private cities (likely), that would seem strong evidence that 100% participatory democracy is not the optimal system.

  5. Gravatar of dw dw
    5. April 2016 at 10:05

    well the first argument for allowing every one to vote, is that in a democracy thats how it works, otherwise maybe its democracy in name only. sort of like north korea or China. and the growth from the 20’s also included a lot of fraud. by bankers. and so far i cant really recall the last time i was asked for my drivers license other than for voting or to get on a plane. course depending a birth certificate to prove you identity seems a fake way to do so, since there isnt any thing on one that could look at it and see you 30-40-50 or more years late that its yours. if one was really trying to reduce voter fraud as claimed, why not address that? but thats not it at all. its just a smoke screen to limit voting to the politicians supporters only.

  6. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    5. April 2016 at 10:18

    “What is the argument for allowing everyone to vote in the first place? Does it lead to better outcomes?”
    There was something about how “(…) to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” But it was in another country, in another life.

    “US growth was generally stronger pre-1920 than post-1920”
    And the n***gers and the wymen knew their place, right?

    “Does the US support democratic uprisings in the middle east
    precisely to destabilize regimes there? Sure seems that way.”
    Yep, because the Arab countries are wonderfully administred as they are. And by definition, supporting uprisings is destabilizing the existing regimes– so is supporting any kind of opposition to the regime (tip: the USA have antagonized the Castros’ failed regime for more years than most Americans have been alive, but loves the jihaddist, Wahhabist Saudi regime). The USA also supported military coups (including the beloved Pinochet’s) precisely to destabilize democratic regimes it didn’t like.
    “Tattoos spread.”
    Run for the hills.

  7. Gravatar of Dagon Dagon
    5. April 2016 at 10:23

    Anecdotes exist on both sides – are you requiring more evidence for fraud than you’re requiring for ID-less population?

    My null hypothesis is that neither in-person fraud nor marginalized ID-less individuals are terribly significant.

    I believe that the motivations for making it an issue are as claimed (republicans to prevent legitimate voters, democrats to encourage illegitimate), but I don’t believe either side is all that effective.

  8. Gravatar of collin collin
    5. April 2016 at 10:39

    I suspect this is an attempt by the GOP to drive down turnout among minorities.

    You think!!?!?! Yes, these laws are targeted to lower the voting totals of groups that traditionally don’t vote Republican. I think we are underrating the impact to all young college students as well. Frankly, I don’t understand why Republicans are pursuing these strategies as the net benefit of less voting is completely overshadowed by the potential increase in current voting by these groups. (Additionally voting experts believe the impact of this voting would at most turn elections on the State Representative level. So the impact is potentially minimal.)

    In terms of politics, these voting ID laws have the impact of the 2009 Cash For Clunkers nonsense.

  9. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    5. April 2016 at 10:42

    @ssumner, I hope you’re not being serious. That Vox graph is ridiculous.

    You can test for voter fraud with various statistical techniques. Voter fraud still occurs in statistically significant amounts in Russia and Georgia, though not enough to affect the general election outcomes except in a couple areas. It may still exist in some areas of the U.S., but it’s the vote-counting process that’s likely corrupt in that case, and there’s nothing IDs can do about that. And the unbound delegates and voting rules are much bigger problems than any voting IDs: just look at how GOP primary rules in Oklahoma led Bernie to win and Trump to lose that state (if Sumner was still wondering about that impossible Bernie Oklahoma victory):
    https://goo.gl/tpk1pP
    I prefer Bernie and Trump victories, so I support open primaries for both parties.

    “I suspect this is an attempt by the GOP to drive down turnout among minorities.”

    -Yeah; probably. If so, nothing wrong with that; non-Asian minorities tend to misgovernment.

    “US growth was generally stronger pre-1920 than post-1920.”

    -Only population growth. And that was due to ancestry-based immigration restrictions enacted from the 1880s to the 1920s.

    “otherwise maybe its democracy in name only”

    -That’s basically all democracy. Ever heard of Obergefell?

    “But it was in another country, in another life.”

    -Yes. When 3/4 of the adult population couldn’t vote.

    “And the n***gers and the wymen knew their place, right?”

    -At least there were no Black Lies Murder and Anita Sarkeesian. I’d be willing to tolerate a lot of minor injustices (for others) for that to be restored.

    “Yep, because the Arab countries are wonderfully administred as they are.”

    -Strawman.

  10. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    5. April 2016 at 10:59

    “At least there were no Black Lies Murder and Anita Sarkeesian. I’d be willing to tolerate a lot of minor injustices (for others) for that to be restored.”
    I am sure you would.

    “‘Yep, because the Arab countries are wonderfully administred as they are.’
    -Strawman.”
    No, it is not. When someone wax poetic on dictatorships and their “optimal outcomes”and blames the USA for supporting the people against those barbaric regimes, it is fair to ask how wonderful those regimes really are.

    “When 3/4 of the adult population couldn’t vote.”
    Which is more than ten times the fraction of the Brazilian population allowed to vote one hundred years later. Or keep in mind the history of the electoral reforms in 19 th Century British Empire. And the USA kept allowing more and more people to be enfranchised. Because to “secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men”.

  11. Gravatar of james elizondo james elizondo
    5. April 2016 at 11:01

    Very happy to see this post.

  12. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    5. April 2016 at 11:07

    “it is fair to ask how wonderful those regimes really are.”

    -Better than what replaced them, for the most part. Tunisia is debatable; Syria, Greece, Iraq, Libya and Egypt are clear net minuses. Yemen is in a case of its own, as is Turkey.

    “Because to “secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men”.”

    -Come on; Thomas Jefferson had no idea how much voting privileges would be expanded in the future.

  13. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    5. April 2016 at 11:38

    “Better than what replaced them, for the most part. Tunisia is debatable; Syria, Greece, Iraq, Libya and Egypt are clear net minuses. Yemen is in a case of its own, as is Turkey.”
    As far as I know, no one– much less the USA– overthrew Turkey’s regime. Iraq’s regime was overthrown by a military invasion, the same way Hitler’s regime or Noriega’s. It has little to do with trying to support popular uprisings.
    As for Lybia, Egypt and Tunisia, they were clearly regimes hated by their own peoples (aside helping to finish the Lybian stalemate–it is funny, I remember a time when the right did not love Colonel Gaddafi so much– and not doing the same in Syria), the USA did little against those countries’ stability. This is the problem with betting on dictatorships’ stability: you can’t torture and kill everyone every time.

    “’Because to “secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men’.

    -Come on; Thomas Jefferson had no idea how much voting privileges would be expanded in the future.”
    Probably not, probably he did not know slaves would be freed too. Yet the Founders clearly stated what separates a government from a gang of thugs preying on the weak.

  14. Gravatar of J Mann J Mann
    5. April 2016 at 11:58

    Presumably, the lack of an ID affects the right to travel a lot more substantially than the right to vote. Given that the voter ID laws are almost always accompanied by reforms making IDs easier to get (as the Carter-whats-his-name commission recommended), is there a possibility that they’re a net gain in utility?

  15. Gravatar of J Mann J Mann
    5. April 2016 at 12:05

    Scott:

    1) Minor correction – I’m pretty sure the fee for Ms. Franks to get a copy of her birth certificate was $20, not $200. There are some follow-on stories that Wisconsin was considering a method to waive the $20 in appropriate cases, but I don’t know if that was passed.

    http://www.wkow.com/story/16219967/documents-needed-to-get-a-voter-id-card

    2) Do you think either problem is significant? (I admit that wouldn’t resolve the problem of which was larger.) In the appeals case in Frank, the court pointed out that the plaintiffs were only able to come up with eight people who said they wanted to vote but didn’t have a birth certificate necessary to obtain photo ID, and of those, 6 didn’t say that they had tried.

  16. Gravatar of Homer Simpson Homer Simpson
    5. April 2016 at 12:53

    There is a widespread belief amongst GOP campaign types that when operating at full efficiency the vote fraud machine in Milwaukee is worth 3-4 points statewide in WI. It is commonly believed amongst such people that WI was straight up stolen in 2000 and 2004 (margins in 2008/12 were too large for fraud). There isn’t any hard or identifiable data to back this belief up, but the belief exists and is honestly held. If you are into the sport of de-coding GOP “dog whistles”, “Milwaukee” is shorthand for “vote fraud”.

    There are some places like Philly in which there are (or were, PA has gotten better about getting dead people off the rolls) an improbably high percentage of the adult population registered to vote ( http://watchdog.org/217083/paindy-phillys-bloated-voter-rolls-defy-logic-open-door-to-fraud/ ).

    The voter-ID rules are in a lot of ways behind the times though. Very 20th-century, where the common method for fraud was having a bus-full of volunteers drive around a city and being told at each precinct who they were posing as. Today the method of choice is absentee. Nursing homes in particular have become infamous (again, in the small circles of campaign types) for this. Nursing homes are almost ideal fraud targets- complete plausibility on having large numbers of absentee ballot requests from the same address, also common for being places where people have different physical addresses from official permanent residence, and many residents are limited in capacity and rely on others to handle mail.

  17. Gravatar of Matthew Moore Matthew Moore
    5. April 2016 at 14:33

    Certain recent immigrant communities in the UK do definitely have problems with voter fraud: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-32428648

  18. Gravatar of Gary Anderson Gary Anderson
    5. April 2016 at 14:42

    In the 2010 election, a pit boss, a female, registered Republican, was arrested for voting twice in Las Vegas. A Republican!!!

    Kgaard, you should not be permitted to vote, ever. And your libertarian friends like Peter Schiff, that whiny privileged billionaire, should not be allowed to vote ever, as well.

    If Schiff is the epitome of libertarianism, it should be shunned like the dirty fraud it is. After all, it is Schiff on video saying that you should be able to refuse service at a restaurant to someone based on race. Of course, if one is hungry, Schiff doesn’t care if the fabric of society is destroyed.

    He says he isn’t a racist, and argued that I go on his show sometime, but fact is, he believes racism should be a CIVIL RIGHT. That is insane.

  19. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    5. April 2016 at 14:58

    Gary hates freedom. What a surprise.

  20. Gravatar of Philo Philo
    5. April 2016 at 15:22

    It will be hard to measure the extent of fraudulent voting, since successful fraud will, necessarily, have gone undetected.

    Among would-be voters who weren’t cleared to vote the only ones that got individual mention in your quote were old people. I suspect this sample is unrepresentative: I would have expected that making it more complicated to get permission to vote would *increase* the proportion of retirees among all voters, since busy people would be less likely to expend the time and trouble.

  21. Gravatar of Kgaard Kgaard
    5. April 2016 at 15:36

    Gary I would not call myself a Libertarian. And Schiff is a pretty bad economist. He doesn’t understand the relationship between monetary policy (particularly QE) and the gold price.

    Anyway, perhaps I should re-frame my argument. Which works better, companies or countries? Pretty clearly the latter. That is because companies are monarchies (more or less). In companies there is a clear decision-making chain, with clear reward structures.

    One idea is to structure political units the same way (hence Singapore, Chile under Pinochet).

    Then we come to another idea: Logically those who contribute most to a polity should have the greater say in how it is run. Doesn’t that seem fair? In such a model, veterans and taxpayers would have an outsized say, and non-taxpayers and welfare recipients a diminished say. In a hunter-gatherer tribe who would have the most say: the old/sick or the warriors? To ask is to answer.

    Here’s a third way to think about it: In the pre-1920 model, what was really going on was that each FAMILY was getting a vote. Hence pro-family legislation. When each individual gets a vote, you get anti-family legislation.

  22. Gravatar of Kgaard Kgaard
    5. April 2016 at 15:36

    Oops, I meant companies work better than countries.

  23. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    5. April 2016 at 15:49

    It’s amusing to contemplate how many man-hours the media invested in finding these three people (and how little it interrogated them about their dealings with officialdom). Or maybe they just printed what ACORN told them.

  24. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    5. April 2016 at 17:33

    “Which works better, companies or countries?
    I don’t know what WalMart’s HDI is or how many crimes McDonald’s has solved or if Costco’s constitution is adequate. You can as well ask what works better, companies or Churches, companies or Families. They clearly do different things, and countries (different from governments) are the sum of all those things.

    “Pretty clearly the latter. That is because companies are monarchies (more or less).”
    So were 19 th Century Russia, China for most of its long decadence, Portugal for most of its long decadence, Fascist Italy (they got a nominal king and a Mussolini), etc. Not to mention the Gulf Monarchies. And Mao and Stalin ((bad king/CEOs bankrupt their companies, bad king/rulers do even worse things) surely had more power than most kings to create “clear decision-making chain, with clear reward structures”, people surely knew what they had to do and how to get ahead. It is not clear that America has any reason to envy them (except Arab oil and Russian caviar, maybe). Corporations are created by a handful of people acting under a shared legislation. Meanwhile a country… well, you literally didn’t build it (but I guess there are still hunter-gatherer tribes with little contact with the corrupt Civilization in Brazilian Amazon– maybe you should go there and become their king… or their dish).
    “In a hunter-gatherer tribe who would have the most say: the old/sick or the warriors?”
    And, as everyone knows, the hunter-gatherers (see above), specially men-eating and literal head-hunting) tribes, are the apogee of social organization. I have heard of bombing Vietnam back to the Stone Age, but voting America back to the Stone Age is news to me.
    “In the pre-1920 model, what was really going on was that each FAMILY was getting a vote. Hence pro-family legislation. When each individual gets a vote, you get anti-family legislation.”
    No, SOME family members (men) were getting a vote– and some families were effectively disenfranchised by racial/property restrictions anyway. Being more clear: you need to shove your “family legislation”down the throats of real family members. Oh, if only Pinochet were here to make America into Chile (apparently, it is serious)…
    “If the future of political entrepreneurship is private cities”
    And always will be.

  25. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    5. April 2016 at 17:34

    As for countries Vs

  26. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    5. April 2016 at 17:38

    As for countries vs. corporations, Disneyland may be a good place to visti, but I would not like to live there (or in, say, Enron).

  27. Gravatar of Kgaard Kgaard
    5. April 2016 at 18:13

    Thiago on the question of one vote per family … why wouldn’t the wives have influenced how the husbands voted? Seems logical to me that they would have.

    Remember that monogamy is not a natural state. It only exists as the norm when it is enforced by the state. If you do away with monogamy, then you do away with the nuclear family. That way lies matriarchy and societal decay — basically what we see now. With resources plentiful, social organization is reverting to the models of Jamaica, Brazil and the African plains. The result will be a two-tiered, caste-based society: The rich and upper middle class who marry (and have children raised with fathers present) and the proletariat raised of single mothers (who will be increasingly sad spectacles with each generation).

    Elysium and Idiocracy are the artistic foreshadowings of our future.

  28. Gravatar of Gary Anderson Gary Anderson
    5. April 2016 at 18:44

    “Gary I would not call myself a Libertarian. And Schiff is a pretty bad economist. He doesn’t understand the relationship between monetary policy (particularly QE) and the gold price.

    Anyway, perhaps I should re-frame my argument. Which works better, companies or countries? Pretty clearly the latter. That is because companies are monarchies (more or less). In companies there is a clear decision-making chain, with clear reward structures.” I know you mean companies, Kgaard, and thanks for saying you are not a libertarian.

    Harding, your version of freedom is to gain it off the backs of the oppressed in America. So I am not impressed. It is not a manifestation of freedom to refuse service to a black guy at a restaurant because he is black.

    You are warped, Harding, seriously warped.

    But I am reminded that Las Vegas, a city of 2 million people, exists because the government created the Hoover Dam. Just FYI.

  29. Gravatar of Ray Lopez Ray Lopez
    5. April 2016 at 19:46

    I know of some people in the vote counting business in the USA, and it’s what E. Harding said: “It may still exist in some areas of the U.S., but it’s the vote-counting process that’s likely corrupt in that case, and there’s nothing IDs can do about that”. Corruption is too strong of a word. The scenario is this: Diebold ‘paperless’ voting machines on occasion don’t record a vote properly, such as, because the voter forgot to touch a screen to “Enter” the vote, or due to malfunction. So, the vote is left hanging electronically. What do election officials do? Do they enter the vote by touching the Enter key or not? There’s a protocol they follow in that simple case (I think it’s to cancel the vote) but there’s also machine malfunction (which does involve a paper copy of the vote recorded). But in general it’s like the ‘hanging chad’ controversy in FL. Usually it does not matter (until it does).

    Sumner is right though about voting restrictions: I don’t vote anymore since the procedure for absentee ballots got more complicated.

  30. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    5. April 2016 at 20:14

    Vote fraud in the US obviously isn’t on the level of Iran or Venezuela, or the systematic Democrat suppression of the Southern black vote from Reconstruction through Ike, or even the Chicago tradition of lifelong Republicans who now vote Democrat, but it’s enough to matter in close elections.

    Frankly, we should be eliminating more voters, a lot more. A basic civics test should be administered. If you can name all the Kardashians but none of the three branches of government, the Republic probably doesn’t founder for lack of your advice.

  31. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    5. April 2016 at 20:41

    “If you can name all the Kardashians but none of the three branches of government, the Republic probably doesn’t founder for lack of your advice.”

    -Paradoxically, that may be likely to lead to worse-quality candidates. The educated favored Rubio and Kasich, both of whom were horrible candidates.

    On the other hand, that may crush the Clinton vote in the South (and in Nevada&New Mexico)…

  32. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    5. April 2016 at 20:47

    “Harding, your version of freedom is to gain it off the backs of the oppressed in America.”

    -I knew I said I wouldn’t respond to you, but this is hilarious. Both the “gain it off the backs of” and the “oppressed in America” bits. If Blacks and Mexicans in America are on average oppressed any bit more than Non-Hispanic Whites, it’s mostly by the politicians most of them elected. Classic tragedy of the commons.

    Refusing service or employment to Blacks as a general principle may well be excellent business practice in places like DC and Milwaukee, with their extraordinary differences between average Black and White crime rates. It makes less sense in places like South Carolina and Hawaii, where those differences are lower.

  33. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    6. April 2016 at 02:29

    “Thiago on the question of one vote per family … why wouldn’t the wives have influenced how the husbands voted? Seems logical to me that they would have.”
    Really? Let them vote and you won’t have to guess if they influenced the election (and it is exactly what you are complaining about!). Or let only women vote and see if their husbands “influence” how they vote. And there were no restriction on single men voting back then, so the “family vote” thing is just hypocritical.

    “Remember that monogamy is not a natural state. It only exists as the norm when it is enforced by the state. If you do away with monogamy, then you do away with the nuclear family. That way lies matriarchy and societal decay.”
    The way of societal decay lies is the one that gives thugs control over their brothers and sisters, as at the pre-Civil Rights South or in the Taliban-dominated Afghanistan. I certainly prefer freedom to the search for the right dictator. If people don’t believe in monogamy, laws will do little to solve the problem. Switzerland, Poland and Italy have half the proportion of births outside of wedlock of France and Bulgaria.

    “The rich and upper middle class who marry (and have children raised with fathers present) and the proletariat raised of single mothers (who will be increasingly sad spectacles with each generation).”
    And it has precious little to do with laws and voting, as Grover Cleveland (and maybe Thomas Jefferson), who fathered a child out of wedlock, could have told you.

    “Elysium and Idiocracy are the artistic foreshadowings of our future”
    No, they aren’t. They are just sci-fi films like Star Wars and Blade Runner.

  34. Gravatar of Dan W. Dan W.
    6. April 2016 at 04:13

    American democracy is better than Communist democracy because in America the voters get to choose between two party controlled leaders, while in Communist country the voters only get a single choice.

    The reality is American Democracy was never intended to be what it has become. Rather it was desirable for Americans to participate in the political process but that the LAW and the politicians would be subject to the limits of the Constitution. In this way American Democracy was supposed to be like a sports fans support for his team. The fan could yell and scream and argue but his actual influence on the team would be limited to choosing whether or not to buy a ticket.

    The idea that voters have any clue of what is best for the country is as ludicrous as the idea that a sports fan could actually run the Red Sox better than current management. The Red Sox are not going to let populist mobs manage their team. But apparently the politicians are more than willing to cede control to the mobs.

  35. Gravatar of Dan W. Dan W.
    6. April 2016 at 04:25

    As for the question of voter fraud I suppose Sumner would say that shoplifting is not a problem because he never sees it. Yet retail store managers know shoplifting is a problem and the worst offenders are employees! So just because you don’t see the problem or are not aware of it does not mean the problem is inconsequential.

    If voting is supposed to be an important symbol of democratic participation it ought to incorporate evidence of personal responsibility and institutional integrity. Otherwise the process becomes a game to be rigged and clearly rigging takes place at many different levels.

  36. Gravatar of John Thacker John Thacker
    6. April 2016 at 04:31

    Most of the voting fraud that occurs is not voting fraud that would be prevented by checking ID when someone votes in person. However, a lot of states already checked ID when voting in person before the recent wave of laws, so I suppose it is difficult to say how things would change without it, and in any case a lot of the new laws *do* have extra things against voting in two jurisdictions, etc., contrary to what Vox implies. A decent amount of the complaints with some of the laws included people who suddenly found themselves no longer registered in their main state when they bought a winter home in FL and were (accidentally?) registered to vote there automatically. Another large set of complaints have to do with student voting.

    All the laws I’ve seen also allow people to vote provisional ballots and have them counted later too, which is why lawsuits against them have generally failed; people have been unable to demonstrate that they were actually prevented from voting or even that they had to pay large amounts to eventually vote. They have been able to demonstrate that they had to file a provisional ballot and go through a time-consuming process to have it counted, which is different and still a barrier.

    Some of the New England Yankee states already had very strict laws, but since those states are overwhelmingly white, there was less concern that there was a racial motive.

  37. Gravatar of John Thacker John Thacker
    6. April 2016 at 04:34

    Also worth noting that in some of these cases, like in NC, the laws were passed after Republicans literally won the state legislature for the first time in a century. Yes, the widespread voter fraud doesn’t happen anymore, but the NC GOP was raised on stories of the bad old days in V.O. Key’s book for decades.

  38. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    6. April 2016 at 04:43

    ” In this way American Democracy was supposed to be like a sports fans support for his team.”
    You are not born a Dallas Indians (or whatever it is) fan, you are not taxed by the Boston Astronauts (or whatever it is), you are not subject to draft or jail time depending on will of the Alabama Yankees (or whatever it is) team and you are not forced to live under laws designed by the Detroit Senators (or whatever it is) owner. No, a country is not a corporation and it is certainly not a football team. As for the Constitution, now as back then, there is a Supreme Court deciding if it is something is unconstitutional or not. Are they wrong? Well, it is YOUR opinion, but until you become king, I don’t see why we should take your opinion over theirs or over the opinions of American voters.

  39. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    6. April 2016 at 04:44

    “The Red Sox are not going to let populist mobs manage their team.”
    Maybe you should create/buy your own country.

  40. Gravatar of Dan W. Dan W.
    6. April 2016 at 05:00

    @Thiago,

    I’m not sure of the point you are trying to make. Anyone who wants to understand the original arguments for the American Constitution can do so. The process and arguments are documented and worth reading. But the short version is there was little democracy in the formation of the American Federal Government, with the House of Representatives being the only political body elected by direct “democratic” vote. This was the way it was until enlightened “progressives” gained influence in the late 19th century. And with the progressives the order of government was changed. Was it changed for the better? It seems that answer all depends on what party has political power.

  41. Gravatar of Jason Braswell Jason Braswell
    6. April 2016 at 05:46

    Isn’t letting a person vote who isn’t supposed to just as bad as preventing someone who should vote from voting? The illegitimate voter will “cancel” someone’s vote (once you have more than a trivial number of voters.)

  42. Gravatar of J Mann J Mann
    6. April 2016 at 05:49

    Eric, Scott – btw, the Vox chart is awful, and frankly, I don’t recommend you accept any Vox information until you’ve read the source data.

    The underlying point is basically right, but the chart is so wrong that you’d be better off with no chart. A first clue is that they don’t link to Justin Levitt’s work that they’re allegedly relying on, only to his bio. When you go through to his actual work, it turns out that he’s very clear that he’s measuring what he sees as credible “allegations” by number of plausible alleged incidents that might have been prevented by voter ID laws, not by number of ballots. A few of the incidents involve hundreds of allegedly fraudulent votes.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/

    So Vox’s point – that detected recent voter ID fraud seems to me negligible – is right, but since they are comparing number of ballots and understate the alleged fraudulent ballots by a factor of 10, reading their chart is not helpful.

  43. Gravatar of Scott Sumner Scott Sumner
    6. April 2016 at 06:29

    Kgaard. Talk about cherry picking!! I’m sure you must be aware that in the vast majority of cases economic policy is better under democracies than under dictators.

  44. Gravatar of Scott Sumner Scott Sumner
    6. April 2016 at 06:41

    Homer, There should be no correlation between whether you believe in voter fraud and whether you are a Dem or GOP voter. But there is. Just as there should be no correlation between politics and views on global warming. It’s a sad commentary on the public that these things are correlated.

  45. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    6. April 2016 at 06:59

    “in the vast majority of cases economic policy is better under democracies than under dictators.”

    -Only if you adjust for ethnicity. Literally taken, this statement is not true. Cuba is middling for Latin America, Belarus is middling for Europe.

    “It’s a sad commentary on the public that these things are correlated.”

    -Turn that frown upside-down

  46. Gravatar of D Gibson D Gibson
    6. April 2016 at 07:04

    The argument on both sides seems disingenuous and smart people should avoid the mudfight. The goal of voter ID is to ensure eligibility, no duplication, and correct localization (most elections are not national). We have lots of ID technology and person data to solve the problem. Since the discussion is not about deploying better technology, it is just politics from *both* sides.

  47. Gravatar of John Brennan John Brennan
    6. April 2016 at 07:52

    Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections? in Electoral Studies, vol. 36, 2014, 149-157. by
    Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, and David C. Earnest

    Two of the authors also wrote and article at WP Wonkblog:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/

    This was the most “commented on” Wonkblog post I have encountered.

  48. Gravatar of Tom M Tom M
    6. April 2016 at 08:02

    If this is such a non-issue, why not make voter ID laws and make them easy to obtain? Then Republicans wouldn’t have anything to complain about…

  49. Gravatar of Gary Anderson Gary Anderson
    6. April 2016 at 08:32

    Tall Dave said: “Frankly, we should be eliminating more voters, a lot more. A basic civics test should be administered. If you can name all the Kardashians but none of the three branches of government, the Republic probably doesn’t founder for lack of your advice.”

    You are just angry that the Republican Party is on its last legs because you think people are not informed. But you have to realize, Tall Dave, the Republican Party is a laughingstock. It is a joke, a bad one too.

    Voting should be protected as a fundamental right, Tall Dave. Libertarians hate that freedom!!

  50. Gravatar of Tom M Tom M
    6. April 2016 at 08:41

    “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.”

    Free Education
    Free Healthcare
    Expansion of Social Security

    Does this sound like a Republicans platform or a Democrats platform? The Republican party will always struggle because the average voter will vote for their own immediate monetary gain above anything else.

  51. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    6. April 2016 at 08:51

    “Anyone who wants to understand the original arguments for the American Constitution can do so.”
    Even back then, there were different opinions and a Supreme Court.
    “The process and arguments are documented and worth reading. But the short version is there was little democracy in the formation of the American Federal Government, with the House of Representatives being the only political body elected by direct ‘democratic’ vote.”
    Except for, you know, people voting for President, governors, the House (the electoral college is irrelevant most of the time- and any voting system has deviations anyway). Not to mention a rich tradition of local govern which goes back to the Colonial times.

    “And with the progressives the order of government was changed. Was it changed for the better?
    It seems that answer all depends on what party has political power.”
    No, it depends on one believing the people should have a say on their government or not. I think it should, Stalin, Pinochet and Hitler thought it shouldn’t. Again, sports teams are good, clean, mindless fun, but the New York Cowboys are not my fatherland and never will be. The Missouri Seahawks’ flag is not my flag, it is not the flag I was thaught since I was a boy to call “holy flag, symbol of Justice and Love”. Your country, love it or leave it!

  52. Gravatar of John Thacker John Thacker
    6. April 2016 at 10:41

    Tom M: “Free Education
    Free Healthcare
    Expansion of Social Security

    Does this sound like a Republicans platform or a Democrats platform?”

    Depends. Are we talking about Donald Trump, because it sure sounds like his platform.

  53. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    6. April 2016 at 11:05

    John — Don’t worry, Trump can pay for it all with better deals. Trump’s crack staff even has a foolproof plan to pay off the debt by selling off $16T worth of government buildings.

  54. Gravatar of TallDave TallDave
    6. April 2016 at 11:10

    Gary — notwithstanding Trump, the GOP is at historic strength at most levels of government.

    You have a fundamental right to vote, just as you have a fundamental right to bear arms. That doesn’t mean the rest of us can’t require you to have a basic familiarity with these weapons of deadly force.

  55. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    6. April 2016 at 14:50

    @TallDave

    -That actually worked in the days of Jackson.

    “Depends. Are we talking about Donald Trump, because it sure sounds like his platform.”

    -No it doesn’t. It sounds like Sanders. Are you familiar with Trump’s platform?

  56. Gravatar of Kgaard Kgaard
    6. April 2016 at 18:13

    E. Harding & Scott: Yes I was going to make a similar point as E. Harding: The correlation between IQ/race and economic performance is probably as good or better than the correlation with democracy and economic performance.

    The other thing to think about is the headwind that monarchies face: The New World Order HATES monarchy and constantly goes out to destroy it. So if you are a Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein or a Kim Jong Il and just want to be a 1700s-style monarch, you can’t do it because the west won’t let you. This really throws off economic performance. In those instances where the west DOESN’T mess with monarchies, we often see quite good performance (Sing, Dubai, Pinochet, Peru under Fujimori, Pakistan under various military dictators, etc etc).

  57. Gravatar of Massimo Heitor Massimo Heitor
    6. April 2016 at 18:18

    “I suspect this is an attempt by the GOP to drive down turnout among minorities.”

    The GOP would never attempt to drive down turnout among minorities or any other group expected to vote in their favor.

    Both parties want to drive down turnout of voters that will vote against them and drive up turnout of voters that will vote for them. That’s basically the job of politicians, to fight and win elections.

    The Democrats are pushing against voter ID, not out of some deep morality, but because they think it will get them more votes and power.

  58. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    6. April 2016 at 20:06

    Very good points by D Gibson, Massimo Heitor and others. As a German it’s very hard to imagine how you could even have a legitimate democracy without a good ID system.

    I also think the discussion about voter-ID laws misses the point regarding what’s really wrong with the voting system in America. The discussion should not be about the very tiny fraction of people who can not vote and it should not be about the (maybe) even tinier fraction of people who commit fraud. The real discussion should be about the millions of people who do vote but whose vote does not count at all. This concerns pretty much all people who do not live in a battlefield state and who vote for the weaker party. Their votes do not count at all. They get zero electoral delegates. And the funny things: They even know this before voting if they don’t live in a battleground state.

    I would also prefer all-mail-voting systems in all Western countries and in all US states (not only Oregon, Washington, and Colorado). This would save quite some money compared to in-person voting systems.

    The voting day should also never be on a workday. Is it still on a workday in the US? Voting on a workday combined with a strict in-person voting system could really bring the
    turnout down. Much more than voter-id laws.

  59. Gravatar of Gary Anderson Gary Anderson
    6. April 2016 at 21:08

    Massimo says: “Both parties want to drive down turnout of voters that will vote against them and drive up turnout of voters that will vote for them. That’s basically the job of politicians, to fight and win elections.

    The Democrats are pushing against voter ID, not out of some deep morality, but because they think it will get them more votes and power.”

    So their selfishness puts them on the right side in this case. Too bad. And as for the German and voter ID’s, you have to consider the source. Germany. Think about it. Here is a nation that incubated Hitler, and now is ramming the Eurozone down the throats of the periphery nations. Germany is one of the most predatory nations on the face of the earth. At least they aren’t shy about it while the Americans fake like they aren’t predators.

  60. Gravatar of JayT JayT
    6. April 2016 at 21:49

    There is obviously massive voter fraud, but I don’t know how much voter ID laws will affect it. I remember my mother taking my dementia-ridden grandmother to the polls and making the decisions for her. Obviously, that’s voter fraud, but they both had IDs.

    On the other hand, if someone can’t figure out how to get an ID, I’m really ok with them not having a vote. Of course, I would be perfectly happy if there was a test before you were allowed to vote.

  61. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    7. April 2016 at 05:21

    If it is like Australian politics, there will be suspicion that unions in particular can organise fraudulent voters. There will be also a lot of rumour and anecdote, but very little in the way of hard evidence.

    The equivalent on the other side of politics seems to be Tuesday voting suppresses working class votes. That also seems to be supposition, rumour and anecdote, but very little in the way of hard evidence.

  62. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    7. April 2016 at 05:25

    “The New World Order HATES monarchy and constantly goes out to destroy it. So if you are a Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein or a Kim Jong Il and just want to be a 1700s-style monarch, you can’t do it because the west won’t let you. This really throws off economic performance. In those instances where the west DOESN’T mess with monarchies, we often see quite good performance (Sing, Dubai, Pinochet, Peru under Fujimori, Pakistan under various military dictators, etc etc).”
    This is beyond silly. For most of his term, Pinochet’s economic outcomes were below mediocre, lower than the Latin American average, his economic miracle started a just few years before his 17-year dictatorship ended and, therefore, lasted a shorter time than Brazil’s own military dictatorship’s miracle did (and when Brazil was still a rural wasteland pre-Pinochet Chile was already a cultured, sophisticated South American Switzerland). So Pinochet and Fujimori were monarchs, but Fidel Castro, Qadaffi and Kim Jong-Il weren’t (and, yep, they were so loved by the West…).

    The ones who messed with the “monarchs” you think so highly of were the peoples those dictators had to guard themselves against (they had to fight a constant war against their own citizens–torturing and exterminating dissidents, censoring the press, etc.– as you yourself confess, when you say Pinochet policies can’t be applied if the citizens have any say on how their country is ruled). Fortunately, Fascism is faded to make Communism company on the ash heap of History. Civilization keeps prevailing over thugs.

  63. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    7. April 2016 at 07:02

    John, Thanks for that link. I’m not too concerned about that sort of fraud, as I think they should be able to vote.

    Kgaard, Pakistan? How do they compare to India?

    Lorenzo, Keep in mind that in America the “working class” is the affluent, who are often too busy to vote. (Often dual incomes.) The poor are much less likely to work, and hence have more free time. If they vote less often, it’s partly because they don’t see any reason to vote.

  64. Gravatar of dw dw
    7. April 2016 at 08:50

    if we wee really serious about voter fraud (as in person voter fraud as opposed the ones that are ignored by voter ids). why not just use DNA and collect it from birth. since some use birth certificates that a few years after birth, have little to no relationship to the individual they supposedly are for. consider as part of the birther craze of a few years ago, more than a few individuals who arent even related to the person that the doc represents, got some ones birth certificate. to the point that the state quit sending them out.

  65. Gravatar of Anthony McNease Anthony McNease
    7. April 2016 at 10:17

    Voting itself is a statistically insignificant act, and instinctively we all sort of know this: our single vote won’t make a difference. Therefore I think it’s logical to ignore both voter fraud and Voter ID laws. Neither have any sort of statistically significant impact on an election. The poor old lady in the story sells clicks, but you can’t think that anecdote equals data. And voter fraud is the same as voter suppression since every illegal vote cancels a legitimate one.

    Voter Fraud and Voter Suppression are partisan polemics intended to stir up their respective voters.

  66. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    7. April 2016 at 10:30

    John, Thanks for that link. I’m not too concerned about that sort of fraud, as I think they should be able to vote.

    Why? They’re citizens of a different country. Does the term ‘citizen’ have any meaning to libertarian widgets?

  67. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    7. April 2016 at 10:54


    I suspect this is an attempt by the GOP to drive down turnout among minorities.

    People are always saying this but when you see the articles by the press you always read about the white 89-year-old lady and the white 90-year-old WW2 veteran. People that aren’t really core voters of the Democratic Pary.

    So which is it?

  68. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    7. April 2016 at 10:57

    @Anthony McNease
    Exactly.

    What astonishes my even more is that people don’t even seem to care when their vote does not even count at all. As it seems the act of voting is the most important thing do them.

  69. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    7. April 2016 at 11:25

    Lorenzo, Keep in mind that in America the “working class” is the affluent, who are often too busy to vote. (Often dual incomes.) The poor are much less likely to work, and hence have more free time.

    About 70% of the workforce consists of wage earners. About a quarter of the workforce are wage earners in dreary service sector employments (e.g. parking lot attendants, janitors, food service, retail clerks, &c).

  70. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    7. April 2016 at 11:27

    So if you are a Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein or a Kim Jong Il and just want to be a 1700s-style monarch

    Neither one bore much resemblance to an 18th century monarch.

  71. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    7. April 2016 at 12:42

    “Voter Fraud and Voter Suppression are partisan polemics intended to stir up their respective voters.”
    Why would they if their votes are statistically insignificant acts?

  72. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    7. April 2016 at 14:02

    “I’m not too concerned about that sort of fraud, as I think they should be able to vote.”

    -So you’re an imperialist, Sumner? How’s that any different from the British taking over India?

  73. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    7. April 2016 at 14:04

    “So which is it?”

    -I think the media realize it’s easier to sympathize with such atypical examples.

  74. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    7. April 2016 at 15:59

    Only Americans should vote or be voted for in American elections. A people has a right to decide its own fate. America for Americans. This Land Is Your Land.

  75. Gravatar of Dustin Dustin
    8. April 2016 at 04:56

    Sounds like the problem is the DMV and, more generally, access to forms of national ID. Even if the risk of voter fraud is small, it seems worthwhile to minimize it. There is no good reason to allow an artificial problem impede a real risk (even if small).

  76. Gravatar of Tom Tom
    8. April 2016 at 05:25

    Thacker already brought this up, but Wisconsin has provisional balloting so all of the examples in the blog post can rectify their situations and have their votes counted.

    http://www.gab.wi.gov/clerks/provisional-ballots

  77. Gravatar of Tom Tom
    8. April 2016 at 05:27

    Also, minority turnout was higher than white turnout even in states with voter ID laws.

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jul/17/jason-riley/black-voter-turnout-exceed-white-voter-turnout-eve/

  78. Gravatar of Randomize Randomize
    8. April 2016 at 05:57

    Tom, correlation doesn’t equal causation. Could minority turnout have been even higher without these laws? I bet it could.

  79. Gravatar of Vince Vince
    8. April 2016 at 14:22

    Wisconsin Rep Glenn Grothman(R) pointed out on TV that voter ID in Wisconsin was intended to depress D turnout. http://www.vox.com/2016/4/6/11377078/voter-id-republicans-grothman

    Also – this from local Milwaukee Journal Sentinal

    ‘Also Tuesday, a former state Senate aide said he quit the Republican Party because of comments Grothman and other GOP senators made in a closed meeting in 2011 about why they wanted voter ID.

    “I was in the closed Senate Republican caucus when the final round of multiple voter ID bills were being discussed. A handful of the GOP senators were giddy about the ramifications and literally singled out the prospects of suppressing minority and college voters. Think about that for a minute. Elected officials planning and happy to help deny a fellow American’s constitutional right to vote in order to increase their own chances to hang onto power,” Todd Allbaugh wrote in a Facebook post.

    Allbaugh declined to name most of the Republicans he heard discussing the voter ID law, but said he was willing to acknowledge Grothman was one of them because of his comments Tuesday on WTMJ-TV.

    “I’ll say this about Congressman Grothman, the people should take him at his word,” he said.’

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/jury-is-still-out-on-voter-id-after-first-big-test-b99701512z1-374789941.html

  80. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    8. April 2016 at 16:29


    I suspect this is an attempt by the GOP to drive down turnout among minorities.

    Are there any reputable studies that minorities are harmed by voter-ID laws? And if so why would they be harmed more than others? There’s still no support for those claims in this post.

    There are no voter-ID laws in quite some European countries. Still certain minorities in those countries don’t vote as often as other groups.

    And there seems to be another thing. The black vote turnout seems to be even higher than the white turnout while the Hispanic turnout seems to be far lower.

    All this can hardly be explained by voter-ID laws. And btw: If you care about that much about voter-ID laws you should be against voter registration also.

    And you should be really happy about Donald Trump. Nothing increases voter turnout more right now than the love and hate for Donald Trump.

    As others said: All this talk about voter-ID laws seems to be about partisan hackery only.

  81. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    8. April 2016 at 16:39

    Anthony, You said:

    “Voting itself is a statistically insignificant act”

    So is terrorism. Let’s devote a bit less effort to fighting terrorism and also to fighting voter fraud.

    Art, You said:

    “About 70% of the workforce consists of wage earners. About a quarter of the workforce are wage earners in dreary service sector employments”

    People in “dreary” jobs aren’t necessarily poor.

    Harding, You said:

    “So you’re an imperialist, Sumner? How’s that any different from the British taking over India?”

    The British let the Indians vote for their leaders? Who knew?

    Dustin, I’m opposed to a national ID.

    Vince, I’m shocked, shocked to find out that GOP officials are trying to suppress minority turnout. Seriously, I wonder if the defenders of these laws are naive, and actually convinced themselves that these laws are enacted for idealistic reasons. At least people like Harding admit their motives.

  82. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 17:22

    Come on, Sumner, don’t be facetious. Democracy is the tyranny of the 51%. There is no fundamental difference between two procedures if they both lead to the same outcomes. Bringing a number of immigrants equivalent to 2% of the native population may, in an extreme case, be equivalent to putting the entire political fate of the nation under the immigrants’ control. You do understand this, right? Especially considering the historically low margins Bush and Obama won re-election. Immigrants made a crucial difference in Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, and Florida in 2004 and 2012.

  83. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    8. April 2016 at 19:01

    People like ssumner really play with the idea that millions of illegal immigrants could vote when you don’t control IDs. In their opinion this is not a bug but a feature. I bet people from the DP think the same thing. So the GOP got another reason why they should push for voter-ID laws.

    The GOP got some problems of course because they score so badly amongst certain minorities. But the same is true for the DP only the other way round: They score pretty badly amongst white voters. Even Obama lost the white vote to the GOP in the last elections.

    The DP also makes the mistake to think that they own the minority vote forever. This can really backfire. In Germany the new right-wing party AfD was the best minority party by far – at least in certain cities and regions. In France Marine Le Pen tries to get the minority vote in the future as well, and the chances are not so bad.

    And the German DP (called SPD) got hit very hard during the last elections – they drove away their white votes while thinking that they own the minority vote until forever – but the minorities thought different – and didn’t elect them either.

  84. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    8. April 2016 at 20:05

    “The DP also makes the mistake to think that they own the minority vote forever. This can really backfire.”

    -But they do own the minority vote forever. Just look at how Washington DC votes. Never voted Republican even in the Reagan and Nixon landslides. Dukakis got 69% of the Hispanic vote, despite (or because of?) Reagan’s amnesty.

    The Democratic party was always a lower middle-class immigrant party. Even in the days of Jackson.

  85. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    9. April 2016 at 06:40

    @E. Harding

    From what I read the Democratic Party under Jackson was more aggressively anti-abolitionist than the Whigs, and they generally outdid them in justifying and promoting ethnic, racial, and sexual exclusion and subordination.

    And in later years it’s even harder to imagine that the Democrats got more minority and immigrant votes than the party of Abraham Lincoln. I bet it was the other way round back then. The GOP back then was what the DP is today: A party of big government and against state rights – while the DP pretty much played the role of the GOP.

    Maybe the position about big government is key here. From what I read Woodrow Wilson won the majority of Blacks, industrial workers and immigrants for the first time. And then of course FDR. Only after that LBJ and Nixon did their part.

    The roles have switched.

    I think to see what happens next Central Europa might be the place to look at.

  86. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    9. April 2016 at 08:54

    “From what I read the Democratic Party under Jackson was more aggressively anti-abolitionist than the Whigs, and they generally outdid them in justifying and promoting ethnic, racial, and sexual exclusion and subordination.”

    -Indeed, it was. But most Irish, South Germans, and Italians in America at the time couldn’t have cared less about Chinese and Blacks.

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

    “And in later years it’s even harder to imagine that the Democrats got more minority and immigrant votes than the party of Abraham Lincoln.”

    -You’re forgetting the urban immigrant political machines (cf., Tammany Hall), from which the Democratic party managed to make its ideological transition to what it is today around the 1920s and 1930s. The Republicans had greater leapfrogging loyalties to Blacks and Chinese in the late 19th century than Democrats, but the Republicans were also the party of the English, the Norwegians, and other upright, non-clannish, and Protestant groups of immigrants, while the Democrats relied on the vote of more generally clannish and Catholic immigrants like the Irish, Jews, and Italians. Thus, New Haven, Boston, New York, and San Francisco were mildly Democratic by 1880:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/PresidentialCounty1880Colorbrewer.gif

    Of course, the irony was the Democratic first KKK was also viciously anti-Catholic, but they were far away from the northern cities.

  87. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    9. April 2016 at 08:57

    “Maybe the position about big government is key here. From what I read Woodrow Wilson won the majority of Blacks, industrial workers and immigrants for the first time.”

    -It was either Al Smith or FDR who first got the majority of the Black vote. The Democrats always had the majority of the non-Protestant immigrant vote. Bryan scared the industrial workers away from the Democratic party; I think it was FDR (or maybe Al Smith) who finally got them back in.

Leave a Reply