Jun

Who Will Win the Crucial Criminal Vote? [Reader Post]

Posted by: Dan @ 7:53 am in Dem eats Dem

Visited 411 times, 3 so far today

Following the Obama, Clinton unity party in Unity, New Hampshire the Democratic Party is still divided. Barack and Hillary said all the right things,

“We have stood toe to toe in the hard-fought primary,” Clinton said. Now, she told the crowd, they are “shoulder to shoulder” and “our paths have merged.”

When Clinton said, “I am proud that we had a spirited dialogue,” the crowd started to chuckle. She paused and added, for an even bigger laugh, “That was the nicest way I could think of phrasing it.”

It seems that Hillary’s hard-core supporters are not buying it. One day after the Obama and Clinton had their little unity party a group of pro-Hillary vandals tagged 60 vehicles in Orlando, Florida with anti-Obama and anti-McCain messages.

This is just more evidence that Obama is having a hard time winning over another key demographic that supported Hillary; criminals. Criminals have long been a key voting block for the Democratic Party, they have fought to restore voting rights to felons and objected in 2000 when Florida removed convicts from the voting rolls. Salon.com argued that Al Gore would be President today if these felons where allowed to vote.

The question we all need to ask is, can McCain appeal to the criminal vote that was once the exclusive domain of the Clintons? Or will they eventually grit their teeth and vote for Barack?

Cross posted at The Hinge of Fate

Technorati Tags: 2008 Election, barack obama, Criminals for Hillary, Democratic Unity, John McCain, Obama and Hillary, Pro-Hillary Vandals

Print This Post

Tags: 2008 Election, barack obama, Criminals for Hillary, Democratic Unity, John McCain, Obama and Hillary, Pro-Hillary Vandals

Technorati Tags: 2008 Election, barack obama, Criminals for Hillary, Democratic Unity, John McCain, Obama and Hillary, Pro-Hillary Vandals

This entry was posted on Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 7:53 am and is filed under Dem eats Dem. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

4 comments so far

NURSERATCHET

Is it that difficult to believe Larry’s story? Let’s put it in context. Jack McCreevy, former Governor of New Jersey. Cruising at midnight, rest stops on New Jersey Turnpikes seeking anonymous male sexual encounters. Senator Larry Craig, seeking male sex encounters in airport bathrooms. Fromer governor Elliot Slpizer, female prostitutes
encounters during breaks while testifing in Congress.

Why do people claim Larry’s allegations are outrageous?

“To be honest with you, its not so much whether you believe me or not, as much as you hear me.”

-Larry Sinclair at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., June 18, 2008

Larry’s words, my post! http://www.larrysinclair.org/press.html

June 30th, 2008 at 12:23 pm

Dave Noble

The traditional phrase with respect to incarceration was that we were making the individual “repay their debt to society.” After a convicted felon completes their prison term, is it appropriate after having taken away their liberty (an appropriate sanction) to then deny them for the rest of their life the precious right to vote? Regardless of who they vote for in exercising that right.

July 1st, 2008 at 3:32 am

Dan

Dave,
Yes it is appropriate to remove their voting privileges for the rest of the life. Voting is a privilege, not a right. It is up to the states to determine who has the privilege to vote. Criminals by nature of their actions have proven that they are not responsible citizens and therefrore should not be allowed to vote.

July 1st, 2008 at 6:01 am

Dave Noble

Dan,

Don’t we want felons to be reintegrated into responsible society? Do we want them to remain on the margins of society? Is that in our interest?

If voting is a privilege allocated by the states, is the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional? If a state felt blacks were not qualified to vote, should it be able to deny them that privilege? What if a state with a high percentage of college graduates, decided that a college diploma was a prerequisite to voting, could they deny the privilege of voting to citizens who only have high school educations?

July 1st, 2008 at 6:41 am