An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Flash of Inspiration
In Michigan, as in the rest of the country, many people are suffering from home foreclosures. Most of us feel bad for those individuals fighting to keep their home. Local Republican leaders, on the other hand, saw an opportunity to prevent people from voting. They’ve announced that they will deploy challengers on Election Day to prevent people whose addresses have been foreclosed from voting.
572 Responses to “Flash of Inspiration”
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.
Luckily, we have a Supreme Court which allows the burdening of fundamental rights on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. As I wrote when that Sup. Ct. case came down, Indiana had as much cause to pass a voter ID law on the theory that it would fraud as Maryland had cause to pass a law barring Republicans from voting on the theory that Republicans are more likely to secretly be fire-breathing dragons. True, there has yet to be a documented case of a Maryland GOPer being a dragon (the closest we've had is Ellen Sauerbrey). But then, neither has there ever been a single prosecuted case of voter fraud in the entire history of Indiana. They are literally equivalent. (The one exception for Indiana is absentee ballot fraud — which, coinicidentally, is a type of voting that leans conservative and, also coincidentally, is exempted from the bill.)
As Prof. Overton extensively documents in his article, the empirical evidence demanding a response to voter fraud just isn't there. It's a made up problem with a solution that is 1000x worse than the putative disease.