#49 debate, part four
See the important second update at the foot of the story.
Here’s another example of how Republican propagandist Cyndy Brucato is dead wrong when she says that the DFL incumbents and their Republican challengers in District 49 are really just the same. This was question put to the candidates in District 49B about photo voter ID. This is a fair use video clip from the League of Women Voter’s embed of the video taken that night for the League.
Sutter says that “people died” to protect her right to vote. It would be more accurate to say that more people died trying to win the vote — like the storied Minnesota First Regiment — for the people that Sutter wants to suppress.
Speaking directly now, that was the most venomous remark made all evening, delivered by a hissing Sutter.
Sutter also remarked about “felons voting” in the Franken-Coleman race, intimating that it decided the contest. I don’t have a link at the moment, but I remember news reports of one felon found voting in that cycle: a fellow from northern Minnesota who said he voted for Coleman. Coleman’s lawyer in the election contest, Joe Friedberg, said that “there was no voter fraud in this election.” If you don’t believe me, ask Tommy Johnson; he has a cite to the quote.
And you have to wonder about how smart the position is politically, anway. You will recall that in 2012 photo voter ID was on the the ballot across the state, and its failure is one of the reasons why the Republicans were turned out of control of the Legislature. It failed 55 – 45 in 49B (and worse in 49A; way to go Keith Downey!).
Sutter’s comments were laced with vitriol all evening; I can’t figure out why Cyndy didn’t hear it.
Update: Here’s comedian Lewis Black talking about who fought and died for the vote.
Now, even 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard A. Posner thinks that Sutter is just a common vote suppressor. Posner is the judge who penned the opinion, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, that that Republicans have used around the country — and tried in Minnesota — to suppress voting with photo ID requirements.
But after seeing what these requirements are really used for, Judge Posner has had a change of heart:
There is only one motivation for imposing burdens on voting that are ostensibly designed to discourage voter-impersonation fraud, [and] if there is no actual danger of such fraud, and that is to discourage voting by persons likely to vote against the party responsible for imposing the burdens.
That’s a perfect fit for Barb Sutter.
Thanks for your feedback. If we like what you have to say, it may appear in a future post of reader reactions.