Well, Democrats has also been caught trying to get illegals and minorities to vote. I think both parties cheat, and I don't think it has a large effect on the election.
Sorry but it can. For example, in Ohio, the head of the election (a GOPer) tried to segregated type election. Poor black and democratic areas were to have less time voting, where as richer republican areas were to have extended voting hours. After a media backlash he was forced to have the same voting hours across the state. Or Back in 2008 (or was it 2004), when the same state, with a GOPer at the head of the election, sent less voting machines to traditionally democratic areas, and more to traditionally republican areas. This lead to massive lines in the democratic areas. Or in Pennsylvania where the new voter registration laws were put in place for the GOP to win the state .. the head of the election committee even admitted so plus the people who put in place the law, admit that the law would not prevent voter fraud... but it would keep up to 10% of the population from the right to vote.... mostly minorities and democrats of course.
Voter ID law may affect more Pennsylvanians than previously estimated - Page 2 - Philly.com
So you cant say it does not have an impact.
What I think is more worrying is the need to lie. It doesn't seem like Republicans are able to defend their policies at an intellectual level, hence they lie because they know voters don't know any better. Yes, Democrats lie as well, but not as much. For instance a recent attack from Ryan was to blame Obama of something Bush did. Ryan knows that, but he know that voters do not. Romney is worse and is constantly lying, but voters do not know.
I agree, but sadly it has been the tactic of the GOP for many decades... throw enough mud and something will stick. Swiftboat comes to mind. And it does not help that the GOP has their own media outlet to promote these lies.
The problem with this policy is that Republicans are pushing away intelligent conservatives who know better. There is a reason only 30% of asians support Republicans, and it is not because asians are so liberal. More asians than whites voted for Bush Sn. It is because they can't stand the anti-intellectual agenda. Without intelligent conservatives it is easy for Republicans to follow policies that will **** up the country, for instance the no taxes at any cost pledge. Also, as Republicans are appealing to dumb voters, then no one is rebutting all the false or misleading claims from Democrat think tanks.
Well to be frank.. it is because of a vocal minority (maybe a majority) in the base of the GOP are dumb religious wackos. Intellectual people challenge their beliefs and hence intellectual people are bad. It has been the standard operating procedure of the church since the dark ages, to attack intellectuals when the facts conflict with religious/political dogma. That is why people like Bachman, Perry and many others have been attacking intellectuals at all levels and saying that having a college education is almost a negative.
While uneducated whites and the rich is still more than 50% of the voting population, it is getting reduced every single year. If Republicans are not doing anything, then I have a hard time imagining Republicans winning many more elections.
I agree. The GOP has problems in the medium term. Hispanics, blacks and Asians will soon be the majority of the US, and since the GOP has gone out of its way often to piss off the Hispanic and black populations, while pretty much ignoring the Asians.. then they have a problem. It is especially the Hispanic problem that should be worrying.
That is also why they are doing voter intimidation. They know that if they can discourage hispanic and black populations in voting, either by lies or by more technical methods.. then they have a bigger chance in winning in the short term. And once they have power, they do everything they can to gerrymander districts so they will always be in power. Hell they are even floating ideas of going from "winner take all" to give out electoral votes per district.. which of course means that even if a candidate wins the state in the popular vote, then he can loose the state in the electoral vote, because of the gerrymandered districts. Pennsylvania Democrats are fighting this as we speak.. here Obama can go from an almost certain win to losing most of the electoral votes but winning the state in the popular vote. And I am against the "winner take all" principle, but going in the other ballpark by giving out electoral votes based on gerrymandered districts... sorry rather have winner take all.. at least the peoples vote would matter.