So a number of people in the election reform community have written me in great support of my Slate column after I mentioned the general drubbing I was receiving from others. The argument from these folks is that on the ground in the states, Clinton’s comments are making achieving modest efforts at bipartisan election reform harder. I’m also hearing that the comments are turning off some Republicans who otherwise might have been amenable to universal voter registration.
But the pushback from the left is pretty strong:
Elias Isquith at Salon: “Yet out of all the columns handwringing and concern trolling over Clinton’s recent liberal bent, I’m not sure any have been quite as wrongheaded, naive and downright weird as this one from UC Irvine professor Richard L. Hasen, which criticizes the likely presidential nominee for advocating that more people, regardless of their politics, be allowed to vote.”
Ed Kilgore at the Washington Monthly: “So we’re left with the thought that Democratic advocates for election reform who are in the political arena at the highest level should either shut up about it until such time as Republicans decide to change their minds for their own reasons, or maybe talk about it quietly and with no hint that advocates might be willing to make it a partisan issue! Talk about a blind alley. Interestingly enough, Hasen is indicating he’s rethinking his position based on the negative reaction he received for his Slate piece from people with whom he normally agrees. That’s a good idea.”