Charles Blow: 2012 election close to being stolen before votes are cast

>> let's get right to our guest. charles, the president is right, isn't he? when he talks about the republicans discipline and what he's really referring to, the voter suppression , alleyed to unlimited money to spend.

>> it's discipline in a way, be but also just broad strategy. which is to focus on how you actually get the votes on your side of the document. and that is just going straight after the voters who are actually going to cast the ballots. even if you put aside far moment, campaign finance , you can spend as much you want. if the person can't cast a vote, it doesn't matter and that is what is happening across the country. state after state where republican rs in control of sta state --

>> we're grateful because as you know, gaffes are made in the political cycle, but actually, it's when someone's actually telling the truth. we've got republican assemblyman from pennsylvania who's revealed the truth about his state 's voter i.d. laws. listen to this.

>> we are focused on making sure that we meet our obligations that we talked about for years. pro second amendment. first pro-life legislation in 22 years. done. voter i.d, which is going to allow governor romney to win the state of pennsylvania . done.

>> i would like to add my applause. the strategy for mitt romney to win is to suppress the vote.

>> that's the classic definition of gaffe. to say something you shouldn't be saying. and i don't think they necessarily win in pennsylvania , but that is the strategy which is there is no real voter fraud to speak of in america. but you know there are tons of people who do not have state issued i.d. and for whom getting it becomes a real hurdle. basically, it's a poll tax .

>> you say it's not so widespread, but the law in pennsylvania could disenfranchise something like 700,000 people.

>> i said voter fraud is not.

>> but there are 15 states where these laws are in place. they could represent like 80% of the votes mitt romney needs to win the election. this is no joke.

>> there's no getting around the fact that people who are putting these law us in place know the effect of what the laws will do and in a lot of these cases, if you look at "the new york times" list of spades, and most of those states, about nine percentage point was the spread for obama last time. if you look at current polling, you're down into low single digits. so now, you say can i move that window? three to four percentage points, doesn't take much. you may have dissatisfied people because of the economy. people voting last time for historical reasons . you may have to move that needle maybe 1%. that is what we're talking about. if you can shade in a florida where barack obama only carries by three percentage points when it's 2008 and it's amazing. if you can shave one percentage point by changing when people can vote, by putting extraordinary limits on voter registration . by having people require to have i.d.s that they have never had to have in decades of voting for some of these people, that means you can shift a state . it is not a small thing. and people keep trying to figure out ways to say this. in a way that will make it resognate with people that this election is r very close to being stolen. before the votes are actually cast.

>> one of the most astonishing things, i'm not exaggerate iing. there's a sense in which an assemblyman in pennsylvania says what he says. we did with the voter i.d., therefore, mitt romney 's going to win. then it goes up to the supreme court because if you look at the way the supreme court shaves down, you're looking at an overtly conservative court. i mean, this is, is this effect the question, a partisan majority that's going to dominate this nation from here on in?

>> well, i think you have to separate the course from the state houses.

>> why because it's the same discipline? that's the point i'm making. it's almost as if from the ordinary assembly men right up from the supreme court . thai got this and they've got control.

>> i'm going to go that far as to link what's happening in the country and state houses to the court. i think there is definitely a conservative bit to the court and there's no way to argue that point. and in fact, what they've done this week in letting the montana case affirms that point. but the strategy on the state level is a very overt partisan strategy that is unlike anything that you have ever seen and almost like a last gasp sort of thing. trying to put things in place before demographics take over. so put things this place as quickly as you possibly can. and that is also the reason you see things like you know, same-sex marriage. put it in place while you still, you see it changes so fast that put it on the books and make someone else have to take it off, which is a harder hurdle to overcome.

>> thank you so much for