« The Third Debate | Main | State by State Breakdown »
October 14, 2004
"Pre-Emptive" Strike?
If Matt Drudge has this right, it is a bombshell
KERRY/EDWARDS ELECTION DIRECTIVE: CHARGE VOTER INTIMIDATION, EVEN IF NONE EXISTS**World Exclusive**
The Kerry/Edwards campaign and the Democratic National Committee are advising election operatives to declare voter intimidation -- even if none exists, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.
A 66-page mobilization plan to be issued by the Kerry/Edwards campaign and the Democratic National Committee states: "If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a 'pre-emptive strike.'"
Hat tip lgf.
Update
The DNC responds to Drudge
Jim Geraghty at National Review explains the situation.
Update II 10-15-04 9am
I've had a chance to read the Democrat's response a bit more thoroughly. Jim Geraghty is right, the line about launching a "pre-emptive" strike is still in there
2. If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a "pre-emptive strike" (particularly well-suited to states in which there techniques have been tried in the past).It's not quite clear as to whethere this "pre-emptive strike" means that Democrats will "declare voter intimidation - even if none exists" as Drudge says, or if they will simply threaten Republicans "not to try anything."
Either way, it's an amazing document, and I encourage you to read the whole thing.
On the one hand, no doubt that Republicans are not perfect beings and occasionally some will do things that ought not be done. But if you read the Democratic response you get the impression that it was written in 1955, or 1963.
Further, the Democrats know that the Republicans are going to be watching ever more carefully for election fraud this time round. Thus, to them "voter intimidation" even incudes such things as
• Giving warnings about election offenses, i.e., that voting when ineligible to do so, or voting at the wrong place, or providing false information to election officials, etc. is a crime
1. Signs, posters, phone calls, and/or sound trucks giving "information" or warnings about voter requirements or eligibility and/or warning that voting when ineligible to do so is an offense, etc.
2. Concentration of numbers of Republican poll watchers or challengers in minority precincts
3. Republican poll watchers challenging every voter in minority precincts on some pretext
4. GOP poll watchers, local law enforcement officers, or persons with official looking badges or insignia stationed at polling places taking pictures, asking for names, or engaging in other types of intimidating conduct.
Funny, I didn't know that enforcing election law was "intimidation".
It seems clear that unless Bush wins decisively, we are faced with a round of lawsuits that wil make 2000 seem tame by camparison.
Posted by Tom at October 14, 2004 11:42 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theredhunter.com/mt/refer.cgi/173
