DNC to charge voter intimidation even if it doesn't exist!!!!

The DNC and Kerry/Edwards campaign already have plans in place to charge voter intimidation even if none exists. They have election day manuals that suggest to do this in certain states where this has occurred in the past!

This story is still developing:

drudgereport.com...

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.'"

[HIGHLIGHT OF ELECTION DAY MANUAL, NOVEMBER 2004. CLICK FOR IMAGE .JPG FILE]
drudgereport.com...

The provocative Dem battle plan is to be distributed in dozens of states, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

One top DNC official confirmed the manual's authenticity, but claimed the notion of crying wolf on any voter intimidation is "absurd."

"We all know the Republicans are going to try to steal the election by scaring people and confusing people," the top DNC source explained.

Is this a normal campaign tactic? It seems outrageous to me.

Jemison

DNC has responded that Drudge was misleading:

www.democrats.org...


[edit on 14-10-2004 by Jemison]

This is a tactic that has been used by both sides from time to time. It is seemingly more common among the DNC, mostly due to their larger share of minority and women voters. This is perhaps the first time it has been proven as a top level strategy by both the candidate and the national party, however (at least to my knowledge). I find it appaling. I would find it appaling had it been a RNC document, and I feel that this shoudl be calle don the carpet and brought into the full light of an inquiry. This rises to the level of attempting to influence and effect an election through subversive tactics. Isn't that a criminal offense? Then again, it's the DNC, so they'll get a pass from the mainstream media.

Could you imagine the flak if this had been an RNC strategy?? We'd never hear the end of it. Kind of like what if GW had mentioned Heinz Co, as one of the largest outsourcing giants. We'd have heard nothing more but that and how 'politically taudry' it was right up until the election!

Thank you Al Gore.

I can see this being almost appropriate if this was some sort of guide to dealing with actual intimidation, but that's not the case here.

If I were a democrat, I'd be ashamed of my party right about now. Are there any democrats that feel sickened by this? Certainly this is crossing the line, especially exploiting minorities: "Prime minority leadership to discuss the issue in the media.."

This election looks like it could be even nastier than 2000!
But let's face it, dead people have been voting in our elections for a long time. Dirty politics is not unique to 2004.

And, why would the dems charge voter intimidation when they ferry and feed people to get them to vote. Does that sound a little corrupt to you?

I agree that if the RNC was caught doing this the poop would hit the fan!

I did not realize that this is somewhat common. Between this and the voter registration fraud I feel like people should be less worried about the elections that just happened in Afghanistan and those that will be happening in Iraq and focusing more on what's happening here!

Kerry/Edwards already have their legal teams ready to go if Kerry doesn't win. That bothers me because if he doesn't win I'm sure they will find SOME way to change the outcome of the election. I really think that if Bush wins the result will be all out chaos, ten million re-counts and all sorts of lawsuits over intimidation, voter fraud, etc. The 2000 elections will look like a cakewalk compared to what we are in for if Bush wins.

Jemison

And, look what they are doing in Colorado????
They have a referendum to divide the electoral votes the same ratio as the popular vote AND make it retroactive if the election is close.

Is it just me or does anyone else think redoing peacemeal the way we vote for President is lunacy????????

This would be a dangerous precedent. What Colorado would essentially be saying is that the electoral process, which has until recently been held and steadfsastly enforced for 200+ years, has to be revamped and revised because the Democratic party can no longer simply reign supreme by the tactics that have been exposed by the growing and strengthening conservative sleeping giant that is now stretching and waking to the battle. So now, if they can't win legitimately, cheat?

The process was designed so that every state's population had a fair say in the process. If the state's popular vote elects one candidate, then that state's electoral vote goes to that candidate. This prevents larger population states such as California and New York from dictating every election through a simple popular vote. I for one, wouldn't want only CA and NY and IL (thank you Chicago) to dictate my President.

What this Colorado issue boils down to is one state's government trying to set a precedent for the dismantling of the electoral college, which would be a disaster. Ask anyone in the southern half of Illinois how it feels to have every statewide election determined by Chicago.

Not only that Jemison, the Democrats have been caught registering voters with the names of people that are no longer living and registering voters with addresses that have no residence! There is a big stink about their tactics in recruiting voters!

I can't seem to find any information on the internet, though I hear it on the radio every so often!

I can say this though, the reason the Republican Party never gets implicated on such charges, is because they never commit such activities.

If you can find anything else, please post it. I'll do the same. Take care.

This election surely has the potential of being nastier than in 00.

I think this country was divided after the last election, united around 9/11, and Iraq put us back into the pre-9/11 divided mode, it's terrible.

Part of me doesn't care who wins, I just want a clean, clear winner. Let one candidate win by a margin that can't be disputed.

Are we just basically screwed this election? Plans to cry 'foul' even if there isn't any, voter registration fraud, electoral votes not being representative. Is there ANYTHING we can do to make this election 'fair'? This appears to be getting further and further out of control the closer we get to the election.

What can we do????

Jemison

Interesting ... as I was previewing my post I discovered that I had spelled 'election' 'illegtion'. I admit sometimes my spelling is off but never THAT badly. I think it was a freudian slip!