July 19, 2004
BUYING YOUR OWN BUNK:
Kerry Building Legal Network for Vote Fights: Mindful of election problems four years ago, John Kerry is assembling legal safeguards in an effort to monitor the election. (DAVID M. HALBFINGER, 7/19/04, NY Times)
Mindful of the election problems in Florida four years ago, aides to Senator John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, say his campaign is putting together a far more intricate set of legal safeguards than any presidential candidate before him to monitor the election.Aides to Mr. Kerry say the campaign is taking the unusual step of setting up a nationwide legal network under its own umbrella, rather than relying, as in the past, on lawyers associated with state Democratic parties. The aides said they were recruiting people based on their skills as litigators and election lawyers, rather than rewarding political connections or big donors.
Lawyers for the campaign are gathering intelligence and preparing litigation over the ballot machines being used and the rules concerning how voters will be registered or their votes disqualified. In some cases, the lawyers are compiling dossiers on the people involved and their track records on enforcing voting rights. The disputed 2000 presidential election remains a fresh wound for Democrats, and Mr. Kerry has been referring to it on the stump while assuring his audiences that he will not let this year's election be a repeat of the 2000 vote.
It's a complete waste of time, effort, and focus, but the logical outcome of believing your own propaganda. It's an article of faith for the Democrats that if their lawyers had only been a little better Al Gore would be president today and that this election is going to be razor tight. Squandering resources on this kind of stuff makes the latter even less likely. Posted by Orrin Judd at July 19, 2004 11:51 AM
It also will serve to raise the voices of the lunatic fringe after the election is over and Bush wins. Any state race that is within two or three percentage points will spark shrill cries for recounts, even if that translates into a 50,000 or 100,000 vote difference in the larger battleground states.
The effort alone tells you all you need to know about Kerry. Anyone who actually cared about the country and not merely about power would realize (as Richard Nixon did in 1960) that legal wrangling over the result of an election does more to harm the body politic than the election of any particular individual, even one to whom one is opposed.
In fact, this effort is no at all different than the lionizing of Lyin' Joe Wilson by Kerry; the false claim that the President lied -- all in the pursuit of electoral advantage -- only serves to empower our enemies at the expense of success in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the Middle East.
This is what the Democrat Party has become -- a power hungry group willing to say and do anything to return to power.
Posted by: Morrie at July 19, 2004 2:00 PMMorrie:
Especially since the signal being measured in Florida--the difference between the actual number of votes cast for each candidate--was far smaller than the noise in the system. Moreover, that difference was so small that virtually any amount of noise would swamp the signal.
Therefore, all the legal posturing in the world will not get past the fact that the 2000 election was essentially a coin toss, no matter who won.
It is high time the Democrats took that on board--a feat that would require analytical thinking, which is, unfortunately, a not particularly widespread commodity on the Left.
Posted by: Jeff Guinn at July 19, 2004 2:26 PMThis appears to be an effort to intimidate voting officials and potential voters. Remembers how the Democrats tried to block the counting of ballots from military voters in 2000? And to steal the election by manipulating the lefties on the Florida Supreme Court?
In Democratic la-la-land, it appears to be ok to create dossiers on voting officials. Just not potential terrorists.
Posted by: Steve at July 19, 2004 2:33 PMWhen you posted this an hour or so ago I started to comment, but I was sputtering and spitting on my keyboard, that I had to calm down.
In Florida, in 2000, the election was held under rules written mostly by Democrats and completely agreed to by them. In all the disputed counties that I know of the Democrats supervised the voting and the counting. And yet Republicans were accused of stealing the election!!!
After the election in Florida and other states there was a clamor for reform by Democrats and the stupid party shrugged and said "OK, anything you want". Now if there is any significant reforms in procedures which crash and burn in 2004, who do you think is going to be blamed??
Posted by: h-man at July 19, 2004 2:55 PMIf it's "stealing" an election to win a court case, (especially if the judges are happy to agree with you), then Bush must have stolen the '00 election, ipso facto.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 19, 2004 3:00 PMGenerals -- last war -- Maginot Line.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 19, 2004 4:38 PMI think you're obliquely referring to this quote:
"Do not let us be taken in by our own propaganda." - the devil Screwtape in "The Screwtape Letters" by C.S. Lewis
Try and find the audiotapes with John Cleese as Screwtape; they're great!
Posted by: Just John at July 19, 2004 5:51 PM