Incessant Rant
The Incessant Rant Home Page

Welcome to The INCESSANT RANT. On our worst day this site will embody .00000001% of the world’s opinion. Considering the world population increases by three every second, I'm going to have to persuade just under 260,000 people to agree with me daily if only to break even. I'm screwed...

The Incessant Rant Home Page

My Photo
Location: Connecticut, United States

I'm a Conservative Troglodyte who puts more emphasis on common sense rather than political parties.

E-Mail Me

The Incessant Rant Home Page

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

How I would hijack an election...

If I were interested in pulling off an election hi-jacking this would be the recipe (let's assume that I was a Billionaire and was willing to, indirectly, bankroll the whole thing through special grants run through groups like, oh I don't know, The Pew Research Center):

1. Enlist pseudo "non-partisan" special interest groups to go hog wild registering new voters...without much emphasis on accuracy. I'd use these special interest groups to secure plausible deniability on any obvious tampering and creative registering. I'd focus those special interest groups on the battleground states.

2. Enlist more special interest groups to file civil law suits in fence sitting counties of these battleground states challenging anything on the registration that makes an effort to indentify the voter. The more anonymous you can make the voter the better. This includes allowing voting at incorrect precincts...making it unnecessary for voters to show ID...Not requiring a voter to show proof of citizenship.

3. Prepare a cadre of lawyers (again, on their own accord and unpaid by the DNC) to stake out Election Bureaus and Civil Court ready to file Civil Rights Violation suits (meritorious or otherwise).

4. Organize an effort (via the initial "non-partisan" special interest groups) to transport, direct, and otherwise orchestrate multiple voting at different precincts, enlist folks to vote under assumed names of created voter registrations...and depend on the attorneys in #3 to cut off any challenges through intimidation of civil rights suits, or blantant accusations of racism (assuring they are in eyesight of a TV camera).

Iowa is the latest state to have a suit filed by the special interest groups (The League of Women Voters of Iowa, the National Voting Rights Institute and the Iowa Civil Liberties Union). This one is trying to remove the box on the registration that you must check to confirm you are a US Citizen. Then, they are also pushing to allow people to vote at incorrect precinct locations.

In Iowa, it is much like it is in NH (when I lived there). The election officials, very often recognize and know the folks in their precinct...same in most parts of Iowa. So if a bus load of folks show up that don't look familiar you could challenge them. But, if you can vote in any precinct...then the challenge can be jumped on by an attorney (waiting in the wings) to complain of a violation of that person's civil rights, and of course, the old stand by...Racism.

Make no mistake, Iowa is an important state. The Democrats registered 42,000 more voters than republicans...and Bush lost the state by just over 4000 votes in 2000.

I guess that's how I would do it...

Window Dressing (These are but a few of the suits hitting the Courts)
Suit to require paper ballot as opposed to the Computer voting in NJ (filed on behalf of two peace activist groups and two residents, including Democratic state Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, in the New Jersey Superior Court in Trenton)

Comment: You can't collect selective ballots and dump them in the trunk of your car if they're not paper.

A Federal Judge ruled against special interest groups who advocated that the State had to count ballots cast in an incorrect precinct. However, there's a catch which negates the decision. The Judge, also, ruled that the State could only refuse to count ballots cast by voters who had been directed by poll workers to the proper polling place, but still got it wrong. Good luck proving that one…

Comment: Another successful attempt as making the voter more anonymous, and fraud more likely.

The Federal Court ruled that as long as the voter casts the vote in the correct county, it doesn't matter which precinct he/'she votes in. Keep in mind that at least one Ohio county has more registered voters than the US Census acknowledges…

Comment: Again, the voter is made more anonymous, with more potential for fraud to occur. Incidentally, poll workers are on their third issued set of instructions on how to handle provisional ballots… Yes sir....plenty of suspect activities in OHIO:
Thousands of new-voter cards in Ohio undeliverable By Jim Siegel Enquirer Columbus Bureau

The Federal Judge ruled that votes cast in the wrong precinct can, and will, be counted as long as they are in the correct city. The Democratic Party was pushing this one directly.

Comments: Same story…

The Democratic Party presented the Michigan ruling to a Federal Judge in Florida seeking to allow voters the ability to vote in the wrong precinct. However, after moving up to the Florida Supreme Court, it was shot down.

Comment: Good news for those interested in a fair election.

Also, in Florida:

A coalition of labor unions is suing five counties over thousands of rejected registration forms -- more than one-third submitted by African Americans and a quarter by Latinos

Comments: And the labor unions have access to these registrations how? Once again, the registrations are likely turned down for valid reasons reflective of the Election Law. That should be the end of the story. However, incorrect registration should not be changed to include more to the rolls after the registration deadline.

New Mexico

The State Legislature passed a law that required all first time voters registering to vote show Idenficiation. A state poll showed that 86% of the residents supported the new law. However, the Democratic Secretary of State filed suit to interpret the law that only those first time voters registering by mail should comply. The Election officials were solidly against Madame Secretary of State...Yet, she won the case...The Secretary of State (representing 14% of her constituency has company in the suit. The suit was joined by the DNC and New Voter Project (NVP).

Comments: Draw your own conclusions...

The Incessant Rant Home Page
Weblog Commenting and Trackback by
The misguided