Suspending Elections

[Griff]

I know I'm cynical but...

U.S. counterterrorism officials are looking at an emergency proposal on the legal steps needed to postpone the presidential election in case of such an attack, Newsweek reported on Sunday.

[lumberjim]

don't worry, griff. jane_says that's impossible.

from this thread in response to this post in that thread:

Jane, let’s say the American apocalypse happens: Bush remains in office come January 2005. Not only that, let’s say that he signs an executive order granting himself martial authority, and it stays in effect for the duration of his term … which doesn’t end in 2008 because he refuses to hold election for “security reasons”. He disbands the legislature, assumes control of all three branches, and enforces his edicts with military power. The press is federalized, guns are seized, and every human baby is stamped with a V-chip at birth.

It’s 2020. 10 different attempts a revolution have been quelled because the technological dominance of the Homeland Security office allows them to isolated and eradicate anyone who gains a significant following in dissent. The country is beaten down by terror, the people unable to regain control of their own government.

~snip~

-sm

[Beestie]

Fear appears to be W's ally.

[jaguar]

If someone told you in 2000 that the reichstag would be smoking by now, what would you have said? Amazing how things change. Looks like bush's closest political allay is Osama, he's the thing most likely to keep him in power.

That's what I call an unholy alliance, a fundie president who beleives he's fighting god's war being kept in power by a fundie who think he's fighting gods war.

I get this image in my mind of God with long white hair and a white beard, sitting on a golden throne in heaven. He reads the latest reports from earth handed to him by a worried angel and gets a really upset look on his face. "OK, send 'em in now," He says. Jesus and Mohammed approach with hang dog looks on their faces. "Can't you two get ANYTHING right?" He asks. "I said 'Peace on earth' NOT 'the earth in peices!"

[Cyber Wolf]

Right. In terms of the election itself, what's the absolute worst that could happen if terrorists attack polling stations on Election Day? The votes from those stations won't be counted. How many thousands (hundred thousands?)of polling stations are there across the US? Not to mention absentee ballots and the like? The terrorists would have to hit a LOT of stations in the 12 or so hours that elections are open. And even if they did, news of a station being hit would travel REAL fast and every other station in the US would be on guard. If it is Al Qaeda, then it's known they don't like to go after well guarded targets, more trouble and less chance of success.

Doing anything to move, postpone or otherwise alter the normal flow of the elections would only bolster the terrorists' morale. Now, what if we left the elections alone and went on through as planned? If a few sites are attacked, should be totally shut down and cower like a bad puppy looking at a raised rolled up newspaper? Or should we take what votes do get through and use them? Besides, in the normal course of an election, it's nothing new for votes to be lost, forged and mistallied. In a given year, there's plenty of votes that either don't get in or don't get counted correctly. I shouldn't have to remind anyone of the absolute tripe that was 2000's election process. If an attack should happen, acknowledge it, yes. Mourn what losses occur, yes. But don't STOP. Keep MOVING. Take what you've got and GO.

[offtopic]Also, along the lines of letting go and moving on, how long are flags supposed to be kept at half-mast for the death of a president? Around here, there's still flags being raised a half-mast and I can't figure out if there's a time period for it or if whoever's responsible just forgot/is lazy?[/offtopic]

[Griff]

Originally Posted by lumberjim

don't worry, griff. jane_says that's impossible.

from this thread in response to this post in that thread:

I give the Wise Alchy Sage credit for not getting caught up in that thread. We are in an amazing place right now. If we look back at the much more significant threat of WWII, FDR was all about keeping the machine of democracy running, no matter what. Having the administration even float this idea is a nice victory for Osama. It's enough to make a libbytarian vote Democratic. Ridge's comments were a message to any crackpot that all they have to do is disrupt a few well chosen polling places and the election is closed. Any crackpot, even a few homegrown right wing nuts who want to stay the course or some ELF types who think it needs to get worse so it can get better could read that message the wrong way.

[Clodfobble]

[offtopic]Also, along the lines of letting go and moving on, how long are flags supposed to be kept at half-mast for the death of a president? Around here, there's still flags being raised a half-mast and I can't figure out if there's a time period for it or if whoever's responsible just forgot/is lazy?[/offtopic]

Bush declared the period to be 30 days in this case.

[lumberjim]

i'm a bit worried that this is just the seed of something to come. So this gets pishawed, and this election comes and goes, and sanity forbid, GWB gets re-elected.....NEXT time, this comes up again, and maybe, just maybe they sneak it through. that's when the shit hits the fan.

and why is it automatically we should postpone the election? why not preempt it? do we think the terrorists can't postpone their attacks? and like CW said, if they wanted to effect our elections, they'd pretty much have to invade us full scale. duh.

this is really fucked up.

and jinx tells me, although i haven't seen it, that we've discussed "free speech zones" at bush rallies, and people are being arrested for adverse signage at those rallies?

if bush get's reelected, i'm going to go live with aunt Elsa in switzerland, american hater or not.

[lookout123]

1) i don't agree with postponing the elections, but from a point of view it does make some sense.

2) i don't think they are talking about postponing to prevent further casualties in the event of an attack. the fear is probably more along the lines of preventing a repeat of spain's election. a couple hundred people die and the election goes in an absolutely unexpected direction. i personally think that if their was a pre-election attack in america it would actually shore up gwb's #'s just because of the collective personality of america. ( america - "you attacked us??? we'll put big flags in our car windows, attack a few gas station attendants, and nuke ya back to the stoneage". spain - "you attacked us??? we'll hand power to the guy who will pull us out so you won't be mad at us anymore"."
that is obviously oversimplified, but you get the point.

[lumberjim]

i personally think that if their was a pre-election attack in america it would actually shore up gwb's #'s just because of the collective personality of america.

i fear that you are correct in that beleif, and gwb knows it. makes me think that another major attack is a near certainty. let's take a poll on the date? i'm thinking mid October.....

[lookout123]

i have believed there was certain to be a pre-election attack since spain's RR bombings. i don't think the terrorists understand the american psyche well enough to know that it would backfire.
personally, i believe there have already been attempts. i would expect their focus to be no more than a week before the election though. they will be looking to accomplish a repeat of spain's elections.
i don't expect any polling places targeted. i believe it will be public functions, the transportation system again.

[jinx]

I'm thinking Boston, July 26-29.

[lookout123]

jinx, i think you are right that there is something planned for it - but no the main event. keep in mind the public doesn't hear about the events that are prevented, there have been other samll scale attacks foiled. it's just one of those things, we only hear about the failures, not the successes.

[jinx]

Why?