If Kerry wins, will Republicans cry foul?

[I_like_chicken]

Ok this thought just occured to me.

It is looking more and more likely that Kerry will win this election, and the Republicans are starting to look desperate. Now if the repubs can't win or steal this election, I think what they'll do is say that the Dems cheated. I've noticed in the news lately that theres a lot of concern about election fraud, and there have been many of stories on this, but not about black box voting, rather about duplicate registrations. The Dems and their allies have been working very hard this year to register new voters, and the numbers show it. So hard in fact, that they have sometimes become overzealous, and get people to register twice. Obviously there is no devious intentions, but thats how repubs are playing it up. In fact they have employed more than 3600 people in Ohio to make sure voters are "properly" registered, mostly in Democratic areas. Now if Kerry wins, I think the Republicans will point to this and say Kerry cheated by having people vote for him twice. They will try to spin it that Kerry committed fraud, and they will then try to impeach him, or use whatever other legal means they have to get him out of office. They are preparing for a Kerry win, and they will do to him exactly what they did to Clinton when he was elected.

Bottom line, if we win this thing, the fight is far from over.

[PartyPooper]

1. Honestly, if we win this one, I don't care what they have to say!

After all, we won in 2000, too! Screw those selfish, lying, hypocritcal, thieving bastards!

'Nuff said.

[NMDemDist2]

2. of course they will, that is a major page in Rove's playbook

but them being foul is no different than any other day now is it?

[DBoon]

3. Impeachment

I read somewhere (Paul Krugman?) that the Republicans are ready to immediately start impeachment proceedings against a president-elect Kerry.

Yeah, unsubstantiated rumor, but I wouldn't put it past them.

[madmax]

5. The Coming Post-Election Chaos

The Coming Post-Election Chaos
By John W. Dean FindLaw Friday 22 October 2004

"A storm warning of things to come if the vote is as close as expected.
This next presidential election, on November 2, may be followed by post-election chaos unlike any we've ever known.

Look at the swirling, ugly currents currently at work in this conspicuously close race. There is Republicans' history of going negative to win elections. There is Karl Rove's disposition to challenge close elections in post-election brawls. And there is Democrats' (and others) new unwillingness to roll over, as was done in 2000. Finally, look at the fact that a half-dozen lawsuits are in the works in the key states and more are being developed.

This is a climate for trouble. A storm warning is appropriate. In the end, attorneys and legal strategy could prove as important, if not more so, to the outcome of this election as the traditional political strategists and strategy.

Let's go over each factor that spells trouble - and see how they may combine."

More: http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/102404V.shtml

[Steelangel]

9. Already?

Wow, they cannot accept the idea of losing the election? Jeez man, republicans are truly crybabies and losers.

I hope Kerry will replace these idiots with democrats to ensure the fairness.

[CMO]

11. Speaking of impeachment...

If W wins the election we should start impeachment proceedings against him. We have a way better reason than the repukes had when they impeached Clinton. Clinton lied about having an affair (who would want the world to know about that...I would lie too) and Bush lied about everything (the main thing being the war in Iraq). He lied and people died. To me, that is a little more important than having sex with an intern in the oval office.

[iamjoy]

17. It's Congress/Impeachment

Congress decides what constitutes "high crimes and misdemeanors" suitable for impeachment. The GOP had been looking for a way to bring down Bill Clinton since 1992. They took over Congress in 1994 and intensified their efforts.

What Bush has done as President is worse than what Clinton did, but because his party controls Congress, they will not move articles of impeachment against him.

As for Kerry, much as the GOP may want to destroy him, they can't just impeach him. Kerry would have to do something illegal first. Clinton did some stupid things and made it easy for them. Furthermore, even if the House moves articles of impeachment against him, it would have to be "tried" in the Senate. Call me overly optimistic, but Kerry's tenure in the legislative body may help him here because even Senators who dislike his politics respect him personally. This is not to say they wouldn't "destroy" him in other ways like refusing to act on any of his bills so they can make him look ineffective. They would also send bills to Kerry with some things he wants and other things he can't stand to put him in a political "Catch 22"

[CMO]

20. Let's just vote Kerry

in and get the dems win back congress!

[dave502d]

4. They had 4 year to fix our voting system.

All they want is a system that let them cheat.so the can go to hell.

[Zen Democrat]

6. Yes. I see Republicans charging voter fraud in Florida and Ohio.

Then James Baker will file lawsuits to throw out disputed ballots and they'll try to get it to the Supreme Court. Put nothing past them.

In the meantime, President-elect Kerry has to start meeting with the transition team and publicly naming cabinet members ... and we can start yelling for Cheney to get out of Edwards' house!!!!!!

[AlCzervik]

7. i'm more than willing to live with their pissing and moaning.

[madmax]

8. Bush v. Gore, Ticking Bomb

Bush v. Gore, Ticking Bomb
By George F. Will
Newsweek 25 October 2004 Issue

That decision, which need not have been written, is pregnant with enough mischief to plunge the nation into chaos on Nov. 3.
On Dec. 12, 2000, the Supreme Court decided Bush v. Gore, ending the Florida fiasco and guaranteeing George W. Bush's election. Shortly thereafter the conservative National Review, which was pleased by the ruling's consequence but queasy about the reasoning that produced it, issued a warning, the prescience of which might become excruciatingly evident on Wednesday, Nov. 3. Noting that the court's "dubious argument" that standardless, selective hand counts in Florida violated the Constitution's guarantee of "equal protection of the laws," National Review said:

"It is unclear why-with the different vote tabulation systems from county to county, with different levels of accuracy-this line of reasoning wouldn't render Florida's entire electoral system unconstitutional. Or, for that matter, the nation's electoral system. In fact, all of life can be considered a violation of the equal protection clause, which is why the clause has traditionally been the Swiss Army knife of liberal jurisprudence, fit for achieving any result, however arbitrary."

Which is why Jeffrey Rosen's recent essay "Rematch: Bush v. Gore, Round 2" (The New Republic, Oct. 4, 2004) is mandatory reading for both campaigns and citizens who want to brace themselves for the storm that could engulf the nation as soon as the polls close Nov. 2. Then the parties might unleash thousands of lawyers, each clutching a copy of Bush v. Gore, to ferret out "equal protection" violations in every closely contested state.

Consider the use of different voting systems-electronic touch screens, punch cards, etc.- in different jurisdictions of a particular state. All systems are fallible, and different systems have different error rates. Does that mean that "equal protection" is denied when different systems are used? What if the distribution of the different systems within the state means that errors have a "disparate impact" on minorities?

more: http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/102404C.shtml

[Wickerman]

10. They'll just have to get over it

BFD, I won't be able to care.

[noahmijo]

12. This is why we have to win in a landslide

I want a knock out I mean a right upprcut to the jaw, Kerry wins by 40% or more.

That way they can't compain about anything other than the fact that they are losers and bad ones at that.

[gordianot]

13. True

This is the end result of the American electorate being conditioned with wedge issues.

In 2000 I really think the Democrats caved in for the good of the Republic and the Union. Will the Republicans do the same, they created most of the divisions. Sorry I do not think they will. How does Constitutional Crisis sound?

[NoPasaran]

14. Fuck 'em! n/t

[iamjoy]

15. If The Votes Show Bush Wins...

will we trust it? Or will we think it was those Democrat's voter registration forms the GOP funded company discarded? Or that there was tampering with the touch screen voting machines (built by Republican-contributing companies)

I can tell you that even if the numbers from November 2 show a significant victory or landslide for Bush I will not trust it.

[LeinesRed]

16. BIG TIME

they've got it all in place

[Liberal Gramma]

18. I'm looking forward to saying,

"GET OVER IT!!"

[senseandsensibility]

19. Does * stink?

Do I care if they cry foul, or more likely, lie? No, as long as we get Kerry into office!