From the article linked above:
So either the Republican election observers or the Democratic election officials quoted are lying. I guess we’ll see.
Do you normally just skip over paragraphs that don’t make it through your ideology filter, Elvis?
All right, Milo. You want it that way. Here’s some dope from Congressional Quarterly, November 2 edition:
Arkansas: court battle:
Louisiana; potential court battle: The in-person absentee voting machines in the state were certified by Election Commissioner Suzanne Haik Terrell, who happens to be running for Senator in this election. The loser in Louisiana can only request a recount of the… absentee ballots.
South Dakota; Florida, part II: Despite the nationwide fiasco of 2000, the Republican-controlled state legislature refused to clarify the election statutes, which are silent on contested Senate elections except to say that the state legislature may choose whom to seat. Any three registered voters in a precinct may contest that precinct’s vote count. Valid concerns about voter registration fraud on the part of the Democrats may well lead to an eminently convenient contested election regardless of the margin of victory, which is as in the bag for Republicans as it would be if you took it to the Supreme Court.
So just lay the hell off the damned one-sided election-stealing horseshit, Milo. Anyone who pulls this sort of thing is deserving of our contempt, no matter which side they’re on.
You’ve convinced me. The Republicans done it.
You know, this jumping to conclusions is the best aerobic exercise I’ve had all day.
Jackmannii, I never said the Republicans did it. My point was that assuming that someone was using reverse psychology in an attempt to encourage black voters is one hell of a leap. The simpler explanation, i.e., that someone wanted to try to keep black voters away from the polls, would seem much more likely, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. If anyone’s jumping to unwarranted conclusions, it’s you.
December has a habit of posting threads which claim some vile abuse of the Democratic Party that turn out to have very little to do with the Party or sometimes even with Democrats. The evidence here was just as scanty, the rhetoric turned up high.
It really doesn’t matter who did it, since there are always going to be dirty tricks and weird stories (though I agree: making voting more convoluted and complex is not exactly helping things). It just seemed a pretty outrageous instance.
Couldn’t agree more. Interesting that you would think otherwise.
News alert! People Milossarian doesn’t like were spotted near polling places! More evidence of the total lack of principle of the Democratic Party!
The clue phone is ringing, dude. Better answer it.
The union story is utter horseshit. The one woman offering translation help was escorted out of the perimeter, but she never went into the booth with anyone. The “union people” who accompanied folks into the booth were there at the request of some of the elderly/disabled folks who wanted help.
And of course, Republicans trying to shut down a poll in a heavily Democratic area isn’t a dirty trick at all…
Sorry…not fact.
“Voter turnout was reported higher than normal in some states, and no major problems with polling sites were reported. (Electronic voting) Poor weather – which typically decreases voter turnout substantially – seemed to have had little effect.”
Cite:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/11/06/elec02.main.wrap/index.html
(Before I am labeled as a basher of Democrats or supporter of Republicans, let me make it completely clear that I think both parties suck the poop-filled nether regions of their respective mascots. I support neither - I just hate when people post “facts” without backing them up.)
Maybe it was a local landlord trying to get people to pay their back rent so they could vote?