# Republican voter intimidation tactics **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 22, 2004, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496 "2004-09-22T15:22:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2004, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/61 "2004-09-28T20:59:01Z")
I’m just trying to get my mind around this. So, is it correct to interpret the Republican stance as “Democracy is good as long as people who aren’t likely to vote for us don’t vote”? Am I missing some nuance? ---
**Author:** ![pervert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbe5ce/32.png) [@pervert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pervert)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2004, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/62 "2004-09-28T23:28:00Z")
**Zut** and **BrainGlutton** I seem to be missing something. According to that article about Papageorge\* he wanted to increase Republican voter turn out and decrease Democratic voter turnout by emphasizing a certain issue. I agree entirely with you and others that intimidating voters, denying legal voters their sufferage, and perhaps even encouraging people not to vote are all naughty things to do. But is that really the same as advocating a political strategy which seeks to do a similar thing through the pushing of particular issues? That’s what political speech has always been about? Surely you are not against that. As I said, perhaps I’m missing something. \*I really thought this was another insulting reference to George Bush before I read the article. Very funny that. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2004, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/63 "2004-09-29T00:16:41Z")
**pervert:** _But is that really the same as advocating a political strategy which seeks to do a similar thing through the pushing of particular issues?_ I hesitate to risk starting another of these long nitpicking sessions with you, but I’ll comment anyway. I agree that all politicians wish that the other side’s voters would just stay home, and they’re within their rights to emphasize the issues that they think will decrease the other side’s enthusiasm for its candidate. But talking about it as though that’s a key part of the strategy—“we’ve got to suppress the Detroit vote or we’ll have a tough time of it in the elections”—leaves a nasty taste. And any Republican politician with a grain of sense these days should know better than to talk about “suppressing” Democratic votes in any way, just from a PR perspective. Even if “suppress their votes” was only pol-speak for “give them our side of the issue to enlighten them and correct their misguided enthusiasm for the wrong candidate”, it was still a very stupid thing to say, in the circumstances. I agree with you, however, that “giving them our side of the issue to correct their misguided enthusiasm” is a legitimate campaign tactic. Trying to make it more **difficult** for them to vote in any way, on the other hand, is definitely not. ---
**Author:** ![zut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zut/32/2875_2.png) [@zut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zut)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2004, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/64 "2004-09-29T01:42:05Z")
> [@pervert](#): > > I agree entirely with you and others that intimidating voters, denying legal voters their sufferage, and perhaps even encouraging people not to vote are all naughty things to do. But is that really the same as advocating a political strategy which seeks to do a similar thing through the pushing of particular issues? That’s what political speech has always been about? Surely you are not against that. Matter of intention, I think. In the this example, I infer from the Oakland Press article that Pappageorge was advocating the inclusion and support of a medical marajuana-legalization initiative on the Detroit ballot. (I admit it’s hard to be sure just _exactly_ what Pappageorge was proposing; I understand his comments were not made in public and there’s no solid record.) This wasn’t an _issue_ that Pappageorge supported; he was advocating the initiative _solely_ to suppress voter turnout; no other reason. If you’re advocating a political position that you believe in, I have no problem with that – even if I disagree with it, and even if, by some analysis, it would tend to depress the vote of some segment of the population. But to take a position or formulate a strategy _solely_ to suppress turnout, and for no other reason, is unethical. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2004, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/65 "2004-09-29T01:59:41Z")
> [@zut](#): > > In the this example, I infer from the Oakland Press article that Pappageorge was advocating the inclusion and support of a medical marajuana-legalization initiative on the Detroit ballot. (I admit it’s hard to be sure just exactly what Pappageorge was proposing; I understand his comments were not made in public and there’s no solid record.) This wasn’t an issue that Pappageorge supported; he was advocating the initiative solely to suppress voter turnout; no other reason. 😕 Isn’t putting something that controversial on the ballot likely to **increase** voter turnout? Lots of zealots who might otherwise have stayed home will turn out to vote both for and against it. ---
**Author:** ![pervert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbe5ce/32.png) [@pervert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pervert)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2004, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/66 "2004-09-29T14:54:24Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > I hesitate to risk starting another of these long nitpicking sessions with you, but I’ll comment anyway. Well, here we go again. Ok, not really. I agree entirely with your post. I understand the ick factor in this issue. I think Papageorge does too. That’s why he quit. Just remember this feeling the next time you hear about a politician “energizing” his core constituency. Unless I am much mistaken, it amounts to the same thing. > [@zut](#): > > Matter of intention, I think. In the this example, I infer from the Oakland Press article that Pappageorge was advocating the inclusion and support of a medical marajuana-legalization initiative on the Detroit ballot. No, I don’t think so. I agree that the details are fuzzy. But the article seemed to me simply to say that Papageorge wanted to emphasize or advertise, or use the fact that John Kerry was connected in some way with the marijuana initiative. “_It was in the context, he says, of trying to explain what he believes to be Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry’s involvement with a backer of the medical marijuana issue on the Detroit ballot. It was opposed by Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. Pappageorge thought it would also be unpopular with Detroit Democrats in general and would “suppress” their turnout._” I agree with you that the ick factor increases somewhat if the tactic a politician uses to “decrease” his opponents turnout involves something deceptive. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Isn’t putting something that controversial on the ballot likely to increase voter turnout? Lots of zealots who might otherwise have stayed home will turn out to vote both for and against it. This was my first thought as well. For some reason Papageorge thought Detroit was against the initiative enough that it would depress their turnout. Either that, or they were disgusted enough with the backer of the initiative that a connection between him and John Kerry would depress voter turnout. It is difficult to make out exactly what is going on. They are clearly talking about an upcoming presidential election. At the same time, the marijuana initiative passed in some past election. But it also says the Republicans did not get any advantage implying that the presidential election is over. I am totally confused as to what they are talking about. In the end, he was talking to a meeting of Republicans about election strategy. Part of the discussion centered on some issue that Papageorge thought might depress Detroit voters and give the Republican candidate an advantage in the upcoming election. His comment was taken out of context and a racial element was added. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2004, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/67 "2004-09-29T16:02:31Z")
> [@pervert](#): > > Just remember this feeling the next time you hear about a politician “energizing” his core constituency. Unless I am much mistaken, it amounts to the same thing. You are much mistaken. Encouraging your own core constituency to go to the poll on election day is not the same thing as encouraging your opponent’s core constituency to stay home. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2004, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/68 "2004-09-29T19:55:39Z")
> [@](#): > > Just remember this feeling the next time you hear about a politician “energizing” his core constituency. Unless I am much mistaken, it amounts to the same thing. No, encouraging people to vote is not generally regarded as being the same as encouraging people not to vote. In fact, technically it’s the exact opposite. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2004, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/69 "2004-10-09T22:38:12Z")
I just came across an article in the October 2004 issue of _The Progressive_ – “Bullies at the Voting Booth,” by Anne-Marie Cusac – [http://www.progressive.org/oct04/cusac1004.html](http://www.progressive.org/oct04/cusac1004.html) – which provides the best summary of this problem I’ve seen to date. The article looks closely at Republican voter-intimidation tactics being used this year in all the “swing states” – Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, and South Dakota (SD is not a swing state in the presidential election, Bush has it sewn up, but there is a tightly contested Senate race – the Pubs are trying to unseat Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle). It’s well worth a read. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/70 "2004-10-14T16:56:30Z")
**Razorsharp** linke to this article in the thread on the third Bush-Kerry debate, and I thought it would be appropriate to add it to this one, just for the sake of a dissenting viewpoint – [http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc66.htm:](http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc66.htm:) > [@](#): > > XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 14, 2004 10:58:04 ET XXXXX > > DNC ELECTION MANUAL: CHARGE VOTER INTIMIDATION, EVEN IF NONE EXISTS > > **World Exclusive** > > The Kerry/Edwards campaign and the Democratic National Committee are advising election operatives to declare voter intimidation – even if none exists, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal. > > A 66-page mobilization plan to be issued by the Kerry/Edwards campaign and the Democratic National Committee states: “If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a ‘pre-emptive strike.’” > > [HIGHLIGHT OF ELECTION DAY MANUAL, NOVEMBER 2004. CLICK FOR IMAGE .JPG FILE] > > The provocative Dem battle plan is to be distributed in dozens of states, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. > > One top DNC official confirmed the manual’s authenticity, but claimed the notion of crying wolf on any voter intimidation is “absurd.” > > “We all know the Republicans are going to try to steal the election by scaring people and confusing people,” the top DNC source explained. > > Developing… The linked page of the Kerry-Edwards Colorado Election Day Manual 2004 (the jpg image is a bit blurry and hard to read) says: > [@](#): > > 1. If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a “pre-emptive strike” (particularly well-suited to states where such techniques have been tried in the past). > > - Issue a press release > > i. Reviewing Republican tactics used in the past in your area or state > > ii. Quoting party/minority/civil rights leaderships as denouncing tactics used to discourage people from voting > > - [illegible] minority leadership to discuss the issue [illegible]; provide talking points > > - Place stories in which minority leadership expresses concern about the threat of intimidation tactics > > - Warn local newspapers not to accept advertising that is not properly disclaimed or that contains false warnings about voting requirements or about what will happen at the polls This kind of “pre-emptive strike” might look like dirty pool to the Pubs, but to me it looks like a necessity their own tactics have forced on the Dems. Meanwhile, Pubs in Nevada and Oregon are trying a new tactic: Get Dems to “register,” then destroy their registration forms after the deadline, so when election day comes it’s too late for them to remedy their status. From Nevada – [http://www.klas-tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2421595&nav=168XRvNe:](http://www.klas-tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2421595&nav=168XRvNe:) > [@](#): > > An employee of a private voter registration firm alleges that his bosses trashed registration forms filled out by Democratic voters because they only wanted to sign up Republican voters. > > The allegations have set off a political firestorm stretching from Las Vegas to Washington D.C., and beyond. > > As with everything else in this election year, it’s now become a political football being tossed between the two parties, with charges and countercharges, but at its core, there still remains the matter of registration forms that were ripped up and tossed in the trash. > > Who did it, and why? That’s what official agencies will try to determine. On Tuesday afternoon, Las Vegan Eric Russell and his girlfriend took a packet of documents to the Las Vegas FBI office but left before filing a formal complaint about what Russell says was a deliberate effort to disenfranchise local voters. > > Russell worked for a company called Voters Outreach of America, along with 300 other people. He says he got into a beef with the company over a pay dispute, and witnessed his bosses ripping up registration forms that had been filed by democrats. > > “They were thrown away in the trash. I grabbed them out,” said Eric Russell. One of those forms belonged to Daren Gray, who was shocked to learn that the re-registration form he filled out was never turned in. > > “I’m pretty mad, upset. I’m still gonna vote,” said Daren Gray. Russell doesn’t know how many democratic registrations were tossed in the trash but guesses the number could be very high since Voters Outreach of America operated in Las Vegas for more than two months. > > The FBI confirms that it is gathering information about the case but stopped short of calling it an investigation, saying it wants to talk to Russell again. Secretary of State Dean Heller issued a statement that his office is also taking a look, trying to figure out what if any laws might have been violated. > > Nevada Democrats came out swinging Wednesday. “Most disturbing is that Voter Outreach of America is being paid by the National Republican Party and we ask how can people have faith in government if a national party is involved in trickery in depriving people the right to vote,” said Clark County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates. > > The Republican National Committee acknowledges that it hired Voters Outreach of America to register voters, but in a statement said it had zero tolerance for any kind of fraud. > > Local party officials said there is no way the GOP would instruct the company to trash democratic registrations. However, similar problems have been alleged elsewhere. In Washoe County, the registrar says he too has turned over information to the FBI about Republican backed registration efforts. > > In Oregon, the same company that was operating here has been criticized for its tactics in signing up voters. There, it used the name America Votes, which is actually the name of a Democratic organization. > > Employees in Las Vegas say they too were told that the name of the company was America Votes. “They confused us with the name. They told us one thing and told the temp force something else. They told us America Votes,” Russell said. From Oregon – [http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-8/1097647496301300.xml&storylist=orlocal:](http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-8/1097647496301300.xml&storylist=orlocal:) > [@](#): > > PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Secretary of State Bill Bradbury and Attorney General Hardy Myers plan to investigate allegations that a paid canvasser might have destroyed voter registration forms. > > “There have been allegations made that someone threw out some voter registration forms that had been submitted to them,” Bradbury told The Associated Press late Tuesday. “This is a violation of the law and I will meet with the attorney general in the morning to talk about what we can do to pursue this, and to make sure it doesn’t happen again.” > > Bradbury learned of the conduct from KGW-TV, which interviewed Mike Johnson, 20, a canvasser who said he was instructed to only accept Republican registration forms. He told the TV reporter that he “might” destroy forms turned in by Democrats. > > “I have never in my five years as secretary of state ever seen an allegation like the one that came up tonight — ever,” Bradbury said. “I mean, frankly, it just totally offends me that someone would take someone else’s registration and throw it out.” > > Bradbury said the law requires that groups registering voters submit forms no later than five days after they were filled out. He added that canvassers can’t turn away a voter because of his or her party affiliation. > > Rory Smith, a spokeswoman for the Republican Party in Oregon, said the young man interviewed by KGW-TV was not in their rolls. “We do not condone this type of behavior,” Smith told the Portland-based station. > > In Nevada earlier Tuesday, KLAS-TV, a CBS affiliate, interviewed an employee of a private voter registration organization who said hundreds — perhaps thousands — of Democratic registration forms had been destroyed. > > Eric Russell, a former Voters Outreach of America employee, told the TV station he had personally witnessed his supervisor take out Democratic registration forms from the pile and shred them. > > The company has been largely funded by the Republican National Committee, the station reported. > > A spokesman for the Las Vegas bureau of the FBI said he did not know if an investigation had been initiated. Yeah, the FBI. John Ashcroft’s FBI. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/71 "2004-10-15T15:08:01Z")
> [@](#): > > 10/11/2004 > [Republicans Resign Over Questionable Absentee Ballot Applications](http://keloland.com/NewsDetail2817.cfm?Id=22,35221) > > Tonight six people connected with the South Dakota republican party have resigned over questions surrounding absentee ballot applications. > > The state director of the Republican Victory Program, Larry Russell is one of them, along with state republican party employee Eric Fahrendorf. Four independent contractors involved with the absentee ballot applications also resigned. They are Joe Alick, Nathan Mertz, Todd Schlekeway and Rachel Hoff. > > Hoff was the notary whose signature and seal appeared on many applications from KELOLAND college students. But several students say only men were there when they filled out the forms. > > Mount Marty student Cassandra Herout says, “All I know is they were gonna have the form notarized or audited or something before they sent it in. She was never present at all.” > [@](#): > > [Workers who left in ballot flap join Bush](http://www.argusleader.com/news/Fridayarticle1.shtml) > > By TERRY WOSTER and DAVID KRANZ > Argus Leader > > published: 10/15/2004 > > Larry Russell, 3 others move to Ohio campaign > > South Dakota campaign official who resigned after questions arose over absentee-ballot applications will work in Ohio for the Bush-Cheney campaign, an internal Republican Party memo indicates. > > Larry Russell, who was chairman of the South Dakota Republican Party’s get-out-the-vote operation, resigned this week after questions were raised about the validity of some of the 1,400 absentee-ballot applications gathered, largely on college campuses, by the program Russell led. > > \ > > an internal Republican Party memo obtained by the Argus Leader said Russell would be going to Cleveland “to lead the ground operations” for President Bush and Vice President Cheney there. Ah, the party of character, accountability, morality, and all that. Charming. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/72 "2004-10-15T21:17:21Z")
> [@](#): > > In a letter, Berkeley County clerk John Smalls cites calls from a cell phone were made to Eastern Panhandle democrats telling them that they were not registered to vote. The letter also said the calls informed democrats in some cases they wouldn’t be able to vote on Election Day. > > John Ott is the top election official in Jefferson County. “This is an improper act and they should notify the proper authorities,” he said. > > It’s considered an improper act because when upset citizens called the voter registration office to make sure they were registered to vote, indeed they were. So, who made these misleading calls? The Berkeley County Clerk’s Office traced the number voters gave as the source back to the Eastern Panhandle Republican Headquarters. [Link.](http://www.nbc25.com/news/default.asp?mode=shownews&id=2536) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/73 "2004-10-15T22:50:29Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > [Link.](http://www.nbc25.com/news/default.asp?mode=shownews&id=2536) :eek: That’s unprecedented! At least in all the other recent dirty tricks mentioned in this thread, the tricks were apparently perpetrated by some separate pro-Republican organization – not by an actual arm of the Republican Party! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2004, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/74 "2004-10-16T18:09:05Z")
Meanwhile, the Pubs in Florida are planning to station poll-watchers to challenge voters’ eligibility. From the St. Petersburg Times, 10/16/04, [http://www.sptimes.com/2004/10/16/State/Voters\_will\_be\_under\_.shtml:](http://www.sptimes.com/2004/10/16/State/Voters_will_be_under_.shtml:) > [@](#): > > Florida Republicans and Democrats say they are heavily recruiting volunteers to serve as poll watchers. They will not say what instructions they are giving them, but they are expected to draw on poll watchers’ experiences in any post-election litigation. > > The approaches are somewhat different. > > Democrats say their goal is to have poll watchers ensure every eligible voter gets to vote. Republicans say they want their poll watchers to ensure election laws are enforced. > > The poll watchers also are expected to be more aggressive in challenging the qualifications of voters. Longtime elections officials could not recall the last time they saw such a challenge. > > State law allows each political party and candidate to post one observer at each precinct. The poll watchers must be registered voters from the same county and cannot be candidates or law enforcement officers. > > But the law also includes an arcane 109-year-old provision that gives poll watchers the right to challenge on the spot an individual’s qualification to vote. The challenge must be in writing and is similar to a sample affidavit included in state law. > > Dawn Roberts, director of the state division of elections, sent a reminder last month to county elections supervisors about the poll watcher law. > > The Sept. 29 memo suggested elections supervisors designate an area in each precinct for poll watchers to sit or stand to watch the check-in process. It said local officials also need to determine how to handle written challenges while other voters wait. > > Democratic lawyers contend the memo was meant to encourage elections officials to go out of their way to accommodate poll watchers’ challenges of would-be voters. > > State law says poll watcher challenges must be addressed on-site by election workers before a citizen is given or denied a ballot. In many cases it will require calls to election headquarters to double-check voter registration or asking the citizen to sign another affidavit. If the challenge can’t be resolved, the would-be voter may cast a provisional ballot and the county canvassing board would decide later if the citizen is qualified. > > Multiple challenges could quickly clog voting precincts. > > “The secretary of state’s memo acts as a road map to challenge voters on Election Day,” said Mitchell Berger, a Fort Lauderdale lawyer who was a key member of Vice President Al Gore’s 2000 legal team and is general counsel for John Kerry’s legal team. “It’s not a road map that ensures that a citizen interested in coming to the polls and voting will have the opportunity to exercise that franchise.” > > Among Berger’s concerns: Polling places will come to a virtual standstill if Republican poll watchers challenge voters by comparing would-be voters’ names to the state’s controversial and since-discarded list of suspected felon voters. Or they might aggressively challenge any voter who shows up without a photo identification. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2004, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/75 "2004-11-01T16:48:09Z")
Update from Ohio – [http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/01/ohio.challengers.ap/index.html:](http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/01/ohio.challengers.ap/index.html:) > [@](#): > > CINCINNATI, Ohio (AP) – A federal judge on Monday barred political party challengers from polling places throughout Ohio during Tuesday’s election. State Republicans planned to appeal. > > The order by U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott found that the application of Ohio’s statute allowing individuals to challenge the legitimacy of a voter at the polling place was unconstitutional. > > The presence of challengers inexperienced in the electoral process questioning voters about their eligibility would impede voting, she said. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2004, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/76 "2004-11-01T17:05:11Z")
For a party dead set against coordination, the Republicans sure have a lot of it. Illegal ID-blocked calls to seniors telling people that Kerry wants to destroy their social security benefits (sic) and not saying who paid for the calls, timed to hit on the exact same day the RNC sends out a mailer to seniors with all the same themes. What an amazing coincidence! And the Republican line is: we have a more centralized message. Darn straight they do. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/77 "2004-11-02T17:21:16Z")
Update to the update: It now appears Republican vote-challengers **will** be permitted in Ohio. From [http://www.blogthevote.org/blog/archives/2004/11/court\_oks\_voter.html#more:](http://www.blogthevote.org/blog/archives/2004/11/court_oks_voter.html#more:) > [@](#): > > By TERRY KINNEY, Associated Press Writer 11/2/04 > > CINCINNATI - A federal appeals court has cleared the way for challengers to be present at polling places in Ohio, ruling early Tuesday that their presence on Election Day is allowed under state law. > > A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) ruled 2-1 to grant emergency stays of two federal judges’ orders Monday that barred political parties’ voter challengers in Ohio. The judges also consolidated the two cases. > > The court said that while there is a strong public interest in letting registered voters vote freely, there is also “strong public interest in permitting legitimate statutory processes to operate to preclude voting by those who are not entitled to vote.” > > The judges also said that smooth and effective administration of the voting laws means that the rules can’t be changed in the hours immediately preceding the election. > > The dissent said the citizens of Ohio have the right to vote without the “threat of suppression, intimidation or chaos sown by partisan political operatives.” :mad: ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/78 "2004-11-02T17:47:19Z")
The website of _The Nation_ has a whole page of links to sites and blogs which are doing real-time monitoring of the election – [http://www.thenation.com/blogs/actnow?bid=4](http://www.thenation.com/blogs/actnow?bid=4). From one of those, the Michigan Independent Media Center, [http://michiganimc.org/:](http://michiganimc.org/:) > [@](#): > > 12:45 PM Detroit Free Press reports: > "Poll workers called police officers to a church in Detroit about two hours after voting began today to keep order. > "Four poll watchers said to be from the Republican Party were inside the church’s polling area, asking for names of people as they checked in to vote. > > “‘They’re challenging some of the people as to whether or not their current registration is valid,’ said Gene Claxton, head deacon of Unity Temple of the Apostolic Faith on Wyoming. The church is a voting site for four precincts.” > > 12:15 PM Toledo, OH–Voters in the predominantly African-American community of Toledo’s Old West End were turned away from the polls this morning at Glenwood Elementary School, after it was discovered that the voting machines were locked away in the principal’s office. Over one hundred people had been turned away before the machines were retrieved. Just a few hours later at 10:45 A.M., voters were again turned away when the polling place ran out of pencils used to mark the ballots. Poll watchers ran out and purchased pencils out of their own pocket. Some voters may have been turned away due to the short pencil deficit. > > 12:15 PM People for the American Way reports the following: > By mid-morning, the Election Protection Hotline has received numerous reports of voter intimidation in several states: > In Ohio, the Hotline has received numerous calls regarding the presence of challengers outside of polling places. Also from Ohio was a report of someone in a white “Voting Rights Team” jacket approaching/harassing voters. > > From New York, the Hotline received a report that every single voter at a particular precinct was being challenged and it was causing long delays. > > In Delaware, a black voter claimed he waited in line behind 30-40 white voters, none of whom were asked for identification. When he came up to vote, they asked for his ID. > > In Jacksonville, Florida, there is a report of a group wearing unidentifiable badges going around and telling voters that they can vote until Nov 18 and that it is not necessary to vote today. :rolleyes: God bless America. ---
**Author:** ![SlyFrog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a3d4f5/32.png) [@SlyFrog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlyFrog)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/79 "2004-11-02T17:57:18Z")
It surprises me that there would be rampant conspiracy theories circling among Democrats on election day. I’m truly stunned. It’s almost as if, based on the last election, some individuals have discovered that there could potentially be a cheap but useful ploy of screaming “election fraud” as loud as possible no matter what the circumstances. I also understand that menthol cigarettes contain a substance that sterilizes black people; and that the Republican’s secretly began to spread AIDS among gays because gays are predominantly Democrats and AIDS would keep them from voting. I’m voting for Kerry, and still embarassed by far too many Kerry supporters. Let’s hope he’s not as stupid as his followers (he must be, as he is smarter than GW, who in turn is smarter than most Kerry supporters). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/80 "2004-11-02T18:06:31Z")
> [@SlyFrog](#): > > It surprises me that there would be rampant conspiracy theories circling among Democrats on election day. These aren’t **theories, Sly,** they’re actual news reports. Read the above posts. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496.md?page=5)