# Republicans set to challenge Ohio voters **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 2, 2004, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557 "2004-11-02T15:29:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/21 "2004-11-02T16:42:36Z")
> [@Isosleepy](#): > > Ok, how big a bet? I’ve been losing a lot of bets lately, I’ll just stick to the figure of speech for now. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/22 "2004-11-02T16:47:43Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > Because in a nation with more than a quarter of a billion people, it’s inconceivable that two people might share identical names, right? I don’t dispute that. But I think that if the name is exactly the same, it’s reasonable to require some sort of check when Alphonsus Q. Radericker shows up to make sure that he’s not the Alphonsus Q. Radericker that was convicted of child porn. > [@LHoD](#): > > And on rereading the thread, Bill Door’s post is my cite . Fair enough. My only comment would be that the mere failure to pick up the letter doesn’t lead to automatic disenfranchisement… but I think it’s enough to prompt a question when you get to the polls, that be answered in 45 seconds: “Yes, I got the slip but never got around to picking up the letter. But that’s my correct address, as you can see on my [license | utility bill | bank statement].” ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/23 "2004-11-02T16:49:18Z")
> [@GrizzRich](#): > > But the lines were LOOOO-OOONG! > Last Presidential election, I was in and out within four minutes. > This time; _FORTY FIVE MINUTES!_. Be glad. Mine took twice that long and other precincts around are up to three hours. ---
**Author:** ![Brainiac4](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brainiac4/32/3534_2.png) [@Brainiac4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brainiac4)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/24 "2004-11-02T16:51:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Here’s my take: if I have a list of voters who provided an address when they registered that turned out to be phony – that is, when they were mailed something, it was returned by the Post Office – then I feel like it’s very legitimate to challenge those voters if and when they try to actually vote. If there was a typo, and they are legit, fine… no harm done. But when 35,000 voter registrations come back as undeliverable… that’s a lot of typos. I suspect fraud. > > Now, if challengers are just up there saying, “Eenie-meenie-miney-mo, this next voter’s got to go,” then I agree that the process is being subverted for insidious ends. I note that you dodged my main point, which is that there is also a handy side effect to challenging voters, and that this side effect benefits the side doing the challenging. It calls their motives into question, does it not? I agree with you that 35,000 new voters showing up as undeliverable does seem suspicious. I differ with you on where the suspicion should fall – was the test a valid test? As noted by Bill Door in this thread, the registered mail being returned was from the Republican Party. The Post Office is simply being used as a proxy to create evidence of fraud. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/25 "2004-11-02T16:58:33Z")
> [@Brainiac4](#): > > If it were only that, I would not object to it. But it’s not. It also has the handy side effect of slowing down the voting process, increasing the length of time that people have to wait, which will reduce turnout. Not only does lower turnout generally favor Republicans, lower turnout in specific neighborhoods strongly favors them. . Please see my thread in this forum. Low turnout only favors Republicans when it is natural. When they try, ridiculously, to force lower turnout by making it a pain in the ass, it is absurd to think that it will only affect Democrats, particularly this year! It will only piss them off and make them more determined than ever. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/26 "2004-11-02T17:03:07Z")
FWIW: my local NBC news affiliate this morning has reported that, _so far,_ things are going smoothly at the polling places in Ohio. No outrageous challenges, no “jamming up the works.” But the day is young. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/27 "2004-11-02T17:03:08Z")
> [@Brainiac4](#): > > I note that you dodged my main point, which is that there is also a handy side effect to challenging voters, and that this side effect benefits the side doing the challenging. It calls their motives into question, does it not? Sure. But it’s the same concept as MoveOn giving rides to Kerry supporters while refusing Bush supporters… it’s their right to do that. It would be more noble, and better overall, if there were a systematic non-partisan effort to identify and remove phony voters… just as it would be more noble to have MoveON give rides to all who need them. But since one party believes that phony voters in large numbers help their cause, and the other party believes phony voters in large numbers hurt their cause, only one party is motivated to exercise their legal options. ---
**Author:** ![Elza\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Elza\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elza_B)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/28 "2004-11-02T17:04:12Z")
> [@GrizzRich](#): > > I’m in Ohio. > I voted. > I saw no challenges being made while I was there. > But, then, I do live in a primarily white suburb. > > But the lines were LOOOO-OOONG! > Last Presidential election, I was in and out within four minutes. > This time; _FORTY FIVE MINUTES!_. > > And there was a State Trooper present. > Not to vote, but strutted about in the standard “state-trooper” fashion; ostensibly making sure all was orderly. I’m voting tonight around 6 (I have no car right now, so I’m at the mercy of whoever does). My husband’s already voted at the same place, and he said there was a challenger there. We’re in a _very_ white, affluent suburb (not us - we live in an apartment - but we’re in Jackson Township in Canton), so I was surprised to hear that they were there. I’m kind of worried that I’ll be challenged, as this is my first time voting in the state, plus I got married and didn’t change my name on my DL so I wouldn’t have a problem since I was already registered under my maiden name. But I’m worried that trying to be dilligent is going to come back and bite me on the ass. I’ll find out tonight at 6. I can’t wait for this damn election to end. Ava ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/47e85d/32.png) [@Captain\_Lance\_Murdoch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Lance_Murdoch)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/29 "2004-11-02T17:04:32Z")
The letter-sending ploy was nothing but a stunt meant to disenfranchise voters and slow down the process in certain areas . I wonder what percentage of those returned letters came from affluent areas? > [@Bricker](#): > > I think it’s enough to prompt a question when you get to the polls, that be answered in 45 seconds: “Yes, I got the slip but never got around to picking up the letter. But that’s my correct address, as you can see on my [license | utility bill | bank statement].” Can you rattle that off for me in Spanish? I’m sure a lot of voters being challenged will not be native English speakers. I can just imagine my mother-in-law trying to answer that question. She would be lost. Bush can relax, however. Her citizenship has been help up for about a year now so she won’t be voting today. ---
**Author:** ![jeevmon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@jeevmon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jeevmon)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/30 "2004-11-02T17:14:45Z")
45 sec./ challenge x 35,000 challenges = 1,575,000 seconds = 26,250 minutes = 437.5 hours spent on addressing challenges. That translates into delays not only for the challenged voter, but also everyone else in the line. And may intimidate/ dissuade people from lining up at all because they don’t know that they won’t be challenged too, and asked to provide information or documents they just don’t have. It’s a sleazy partisan stunt by a party that seriously and sincerely believes that their victory can only be achieved by depriving the poor and the dark-skinned of their right to vote. ---
**Author:** ![fessie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@fessie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fessie)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/31 "2004-11-02T17:18:01Z")
My father lives at the edge of downtown Cincinnati, so his precinct is exactly the kind of heavily African-American urban area where you might expect to see challengers. He got there right when it opened at 6:30 a.m. and was the twelfth person in line! Usually he’s the very first person to vote. No sign of any challengers. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/32 "2004-11-02T17:22:24Z")
> [@Captain Lance Murdoch](#): > > Can you rattle that off for me in Spanish? I’m sure a lot of voters being challenged will not be native English speakers. I can just imagine my mother-in-law trying to answer that question. She would be lost. Bush can relax, however. Her citizenship has been help up for about a year now so she won’t be voting today. If your mother-in-law is not a citizen, then I can’t get too worked up about her theoretical inability to answer an election question. And there is a general requirement for naturalization that prospective citizens “…must be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language.” There are some exceptions, but in general, persons seeking naturalization must be able to communicate in English. That said, there are certainly US citizens for whom English is a challenge, and I’m sure in those cases, some translation help will be needed. And yes - being the child of a Salvadoran immigrant and married to a Dominicana, I CAN rattle that off for you in Spanish. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/33 "2004-11-02T17:22:51Z")
**Fessie:** > [@](#): > > No sign of any challengers. What, do people have me on ignore or something? I just said the same thing up above. Maybe you’ll believe **fessie.** But probably not. I mean, why let something as trivial as _facts_ get in the way of a good partisan hate-on. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/34 "2004-11-02T17:24:30Z")
> [@jeevmon](#): > > 45 sec./ challenge x 35,000 challenges = 1,575,000 seconds = 26,250 minutes = 437.5 hours spent on addressing challenges. That translates into delays not only for the challenged voter, but also everyone else in the line. And may intimidate/ dissuade people from lining up at all because they don’t know that they won’t be challenged too, and asked to provide information or documents they just don’t have. > > It’s a sleazy partisan stunt by a party that seriously and sincerely believes that their victory can only be achieved by depriving the poor and the dark-skinned of their right to vote. Seems to me you’re saying the poor and the dark-skinned are more stupid and/or easily distracted, if you believe these tactics will work on them. I don’t believe that. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/35 "2004-11-02T17:24:33Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] I don’t dispute that. But I think that if the name is exactly the same, it’s reasonable to require some sort of check when Alphonsus Q. Radericker shows up to make sure that he’s not the Alphonsus Q. Radericker that was convicted of child porn. [QUOTE] That sounds reasonable. But my understanding is that’s not what happened. Alphonsus the non-felon never had a chance to prove his identity. His name was crossed off the rolls in big black magic marker, and he was simply told he was not allowed to vote. Had he produced a platinum engraved driver’s license authorized by God Himself, all that would have proven was that he was the same guy whose name was blacked out. In fact, I’m sure there were plenty of eligible voters who were more than happy to show ID but were still disenfranchised. It’s not like poll workers can uncross off your name. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/36 "2004-11-02T17:26:10Z")
[QUOTE=tdn] [QUOTE=Bricker] I don’t dispute that. But I think that if the name is exactly the same, it’s reasonable to require some sort of check when Alphonsus Q. Radericker shows up to make sure that he’s not the Alphonsus Q. Radericker that was convicted of child porn. > [@](#): > > That sounds reasonable. But my understanding is that’s not what happened. Alphonsus the non-felon never had a chance to prove his identity. His name was crossed off the rolls in big black magic marker, and he was simply told he was not allowed to vote. Had he produced a platinum engraved driver’s license authorized by God Himself, all that would have proven was that he was the same guy whose name was blacked out. > > In fact, I’m sure there were plenty of eligible voters who were more than happy to show ID but were still disenfranchised. It’s not like poll workers can uncross off your name. MY understanding is that the law permits you to cast a provisional ballot in those circumstances, to be counted after the disconnect is resolved. ---
**Author:** ![Brainiac4](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brainiac4/32/3534_2.png) [@Brainiac4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brainiac4)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/37 "2004-11-02T17:31:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. But it’s the same concept as MoveOn giving rides to Kerry supporters while refusing Bush supporters… it’s their right to do that. It would be more noble, and better overall, if there were a systematic non-partisan effort to identify and remove phony voters… just as it would be more noble to have MoveON give rides to all who need them. Again, you dodge. My point was not that their actions were partisan; it was that their actions are not purely directed at purging phony voters. Your original statement was: > [@Bricker](#): > > No, it’s an attempt to ensure that votes are cast only by people eligible to vote, not people masquerading as dead people, or people falsely claiming to be Ohio residents but providing phony addresses. It may be those things, but it is not _only_ those things. You’re defending the actions as honorable, I am pointing out that there is reason to believe that they might not be. > [@Bricker](#): > > But since one party believes that phony voters in large numbers help their cause, and the other party believes phony voters in large numbers hurt their cause, only one party is motivated to exercise their legal options. Now you’re just being juvenile. What factual basis do you have for this statement? Is there some statement from the DNC that I am not aware of, touting the benefit of phony votes? ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/38 "2004-11-02T17:39:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > MY understanding is that the law permits you to cast a provisional ballot in those circumstances, to be counted after the disconnect is resolved. Hmm, I did not know that. I’d be interested in reading more about that. Even so, I can’t help but wonder a) if all who could have cast a provisional ballot did so (just a further pain in the ass to the voter), and b) if such ballots were actually counted. Since so many ballots were thrown out, I wonder if the ones you speak of were, too. Either way, even if such voters were re-enfranchised and their votes actually counted, that still strikes me as a horrible and dishonest way to run an election. ---
**Author:** ![chula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a4c791/32.png) [@chula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chula)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/39 "2004-11-02T18:04:09Z")
> [@Brainiac4](#): > > I agree with you that 35,000 new voters showing up as undeliverable does seem suspicious. I differ with you on where the suspicion should fall – was the test a valid test? As noted by Bill Door in this thread, the registered mail being returned was from the Republican Party. The Post Office is simply being used as a proxy to create evidence of fraud. Exactly. What percentage of those registrations do you guess were actually fradulent? I would estimate .01%, tops. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2004, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557/40 "2004-11-02T18:12:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Seems to me you’re saying the poor and the dark-skinned are more stupid and/or easily distracted, if you believe these tactics will work on them. I don’t believe that. **OR** that poor voters are more likely to be hourly employees vs. salaried, more likely to be relying on public transportation, and may not have a spare 2 hours to wait in line to vote, than say folks like me who have transportation, are salaried and can schedule themselves for ‘flex time’ to insure that they have the opportunity to vote. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-set-to-challenge-ohio-voters/272557.md?page=3)