gits
10-21-2004, 10:27
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/pennsylvania/counties/chester_county/9973834.htm?1c
Democrats Secret Plan to Disenfranchise The Military?
More shocking news from Pennsylvania. A Federal judge has denied a request by the Bush Administration to force Pennsylvania counties "to send new absentee ballots to thousands of oversees voters and to count the results up to two weeks after Election Day."
What's the cause of the cause of all this trouble? Due to Ralph Nader's "on-again, off-again status as a presidential candidate" ballots were sent overseas with Nader's name on them. This past Tuesday the state Supreme court affirmed a lower court's decision to nix Nader from the ballot. Now he's officially not a candidate - but he remains on those ballots.
Some of those overseas voters, including soldiers serving in Iraq, are now being asked to pick from an incorrect slate of presidential candidates. And, as a result, they are being deprived of the same options given to voters at home, Justice Department lawyer Amy Zubrensky argued.
They "have the right to correct ballots," she said.
The Bush administration wants the absentee ballots to be resent reflecting the correct slate of candidates - meaning sans Nader.
Former Kerry advisor and now Pennsylvania election observer Mark Aronchick, doesn't see much of a problem apparently, for it only impacts "a theoretically tiny universe of people."
When overseas voters are weighed against that potential pool, "the scales don't even come close," Aronchick said.
Kane, a Clinton appointee who served as the state's top elections official for three years under Republican Gov. Tom Ridge, agreed. There was substantial evidence to suggest that the Justice Department alternatives "will harm the Pennsylvania election system and the public at large by undermining the integrity and efficiency of Pennsylvania's elections," she wrote.
The question you must ask yourself is "Why is that the Democrats are not interested in making sure these overseas ballots (many of which are going to our troops overseas in Iraq) all don't have Nader's name on them?"
It is safe to say that Nader takes votes from Kerry. So, what's going on here? Bush and Kerry are currently neck-and-neck in the state. What are the Democrats thinking? Perhaps, this is only a temporary approval of these incorrect ballots.
The Democrats know that the military overwhelmingly support Bush. Is this some preemptive plan to disenfranchise the votes of our troops overseas? It is conceiveable that while the Democrats have no problem now with Nader's name being on these overseas absentee ballots that they will use this as an excuse to toss those votes out on Election Day - citing the fact that those voters were picking "from an incorrect slate of presidential candidates."
With Pennsylvania as close as it is, I highly doubt the Democrats are willing to gamble on "a theoretically tiny universe of people" that overwhelmingly supports Bush. Is this a secret plan by the Democrats to disenfranchise our troops protecting our country overseas?
Democrats Secret Plan to Disenfranchise The Military?
More shocking news from Pennsylvania. A Federal judge has denied a request by the Bush Administration to force Pennsylvania counties "to send new absentee ballots to thousands of oversees voters and to count the results up to two weeks after Election Day."
What's the cause of the cause of all this trouble? Due to Ralph Nader's "on-again, off-again status as a presidential candidate" ballots were sent overseas with Nader's name on them. This past Tuesday the state Supreme court affirmed a lower court's decision to nix Nader from the ballot. Now he's officially not a candidate - but he remains on those ballots.
Some of those overseas voters, including soldiers serving in Iraq, are now being asked to pick from an incorrect slate of presidential candidates. And, as a result, they are being deprived of the same options given to voters at home, Justice Department lawyer Amy Zubrensky argued.
They "have the right to correct ballots," she said.
The Bush administration wants the absentee ballots to be resent reflecting the correct slate of candidates - meaning sans Nader.
Former Kerry advisor and now Pennsylvania election observer Mark Aronchick, doesn't see much of a problem apparently, for it only impacts "a theoretically tiny universe of people."
When overseas voters are weighed against that potential pool, "the scales don't even come close," Aronchick said.
Kane, a Clinton appointee who served as the state's top elections official for three years under Republican Gov. Tom Ridge, agreed. There was substantial evidence to suggest that the Justice Department alternatives "will harm the Pennsylvania election system and the public at large by undermining the integrity and efficiency of Pennsylvania's elections," she wrote.
The question you must ask yourself is "Why is that the Democrats are not interested in making sure these overseas ballots (many of which are going to our troops overseas in Iraq) all don't have Nader's name on them?"
It is safe to say that Nader takes votes from Kerry. So, what's going on here? Bush and Kerry are currently neck-and-neck in the state. What are the Democrats thinking? Perhaps, this is only a temporary approval of these incorrect ballots.
The Democrats know that the military overwhelmingly support Bush. Is this some preemptive plan to disenfranchise the votes of our troops overseas? It is conceiveable that while the Democrats have no problem now with Nader's name being on these overseas absentee ballots that they will use this as an excuse to toss those votes out on Election Day - citing the fact that those voters were picking "from an incorrect slate of presidential candidates."
With Pennsylvania as close as it is, I highly doubt the Democrats are willing to gamble on "a theoretically tiny universe of people" that overwhelmingly supports Bush. Is this a secret plan by the Democrats to disenfranchise our troops protecting our country overseas?