E-mail from Ohio: Recount in Full Swing in Ohio

[roguevalley]

From Mark Crispian Miller again ...

Recount in Full Swing in Ohio

Thursday, December 9, 2004

Recount activities in Ohio are in full swing! Coordinating staff are being hired on the ground in Ohio, and volunteer training will begin soon. It looks like the 88 county recounts will begin on different days, either December 14, 15 or 16. We are still looking for donations to pay for recount expenses, so please give what you can.

Donations: http://web.greens.org/c/cobb/supporters.cgi?function=do...

Many groups, including the Green Party, are planning protest activities all across the country for December 13th, when the Ohio Electors (and the other 49 state Electors) meet to cast ballots as part of the Electoral College process. Given that it was an unfair initial voting process which resulted in a vote total that is being disputed and recounted, how can the Electors cast their ballots for George Bush - or any candidate - until the recount is completed?

At yesterday's Congressional Forum in Washington on voting irregularities that was convened by Congressman John Conyers (D-MI), it was suggested that if the Ohio recount results in a Kerry victory, then a second set of Electors could be convened to send a vote to Congress, which will count the Electoral votes on January 6th. What might happen if two sets of Ohio Electoral votes show up in Congress is anyone's guess.

We must never repeat the momentous blunder of 2000, and allow the recount to be stopped, only to be told by the press months later that if all the valid, machine-rejected votes were counted, the man occupying the White House lost the election (SOURCES: 1 ; 2; 3).

In his opening statement, Rep. Conyers asked us all to take action in support of his efforts to investigate the 2004 election irregularities in Ohio by contacting: (1) Secretary of State Blackwell (2) James Sensenbrenner, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Please respond to Rep. Conyer's request for a strong showing of support by concerned voters. With all three branches of government under one-party rule, only a strong message from America's voters will get results.

We will be posting a complete list of December 13 activities here soon, so please send information about your events to us at [e-mail] . Thanks, as always, for your support. We couldn't do it without our 6,000+ donors and 3,000+ volunteers!

daily updates available here: http://www.votecobb.org /

[Bethany Rockafella]

1. What if the recount doesn't get enough votes for Kerry to overtake Bush?

Then what?

[roguevalley]

2. sort of explains itself I would think

[Massacure]

3. Then China will overtake this country as a super power by 2010.

[Griffy]

4. Bush is Pres, but your missing the point..

This is about voting rights... ot Kerry... if the numbers appear, Kerry will too. But just focus on shinning light on the fraud and supression issues!!

[Griffy]

5. Unless....

the congress does certify the vote.. but still its likly bush would be in.... fight for the brights light to shine on the fraud!

[Moonwatcher]

12. Framing the votes cast by Bush and Kerry electors

Hello from a newbie. If the recount produces a second slate of Ohio electors, I think it's important that the votes in Congress for or against them should be framed by us as votes for or against fraud. Just as anti-abortion proponents frame their message as pro-life -- so that if you are against them you are against life -- I believe that a vote to accept a Bush slate of electors should be referred to as a pro-fraud vote, and a vote for a Kerry slate an anti-fraud vote. If a recount gives Kerry more votes, then supporting a Kerry slate would be supporting transparency in democracy, and could be viewed that way across the political spectrum.

Even if the recount does not reveal evidence of out-and-out criminal activity, just mere glitches that would not presume actual fraud, it would still be fraudulent to cast EC votes for someone who did not win the state, so Republicans in Congress who back an Ohio Bush slate should be labelled as supporters of fraud.

[moesse]

13. Framing the votes part deux

Or pro-democracy, or pro-America votes?

[Moonwatcher]

14. "pro-democracy" a sticky wicket

Unfortunately * supporters might argue that * won the popular vote across the land, and therefore to give Kerry the presidency "merely" because he won Ohio would be "anti-democratic" and against the will of the voters across the US. So they might try to paint a * vote as a "pro-democracy" or "pro-America" vote, and a Kerry vote as a "trial lawyer" vote or some such demonizing tactic. We can't let them.

Vote fraud is so intolerable, to anyone, we have to make it clear that an EC choice between two slate of Ohio electors is a vote for fraud - accepting the results of a marred election process - or against fraud - accepting an audited re-accounting of a technologically-challenged tally as the true will of the people.

[floridadem30]

18. Welcome to Du Moonwatcher, in response to your post this is not a fair

argument because Gore won the popular vote in 2000 and the electoral college vote, but because of litigation and the supreme court intervention * was still allowed to be pres. So in a sense they would be fighting themselves and taking the opposite side of the argument than they did previously. I like your other post that stated anti-fraud vote though.

[Moonwatcher]

23. Flip-flopping

Of course the Republicans would be taking the opposite side as their 2000 argument - I don't put that past them. I just think they'd try to use the argument that voting against *'s apparent (and by no means audited) 3.5 million popular vote lead would be voting against "democracy." I think we have to beat them to that by tying the word "fraud" to the * electors.

[merh]

15. Welcome to Moonwatcher! Thanks for the post

You are right, we need to frame our efforts as anti-fraud.

Glad to greet ya! :hi:

[electropop]

20. Pro-Fraud Republicans

has a nice ring to it. Repeat it often.

[catnhatnh]

19. no...

Bush is the usurper in chief....

[alittlelark]

8. Then we get to experience the FOURTH REICH !!!

Get some popcorn and enjoy (as long as you are not arab, female, Jewish, Hindu, Buddist, an about-to-be-medicated child, a member of any minority, or HAVE 2 BRAIN CELLS TO RUB TOGETHER)

That's what.

[noclonyofthechimp]

10. too funny!

[newyawker99]

9. Hi Bethany Rockafella!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[noclonyofthechimp]

11. Welcome!

[Carolab]

6. Roguevalley, honey

it's Mark Crispin Miller, not Mark Crispian Miller

[roguevalley]

7. BWAHHAHA! I never get his middle name right. :) But I post his

e-mails as is when they matter. :) I had a cat named Crispian.

[Stevepol]

16. A recount means that every vote is recounted manually?

An audit could involve just 3% of the precincts and then if evidence of anomalies is found the swathe is widened, but a RECOUNT means that every vote is hand-counted. Am I right on that? Somebody who knows what's going to happen in OH let me and others know.

[jamboi]

22. Good question, cause that is not a given. A hand recount is different

than an auto recount and takes a lot more time. I don't know which this is.

[Wordie]

17. kick

[jamboi]

21. Thanks for the update roguevalley! n/t