New from Dean People: Objecting to Electors Jan. 6 - talking points

[Amaryllis]

This just out from The Dean People

Excellent points for letters or talking with senator's aides about contesting the electors.

Talking points: Objecting to Electors on Jan 6th

Talking Points from thedeanpeople are now available at
http://jan6points.org

This talking points document has been compiled from the resource material available at http://proveyouhavethepower.org.

Note: The talking points at http://jan6points.org are a work in progress. To get the "latest and greatest,” check for updates the mornings of Jan 4th and 5th .

Please join the following Yahoo group to post arguments that you have found effective, and any feedback, questions, or suggestions that others may find helpful (or that others can help with). As they the saying goes, "All of us are smarter than any of us." The January 6th lobbying effort is an uphill battle so we need whatever help we can get from, or give to each other!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedeanpeople_projects

[Amaryllis]

1. kick

[ClassWarrior]

2. I thought this passage in another DUer's letter was spot on...

“You do not need clear evidence of ‘fraud,’ however you might define it, in order to contest the election. If a person disappears over a cliff, do you turn your back and go about your business because you have no evidence of injury or death? If your house is on fire do you walk away just because you don't know how it started? The MASSIVE list of disturbing unanswered questions is more than enough to justify standing up and demanding answers before accepting the electors' votes.”

Wish I remembered the name of the poster.

NGU.

[Amaryllis]

3. I read that too. It was excellent. When they say they will contest if

fraud it proven:

What has been documented is massive voter suppression and discrimination. So if they say they will only contest if proven fraud, does this mean massive voter suppression and discrimination is acceptable?

Then they say it wasn't enough to swing the election.
1. How do they know? All it takes is 11 votes per precinct in OH to swing the election.
2. This is irrelevant. It is intolerable regarless of whether it was enough to swing the election. Are they going to send another statement to the voters like they did in 2000 that massive discrimination and voter suppression is tolerable?

We will be watching on C-span to see what they do!

[merh]

13. How many precincts are there in Ohio?

I need the info for my letter to the lovely congress people!

THanks

[Amaryllis]

7. What's NGU mean? And another question: the time that corresponds

with posts- it seems to be eight hours ahead of pacific time. What time zone are they using on the times next to people's posts?

[ClassWarrior]

8. NGU = Never Give Up...

...my personal motto since Nov.3.

I'm not sure what time they're using. What I see on my posts is my local time.

NGU.

[librechik]

9. Amaryllis

you can change the times on posts to reflect where you live. Go to OPTIONS, then I think it's either in your preferences or your profile.

Thx for the clear talking points, and welcome to DU!

:loveya:

[Amaryllis]

12. Thanks! Do you know what the deal is when posts are showing up 8

hours ahead of pacific time? Most times seem to show that and it makes no sense to me. I could understand three hours ahead, but 8?

[librechik]

18. I dunno; it might be set to Greenwich Mean as default until you change it

but that's just a guess

[EuroObserver]

23. Yeah, sounds like GMT

(the default?) - also known as UTC (Universal Temps Central, en français).

[electropop]

19. NGU = Never Give Up. As for the time...

You can configure your settings in this forum to display the posts in GMT (the default, which is 8 hours ahead of PST) or your local time zone.

[merh]

15. Hell, they didn't have Lacy Peterson's body to begin to investigate

that some thing bad had happened to her. What about Ms. Levy - those names may get their attention. You don't have to witness the murder or have a body to begin an investigaion and to suspect FOUL PLAY!

[merwin]

24. This the post you're looking for?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=218650

[iconoclastNYC]

4. Ok. So I call and they only want to take a message.

What are you supposed to do ? Here is how I stand. Contest. I didn't have the opportunity to use any of these talking points.

The guy on the phone did say he had a stack of messages on the issue....but thats it. And that Schumer had not come out on the issue.

[Amaryllis]

5. Fax them. Email them. Use the talking points there.

[ClassWarrior]

6. Ask to talk to the staffer assigned to Voting Issues...

...and perhaps you'll get a discussion. If you don't get one, then just leave your message. I think these talking points are mainly for those who actually do manage to strike up a conversation with a Senator or his/her staff.

I personally included the passage I cited above in my letter (I said, "In a letter to Senator Feingold, a friend of mine wrote, 'You do not need...'")

NGU.

[Amaryllis]

14. They developed them for conversations but also to be used in letters

etc. So many senators say " if fraud is proven" or "it wasn't enough to change the election results" and these give excellent counter arguements.

[librechik]

10. you did fine. That's how it's done. n/t

[electropop]

21. Leave a very brief message

Basically all they will do is tally the 'contest' and 'dont contest" calls and present the totals to the Senator. Don't bother with a lengthy hard-sell.

[texpatriot2004]

11. kick it

[Amaryllis]

16. kick

[joevoter]

17. Kickit

[pacalo]

20. Thanks, Amaryllis! This information is very helpful. :)

:hi:

[ClassWarrior]

22. .

[Qutzupalotl]

25. Kick

:bounce: :kick: