Be careful what you wish for...

[Dookus]

you just might get it.

For people here who are apoplectic at the possibility of holding the election a week or two after scheduled, how would you respond to a scenario like this:

Imagine some biochemical or even radiological attacks in a few key democratic areas of swing states. Say Broward County, Florida; Philadelphia, PA; Cleveland, OH.

Imagine a few million people in swing states unable, or unwilling due to fear, to go to the polls. Imagine Bush saying "The election will go on!"

We'd all be fighting tooth and nail to find a way for those people to vote.

[sendero]

1. Don't buy it....

... unless there has been some kind of major attack prior to the election. Then it might make some sense.

But anything based on vague warnings and piffle 'intelligence' of the sort we have now would not be enough. Once they delay it 2 weeks, there would be no end to the new warnings and potential attacks.

[Dookus]

2. I'm not talking about vague warnings...

I'm talking about actual attacks.

AND... delaying the election will have NO effect whatsoever on the date and time Bush's term ends: january 20th, 2005. At noon.

[sendero]

3. Ok, how does that..

... work? Who is the president then?

[Padraig18]

4. The Speaker of the House.

The usual order of succession...

[Tweed]

5. Well Bush is President until Jan. 20th n/t

[Tweed]

6. Dupe

[Dookus]

8. No..

elections will NOT be delayed for 2 and a half months. Elections MUST occur before January 20th.

[Cleita]

21. Dear dookie, there probably will be a talked about attack.

Whether it's real, confected or an urban legend that gets fed to the "fair and balanced media" it will be out there, we still must keep to our scheduled election no matter what. There is a precedent prior to the Third Reich and I will look it up for you. I just don't have it at my fingertips right now.

[Dookus]

22. Cleita...

WHY should we have elections if millions of people are unable to get to the polls on election day? What is wrong with postponing them? It will have NO effect whatsoever on Bush's term of office, which ends on January 20th, 2005.

[Cleita]

25. Millions of people can get to the polls. Only a few thousand may

not. Even in a city like Los Angeles, maybe six million could be stopped, but I doubt it. That's tops and I am being generous. It can't happen. Other than that there is a BIG country out there and they can vote.

[Dookus]

27. If a radiological weapon goes off in midtown manhattan,

I assure you it's a lot more than a few thousand people who will be affected.

What's wrong with having a plan to handle such a contingency?

[Tweed]

7. Republicans and Democrats would be just as likely to stay away IMO

What makes you think otherwise?

[Dookus]

9. I specifically

mentioned predominantly DEMOCRATIC areas in swing states. If you take out Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is predominantly Republican. Same for the other places I mentioned.

Of course it's an extreme example. But what I'm saying is, it's NOT inherently fascistic to make plans to ensure that Americans are able to vote in the event of a huge catastrophe on or shortly before election day.

[troublemaker]

13. Even if true, absentees would then rise in value

and they're comparatively republican-leaning

[oldcoot]

10. Instead of Election Day, let's have Election Month

We should give voters a full month to vote. This would hopefully make it harder for terrorists to disrupt the election. As others have recommended, we should have alternate polling areas in case of a terrorist attack. We could even postpone the election in the effected areas and allow everyone else to vote in those areas on a later date. We could even hold off on reporting election results until everybody gets a chance to vote (something that I wish we would do for those voters who live on the Pacific Coast during normal election years). However, I see no reason why a terrorist attack in New York should prevent voting in California or vice-versa.

[Dookus]

11. A month may be a little long...

but I've long believed it ought to be at least an election weekend: from midnight Friday night 'til midnight Sunday night.

[lanparty]

12. The elections should go on in unaffected areas ...

Affected areas would have their elections as soon as possible.

[troublemaker]

14. Can't do it - check the 2000 decisions

the Constitution has be construed to mean that the presidential election has to be on the same day everywhere (That's why there could be no re-vote in Palm Beach County even though there had been regional revotes in other elections)

[lanparty]

17. Re-Check the ruling ...

It wasn't a ruling. It was a "one time only" decision. It can't be used for any arguments.

[Dookus]

15. the constitution requires

all states hold elections on the same day.

[KittyWampus]

16. Doesn't Oregon Have Mail In Ballots?

opened & counted on Election Day?

Or is it WA?

[Dookus]

18. Oregon does

and personally, I'm against it.

I think absentee voting is out of control. I don't like people voting a month before the election.

[KittyWampus]

24. IMO, The Countrywide "Ritual" Of Coming Out To Vote

on Election Day is very powerful. It CAN give a sense of import to the process. Helps foster a Community Consciousness.

Am not a fan of Mail In Ballots either.

[Art_from_Ark]

26. For some of us,

mail-in ballots are the only option

[Cleita]

19. This country is too big to not be able to get in a vote.

Dumb and dumber as far as I am concerned. WE, WHO CAN GO TO THE POLLS WILL, NO MATTER WHAT MIGHT DROP ON US. Because even if something drops it won't affect most of the population.

Stop doing that scare thing. It's crap and you know it!

[Dookus]

20. What about the scenario in the OP?

What if millions of people are unable to get to the polls on November 2nd?

Why the hell does ANYBODY think postponing the elections in the event of a terrorist attack will help Bush?

His term ends on January 20th, no MATTER WHAT HAPPENS!

[Cleita]

23. How would millions of people not get to the polls unless

something rather unusual and unAmerican was happening? Even the Fourth Reich can't stop that many people from moving around.

[Dookus]

28. Very simple...

you put a chemical or radiological or biological weapon in the heart of a couple of large cities. You tell people to stay indoors.

Why is this hard to understand?