Question: what is the status of an election if illegal activities are found?

[IDemo]

Can an election be challenged if robo-calling or other disenfranchisement tactics have been employed? Or does the Secretary of State make the call (or not)?

I've already heard, tonight on Countdown, that fines and/or jail time may be levied against offenders, but nothing about whether an election may be certified nonetheless given such activities. And, if certified by the SoS, would a court challenge likely be heard?

[Cleita]

1. Considering 2000/02/04 pretty much went unchallenged

in the face of a lot of obvious violations of law, all I can say is:

:shrug:

[LaPera]

2. Its worth it, Repugs can be slimy as they want-lie, cheat smear & the Repug still keeps the office.

If you prove something illegal after the election, the Repug still gets to keep the office (seat), only the campaign and/or the RNC is fined...Big Deal...

It pays to cheat, lie, distort and smear - Big Time!

The republicans have always known this and continue to put their slime in office by cheating, stealing, anything illegal they can think of to put a repug in office, they don't care...as long as they get the seat

The rich republican party is fined and the republican candidate still stays in office...Now the repugs can go on governing the way they chose.

Dems will never get it...they always want to be nice and play fair.

[Cleita]

6. I agree with you. They should be called on it, but will our

Dems (the ones who can do something about it) do it this time?

[IDemo]

3. So fines, etc., may be viewed simply as 'the price of admission'?

With no real ultimate cost to be paid for such behavior? I don't care if robocallers get life in Joliet if the real criminals are elected.

[Cleita]

7. A good assessment.

There's a time that fines and community service, whatever, becomes a ticket to more criminal behavior, so maybe it's time to define what's acceptable, what's criminal and what the punishment is?

[sandnsea]

4. Elections are still certified

I believe the premise is that you can't hold the candidate responsible for actions they didn't know anything about. I would tend to agree with that, otherwise every candidate would be disqualified every time a yard sign was stolen or some such. The person that commits the crime, goes to jail. If there is a conspiracy, a lot of people would go to jail. If the candidate can be proven to be involved in the conspiracy, then that might change an election. I don't think that's ever happened in this country.

That's why Kerry conceded. No evidence and no evidence of fraudulent votes that would overturn the election.

[IDemo]

5. So there is no real motivation for an 'independent' not to act

I'd like to announce the Let The Air Out of Freeper Tires on Election Day Foundation (LTAOFTED).

If there is reasonable cause to believe robo-calling or other shenanigans resulted in shifting the margin of error of votes, there should be a re-vote. Or a revolt..

[John in Cincy]

8. A "minor" detail . . .

about Ohio law. Any violation of Chapter XXXV (Elections) is considered a prima facie case of fraud. He got bad advice and quit without even requesting a recount.

[sandnsea]

10. The remedy is counting legal votes

And eliminating the fraudulent votes. That's all. Fraud, in and of itself, doesn't overturn an election.

[John in Cincy]

9. In Ohio . . .

as of HB 3, passed January 2006, no federal election may be challenged under state law. Thus, it's extremely unlikely even an obvious and illegal case of disenfranchisement would alter the results certified.

That's why it's so important there are no concessions and recounts are requested when there's even a hint of irregularities.